Lesta Nediam LNC2017-08-17 0910 +kam1k4ze gg

Lesta Nediam LNC2017-08-17 0910 +kam1k4ze gg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5kSIlKqPYt8&lc=z23medtiik3bhpdji04t1aokgzfappbytxkiimpwa3kvrk0h00410
https://pastebin.com/jLwViX7T
__

+kam1k4ze gg __ I am not sure I understand what you are saying. Without "sufficient proof" we should not assert _as a fact about reality_ that something did or did not happen. In the presentation I used footage of "Building 7" collapsing as an example of "sufficient proof". The *absence* and *obscuring* of "sufficient proof" is what enables people to rationally doubt events and claims - including those that are genuine. Which conclusions of mine do you think could be wrong? Are you suggesting that perhaps "Building 7" _didn't_ collapse?!


____________________________________________________________
My name is Lesta Nediam and I am cracking reality like a nut.

Lesta on YouTube
https://www.youtube.com/c/LestaNediamHQ

Lesta on Twitter
https://twitter.com/lestanediam

Lesta on Google Plus
https://plus.google.com/+LestaNediamHQ

What does not exist - exists to exist.
What exists - exists to always exist.
As it is written - so it is done.