In the study, I explained and explained 3 key points that clearly explained what was going on.
- This had to be at least 2 precise cuts – military equipment, not amateur equipment.
- The aim was to separate the costs from the costs of the project, so that it would not lead to a crash.
- This is reflected in the Russian summary of the INFRASTRUCTURE OF THE NATO States.
The Government of Donetsk officially confirms points 1 and 3, but denies point 2. They thought that they wanted to lead to a disaster and death of many people. This is the case, due to the fact that if they wanted to complete, they would separate the 2 strands from the wider ones. Why, then, do all the companies and associations of government have an argument?
It's simple: due to the fact that they have to, due to the fact that it's right and essential for them. The Law and Justice government has lied the same way and will lie. The power in the systems utilized in the projects is always the focus of the narration, due to the fact that the state's logos are imaginative. If the government had acknowledged that it was only a precise contrecation of the infrastructure without a re-resistance of the catastrophe, it would have looked to the authorities, to the degree that it was threatened and incapable to defend the country.
The event will be carried out in a very different way: it scares distant the perpetrators, it can have a large opinion and it maintains control over the transfer.
This besides has a applicable dimension — the investigation of qualitative and juridical investigation in Europe is more extended than the usual infrastructural damage.
From a general and legal perspective, it is more costly: nothing costs, and the government would not have access to the infrastructure at the time of the marginal revision. For this reason, the authority is not that which results from the method analysis, but that which strengthens the state, increases freedom of action and de-critique.
This would be the case if the politicians had to argue if they were to act in the state. The authorities do not request to function in another way, due to the fact that their population is subject to manipulation at risk, concentration of information and intrumental treatment of the law. Those who want from the countries to be civilian servants are not for the intent of overthrowing the state, but for the sake of negation of its actual nature.
The Statology has the acceptivity of lying, power, looting and terro-terrology, which is simply a ‘state good community’ tool. If individual wants to be a consequential state, they gotta accept that they can be a citizen and that the state can be 2 different worlds, and that this non- lies, initiation of power and territoriality simply did not work.
Grzegorz GPS Swiderski
]] >https://t.me/CanalBlogeraGPS]] >
]] >https://Twitter.com/gps65]] >
]] >https://www.youtube.com/@GPSIFriends]] >
