Standing by your statements is as ridiculous as the statements themselves.

the series is infinitely long, with every statement justified by some other statement.

There are several reasons they make this claim. ...

The negation of p -> q (read “p implies q” or “p only if q” or “if p, then q”) is p & ~q (read “p and not q” or “p without q”).

The diagnosis device gives a defect assessment of the whole system.

However, this is unfortunately either a blind claim or a willfully blind claim for the sake of propaganda.

But I would atleast like to correct your first statement.

Oh, one more thing: the future belongs to socialism.

Other members of council have repeated this claim.

What he is saying is belied by the Swedish experience.

This theological theme is taken up by the Affirmation.

Historians, constitutional scholars and biographers all dismiss the claim.

He very reasonably based this assertion on the fact

The Enchanted: Forest of Light is an event that...

The stating of a few facts will prove the correctness of this assertion.