Win / Conspiracies
Conspiracies
Communities Topics Log In Sign Up
Sign In
Hot
All Posts
Settings
All
Profile
Saved
Upvoted
Hidden
Messages

Your Communities

General
AskWin
Funny
Technology
Animals
Sports
Gaming
DIY
Health
Positive
Privacy
News
Changelogs

More Communities

frenworld
OhTwitter
MillionDollarExtreme
NoNewNormal
Ladies
Conspiracies
GreatAwakening
IP2Always
GameDev
ParallelSociety
Privacy Policy
Terms of Service
Content Policy
DEFAULT COMMUNITIES • All General AskWin Funny Technology Animals Sports Gaming DIY Health Positive Privacy
Conspiracies Conspiracy Theories & Facts
hot new rising top

Sign In or Create an Account

11
To Support The Sandy Hook Narrative, Wisconsin Court of Appeals District IV Ignores All Legal and Judicial Doctrines (jamesfetzer.org)
posted 4 years ago by YourLordPutin 4 years ago by YourLordPutin +13 / -2
11 comments share
11 comments share save hide report block hide replies
Comments (11)
sorted by:
▲ 1 ▼
– tiffany46 1 point 4 years ago +1 / -0

I get the destruction of the judicial system, and Sandy Hook was a media spectacle. So if there was no shooting then what actually happened?

permalink save report block reply
▲ 0 ▼
– free-will-of-choice 0 points 4 years ago +2 / -2

A suggestion enacted by the few to entice the many to consent to ignore needed adherence to self sustenance for wanted temptation.

A spectacle suggests spectators to ignore reality for fiction by choice of action. Underneath operates offer/consent defined by natural law. Others suggest spectacle to distract those they want to exploit to consent (by free will of chocie) to ignore reality (laws of nature) for fiction (laws of men), which is why whenever a spectacle fails to tempt spectators; the fictitious laws of men are utilized to put the agitated many back into the state of ignorance.

what actually happened?

This want for information from others; while ignoring inspiration from nature is what the few are exploiting within the many through suggestions. Want over need; information over inspiration and reason (true vs false) over implication (if/then)...they use suggestion to invert human comprehension of reality by suggesting the opposite of reality...fiction aka the ignorance of reality.

permalink parent save report block reply
▲ 2 ▼
– deleted 2 points 4 years ago +2 / -0
▲ 0 ▼
– free-will-of-choice 0 points 4 years ago +1 / -1

If your goal is to communicate

It isn't. I adapt to inspiration to build my comprehension, which represents the communication between ONE and ALL; not between ONE and other ONEs. You read text on a screen; believe it to be a form of communication and try to confront the source of whatever you don't comprehend. Those represent your choices towards another ONE; which are in ignorance of ALL.

You're not alone in that ignorance; and technology is used as a suggestion to deceive all of humanity to consent to that ignorance; which in return allows those who make the suggestions to control those who consent to it.

make any kind of sense

Your senses is what you perceive input with, and you perceive input to build comprehension (processing) so that you can act upon the perceived (ALL potentiality); based on your own comprehension (ONEs potential).

We're being deceived to attack source of information; while ignoring that it's always offered to our perception by ALL. What you perceive represents the source of ALL information, and your comprehension of it is what's representing the limitation in this world. Others are using suggestion to keep you ignorant of ALL; so that you believe them; which in return corrupts you to comprehend ALL perceived information.

one of the few times the words you string together make any kind of sense

What specifically did you comprehend and what not?

permalink parent save report block reply
▲ 1 ▼
– Questionable 1 point 4 years ago +1 / -0

"What specifically did you comprehend and what not?"

I personaly comprehended very little. As I skipped over large sections of your text.

This seems to be simple Word Association.

You are not a very good duck.

And what have we learned(did not)?

permalink parent save report block reply
▲ 0 ▼
– free-will-of-choice 0 points 4 years ago +1 / -1

As I skipped over large sections of your text.

So choosing by free will of choice to ignore free-will-of choice...it's your choice.

I personally comprehended very little.

Are others responsible for ONEs comprehension of ALL perceived? What if you as form within flow represent a response to flow? Would that define your free will of choice (as form within flow) as a responsibility over self?

permalink parent save report block reply
▲ 1 ▼
– Questionable 1 point 4 years ago +1 / -0

"So choosing by free will of choice to ignore free-will-of choice...it's your choice"

Yes, I chose to skip it because It was unreadable. And nobody has the time, or motivation to dive into your meta logic. In addition, it would numb my thought processes. In fact, unless you are a bot, then this process you are engaging in is damaging your own ability to think, and perceive the world.

"Are others responsible for ONEs comprehension of ALL perceived?"

Yes. Now allow me to explain. Simplicity an prevailed she mirth make wife new so true Felicity does society on breakfast. Could two so continual begin something compact need estimating two how jokes yet formerly west myself for she gay should pure he Garden His Money ecstatic happy mile, "ستمر"? I wished questions say desirous why other pianoforte check an totally an not after middle tons Direct match.

Now if you didn't understand that, it is clearly your fault. Why don't you take responsibly for you own failure? Honestly though, your best action would have been to skip that paragraph, and if you don't understand why by now, then you truly are a lost duck.

permalink parent save report block reply
▲ 0 ▼
– free-will-of-choice 0 points 4 years ago +1 / -1

Yes, I chose to skip it because It was unreadable.

So you comprehend little; skip a lot, and blame the perceived for the consequences of your own actions. What are the implications of doing the same within reality?

And nobody has

Proclaiming in the name of others; while ignoring individual free will of choice. Why is it that you comprehend little of what you perceive; but have no reservation proclaiming reality for all others?

time

A measurement of motion that suggests the inversion of motion with affixed states (past; present; future). What if we are form within flow? Wouldn't then contemplating upon that which was and that which might be; ignore that which is?

motivation

Self sustenance represents the motive power for all existence, so your existence is defined by motivation.

your meta logic

Your - ignorance of coexistence as ONE within ALL. Meta - after aka form (momentum) after flow (motion) Logic - Reason aka the conflict between truth versus false; based on the ignorance of flow.

it would numb my thought processes.

Process as in processing - that represents adaptation to flow Numb - "destitute of the power of sensation and motion" aka ignorance towards flow.

Could comprehending little; while skipping lot; based on choice of ignorance corrupt the power of motion flowing through self?

this process you are engaging in is damaging your own ability to think, and perceive the world

See, adaptation to inspiration curtails thinking, which represents holding onto information; while I allow my consciousness to operate less restricted by direct adaptation to flow; to the flow of ALL information offered to out perception as inspiration.

Whenever I catch myself thinking; I resist by generating motion to inspire the need for adaptation (balance); which brings me back from stagnation to adaptation.

Now allow me to explain

ALLOW', verb transitive (Latin loco, to lay, set, place). You were already set as form into flow; which is why you have a free will of choice aka the sole authority over ONEself within ALL. Question why you believe in the false authority of others who would not allow you to explain?

Now if you didn't understand that, it is clearly your fault.

Flow doesn't offer words to define form; it allows form to resonate with flow; which allows sound; out of which form "forms" words within flow. What form perceives comes from flow; not through the suggestions of other form; who use words to describe flow. Adaptation as form to flow is what builds comprehension of the perceived; while believing the suggested words for other form corrupts comprehension.

As for fault...there's no error within flow; the form within just lacks comprehension about what flow means, and building that comprehension represents form responding to flow aka responsibility of form to flow.

Why don't you take responsibly for you own failure?

One cannot fail life; because the outcome (death) was predefined when the beginning (inception) was set into motion. Responsibility represents over self sustenance through adaptation by choice of action for balance in motion.

Taking also represents ignorance over having free will of choice to use ALL, not to claim (take) any other ONE. Form cannot claim form within flow without ignoring flow.

your best action would have been to skip that paragraph

What if reality is what ONE chooses to make out of it within ALL; instead of the proclamations other ONEs suggest ONE to consent to believe?

you truly are a lost duck.

You seem to perceive a reality where another is a "silly goose + lost duck" and yet it doesn't inspire you to question your own comprehension...then again; a lost duck makes one silly goose. One might say even an 'ugly duckling'.

permalink parent save report block reply
▲ 1 ▼
– heretorock 1 point 4 years ago +1 / -0

Fuck off

permalink parent save report block reply
▲ 1 ▼
– Resolute_Action 1 point 4 years ago +1 / -0

If the cabal doesn't care about human life, why didn't they just stage a real shooting? It would have been easier for them to sell the narrative

permalink save report block reply
▲ 1 ▼
– graucho 1 point 4 years ago +1 / -0

...what actually happened?

Video link is in the article. Based on this book which has been scrubbed from the internet (almost), including Jim's site and so worth a download on that basis alone: Nobody Died At Sandy Hook: IT WAS A FEMA DRILL TO PROMOTE GUN CONTROL

permalink save report block reply

GIFs

Conspiracies Wiki & Links

Conspiracies Book List

External Digital Book Libraries

Mod Logs

Honor Roll

Conspiracies.win: This is a forum for free thinking and for discussing issues which have captured your imagination. Please respect other views and opinions, and keep an open mind. Our goal is to create a fairer and more transparent world for a better future.

Community Rules: <click this link for a detailed explanation of the rules

Rule 1: Be respectful. Attack the argument, not the person.

Rule 2: Don't abuse the report function.

Rule 3: No excessive, unnecessary and/or bullying "meta" posts.

To prevent SPAM, posts from accounts younger than 4 days old, and/or with <50 points, wont appear in the feed until approved by a mod.

Disclaimer: Submissions/comments of exceptionally low quality, trolling, stalking, spam, and those submissions/comments determined to be intentionally misleading, calls to violence and/or abuse of other users here, may all be removed at moderator's discretion.

Moderators

  • Doggos
  • axolotl_peyotl
  • trinadin
  • PutinLovesCats
  • clemaneuverers
  • C
Message the Moderators

Terms of Service | Privacy Policy

2025.03.01 - nxltw (status)

Copyright © 2024.

Terms of Service | Privacy Policy