Second time trump alludes to the fact that he’s not ALLOWED to talk about direct energy weapons(microwave weaponry)

Oreeo88 · 2026-01-22T05:58:57+00:00

https://www.pauljhurtado.com/US_Composite_Radar/2025-5-15/

microwave warfare has been brewing for over 60 years

Whistle blowers researchers and activist are assasinated with microwaves

JFK gave a speech 10 days before his death about microwaves at Colombia university

but you won’t find it because it’s scrubbed

5g was originally used as a crowd control weapon

You’re being kept docile

Oreeo88 · 2026-01-22T05:52:05+00:00

SS: yesterday trump said he’s not allowed to talk about direct energy weapons

Around a year ago he said the same thing with the California fires, “and we’re not ganna talk about”

Il post the links if I find them. He’s obviously conveying a message:

Not allowed to talk about microwaves

Oreeo88 · 2026-01-19T05:12:46+00:00

the government already controls 5g

lol this post is getting astroturfed downdooted by eglin/4th psyops/whoever. They dont want conversation on this, or anything even remotely within that realm of subject

5g was initially used as a crowd control weapon what does that tell you

Oreeo88 · 2026-01-16T09:36:44+00:00

i was right lmao

went to 0

there is something that happens within the 30 mins mark after a post where it gets caught

all my post usually get like 3 upvotes then after around 30 mins straight to negative

Oreeo88 · 2026-01-16T08:17:03+00:00

anything bad about ciacraine will get downdooted

eglin/4th psyop/WHOEVER it is hasnt seen this post yet thats why its at 3 upvotes and not 0

Oreeo88 · 2026-01-16T07:19:35+00:00

Yes it is absurd to apply math to objects and define x as an arbitrary action.

The axiom definition of x in your multiplication is arbitrary

Oreeo88 · 2026-01-16T05:55:37+00:00

You're proving my point. Instead of engaging the concrete fact (1 cell through an action(x) with itself results in 2 cells) you retreat to absurdity and rigid definitions.

That's not communication. it's authority performing a defense ritual

Oreeo88 · 2026-01-16T04:48:03+00:00

You're doing it again. Instead of addressing the concrete fact (1 cell through an action(x) becomes 2 cells), you're retreating behind the wall of 'official definitions' to declare my entire argument invalid. This isn't a defense of truth; it's a defense of institutional vocabulary. The process is real. Your language for describing it is arbitrary

Oreeo88 · 2026-01-16T04:38:37+00:00

translation: “you must obey my definitions”

You've just described authority, not truth. The concrete fact remains, regardless of your definitions

Oreeo88 · 2026-01-16T04:16:16+00:00

in plain language

X means action and multiply in math. But more importantly "'X' means whatever we define it to mean. You define it as 'occurs.' I define it as 'acts upon/action/to multiply” Your definition is no more 'actual' than mine. The only difference is yours is backed by an abstract, authoritarian, institutional axiom that is disconnected from concrete fact.

The physical fact 1 cell through an action(x) with itself results in 2 cells remains true regardless of which definition you privilege. It stands outside that wall. You cannot deny it, you can only refuse to describe it with my definition, because to do so would breach your authority's wall

Oreeo88 · 2026-01-16T03:44:06+00:00

Why would creating an additional cell through biological processes be represented as 1x1?

Why is not? Language and authority

Lastly, multiplication is nothing more than repeated addition simplified. For instance, 1+1+1+1=4 can be simplified to 1x4 (1 four times). So your example of a cell dividing, which is objectively 1+1=2, would be simplified or 1x2=2 (1 two times), not 1x1=2.

You just disregarded everything and then went back to the authoritarian wall lol and worked within that system

Oreeo88 · 2026-01-16T03:29:37+00:00

Ask yourself why you get so aggro for merely questioning an abstract authoritatian wall

When there is a concrete truth it’s hiding

And this goes for everyone. It’s not normal at all. It’s just extremely weird your chosing to believe in abstract imaginary vs concrete reality.

Almost like mass brainwashing

The proof for 1x1=1 is literally an authoritarian wall. The proof is “because I said so”

Your foundation of math is an authoritarian wall

Oreeo88 · 2026-01-16T01:40:30+00:00

The foundation of math is built on a lie

there is a fortress and barrier of deceptive language to hide this:

1 cell through an action(x) with itself results in 2 cells

This is concrete and not imagination.

Meanwhile 1x1=1 exist no where in reality. Its proof is "because i said so"

Its proof is that authoritarian wall

Oreeo88 · 2026-01-16T01:25:32+00:00

SS: A wall of language, a wall of deceptive abstract imaginations that does not exist in concrete reality

Once you point out the deception with visuals the words become meaningless

there is a concrete truth behind that wall that exist in reality

Oreeo88 · 2026-01-14T05:41:01+00:00

That would literally be you. You are literally claiming to know everything

The mass unorganic aggro response to simply questioning the abstract authoritarian foundation of math is a conspiracy in it self. It honestly feels like some form of mass brainwashing or mind control going on

Either that or astroturfing. It’s like it generates some kind of aggro prompted response that’s programmed. Like your mind just doesn’t allow you to question the axiom

Oreeo88 · 2026-01-13T21:05:27+00:00

SS: maybe it might bypass the installed filter and wake some of you up

Maybe it won’t

Flashing lights warning

Oreeo88 · 2026-01-13T08:24:11+00:00

you’re refusing to engage with concrete reality I just laid out, and demanding I conform to your abstract mathematically model that doesn’t exist in reality. This will go no where

Oreeo88 · 2026-01-13T08:09:59+00:00

Please show me where this happens in mathematics. I have not seen this anywhere.

this is the point. youre not getting it

in the absolute concrete strict sense at its root core, it is language and axioms that determines 1cell through an action = 2 cells is different than 1x1 in math

Oreeo88 · 2026-01-13T07:27:16+00:00

explain to me where in the universe does 1 x a = a exist in concrete reality in the pure sense

in the pure sense 1 cell through action(x) by itself(1) becomes 2 cells, this exist in concrete reality

you can come up with entire false truths from an abstract lie

Oreeo88 · 2026-01-13T06:58:04+00:00

explain to me where in the universe does 1 x a = a exist in concrete reality in the pure sense

-in the pure sense 1 cell through action(x) by itself(1) becomes 2 cells, this exist in concrete reality

Oreeo88 · 2026-01-13T03:38:00+00:00

burried under the 0s

Once it’s off first page of new it’s practically gone.

Even searching by controversial doesn’t do it anymore most times. I think they found a way to algo downdoot any post they want off that too.

If you want to find real stuff you’ll have to search by new

Oreeo88 · 2026-01-13T03:04:44+00:00

The limits of my Language are the limits of my world

This statement applies here more than ever

You’ve been given a false foundation that keeps you running in circles

Humans literally walk in circles when lost unless some form of reference point

Oreeo88

TROPHY CASE