that that the mobilization occurs leads to that the siege does not occur is incorrect.
sent1: that not the blemishing Yaounde but the siege occurs prevents that the strut occurs. sent2: the semanticness occurs. sent3: the siege happens if the mobilization occurs. sent4: the strut occurs. sent5: that the semanticness happens and the demonstration occurs is not wrong. sent6: that the blemishing Yaounde does not occur is triggered by that both the demonstration and the mobilization occurs.
sent5 -> int1: the demonstration happens.; void -> assump2: Let's assume that the mobilization occurs.; int1 & assump2 -> int2: both the demonstration and the mobilization happens.; int2 & sent6 -> int3: the blemishing Yaounde does not occur.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the siege happens.; int3 & assump1 -> int4: the blemishing Yaounde does not occur but the siege happens.; int4 & sent1 -> int5: the strut does not occur.; int5 & sent4 -> int6: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int6 -> int7: that the siege does not occur is not incorrect.; [assump2] & int7 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = that that the mobilization occurs leads to that the siege does not occur is incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: that not the blemishing Yaounde but the siege occurs prevents that the strut occurs. sent2: the semanticness occurs. sent3: the siege happens if the mobilization occurs. sent4: the strut occurs. sent5: that the semanticness happens and the demonstration occurs is not wrong. sent6: that the blemishing Yaounde does not occur is triggered by that both the demonstration and the mobilization occurs. ; $proof$ = 
sent5 -> int1: the demonstration happens.; void -> assump2: Let's assume that the mobilization occurs.; int1 & assump2 -> int2: both the demonstration and the mobilization happens.; int2 & sent6 -> int3: the blemishing Yaounde does not occur.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the siege happens.; int3 & assump1 -> int4: the blemishing Yaounde does not occur but the siege happens.; int4 & sent1 -> int5: the strut does not occur.; int5 & sent4 -> int6: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int6 -> int7: that the siege does not occur is not incorrect.; [assump2] & int7 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__