I'm tired of the same propaganda on this forum....there are actual posts of value and usually only a dozen or so useful comments because the majority of the feed is filled with the same garbage posters.... I could write a bot (technically already did) that could post better than these people .... I'm tired of it. I cannot block them and nothing work on this site properly........
Can we do something about /Pvki /Dukey /zap_powerz....and axo....sometimes you thread a fine line of propaganda vs inquiry....your posts pinned could use some dusting....
Try perceived inspiration over suggested information; which is how ONE grows comprehension of ALL perceived.
Inspiration implies from within spirit aka communicated out of movement towards perceiving senses. Your interest implies "within rest"; hence in ignorance of being form (life) within flow (inception towards death).
Your perspective of ALL perceived is different from everyone else. Expressing it represents inspiration/temptation for others and self. Try to resist using your choice to suggest value to others; and instead as evaluation for whatever you perceive as inspiring value.
a) to see implies perceiving everything offered
b) nothing implies ignoring perceived everything for suggested nothingness by others.
c) new implies consent to suggested creationism (out of nothing); in return for ignorance of perceived transmutation (out of everything).
Ask yourself if ALL is offered to each ONEs perception at every moment; while each ONE lacks comprehension of what ALL perceived means? Could it be that comprehension can be grown by adaptation to perceived (inspiration)?
SOLU'TION, noun [Latin solutio, from solvo, to loosen, melt, dissolve] - "separating the parts of any body". What if you as ONE within ALL; form within flow; choice within balance etc. already represent the differentiated solution (ONE) out of the collective base (ALL)?
I am here because I have perceived the hidden parts of society but I cannot fully pull back their veils. Unfortunately, it has been my experience that it is dangerous to make specific claims without evidence, and it is not beneficial to waste time on falsehoods - I have found that ridicule is used frequently to dissuade people from exploration just as belittling them may be done to dissuade their advancement beyond a poor teacher.
--
I feel that I am not alone in searching for information, so I doubt all people are suggesting things as in order to fully form an idea it must promulgate. This cannot be done only internally - an idea worth fully exploring is one which needs to be evoked and expressed beyond internal monologues and biases.
It must be challenged by the realities of life and face its maker as the truth will find all its flaws.
First, if you were behind L then that’s sad. WSB was a good group. I found it entertaining even when it was low quality.
Second, if you want to discuss solutions, let’s do it. Post about it. I’d like to map the connections between large banks. Here’s something tangible: map the corporate ownership relationship between top 3 financial institutions.
L was why I am wary of supporting community 'efforts'.
That was what L was supposed to be doing, and proved just another wannabe loser.
Only suggested information can be hidden for those who consent to want it while ignoring needed perceived inspiration. The few suggest information; the many consent to want vs not want it (conflict of reason); which in return gives the few the power to define; redefine; contradict and withhold this information at their will.
Meanwhile; nature moves everything; which those within perceived as inspiration with their senses for adaptation by choice (need/want). Choosing need grows comprehension of perceived; while choosing want represents loss; lack of comprehension towards perceived; which allows others to suggest information instead.
In short...all meaning is being communicated from one source (nature) through movement; while the suggested description of others within nature does not represent meaning; but the temptation to ignore perceived (reality) for suggested (fiction).
Consider if the veil represents each individual ONEs ignorance (choice of want over need) among the many towards ALL perceived (inspiration); for the suggestions (information) by the few?
a) as form (life) within flow (inception towards death) one cannot claim anything; only utilize everything for self sustenance. Any claim made represents the ignorance of being form (temporary) within flow (ongoing).
b) EV'IDENCE, noun [Latin evidentia, from video, to see.] What your senses see represents perceived movement aka inspiration; which implies perceiving constant change. The few corrupt our understanding thereof by suggesting us "true" vs "false" states; which neither exists within constant change.
How can this be? Adapting to perceived inspiration represents choice of "need"; ignoring it (choice of want) for suggested information by others; causes a conflict among those who want the suggested information versus those who do not want it aka want vs not want (conflict of reason). Rebranding this conflict from want vs not want into true vs false; good vs evil; left vs right; believing vs not believing; feminism vs patriarchy; Mc Donalds vs Burger King etc. represents the spell-craft used to sell the ignorant many all the conflicts in this system.
c) "without" represents your consent to ignore perceived everything for suggested nothing. A "without" cannot exist inside a "within".
Question the existence of suggested "truth" instead. Could it be that without consenting to believe in truth; others couldn't exploit it by suggesting lies aka contradictions of believed truth? Could it be that reasoning about true vs false; simply represents wanting vs not wanting the suggestion of a 3rd party; and what if that 3rd party deliberately keeps suggesting contradictions to both sides of reason to keep them in conflict with each other (talmudic reasoning).
What if the few use suggestion (-isms) to cause division (reason) among the many? Mass population control by racketeering ignorance of perceived (inspiration) through suggestion (information).
"you are the greatest" vs "you are the worst"...what if others cannot define what you are; only suggest you to believe that you are what they want you to be? What if opposing their suggestion (not want) puts you into a conflict (want vs not want) for which you ignore responding as choice to balance (need/want)?
As for exploration...what if the suggested information of others isn't worthy to explore; but instead represents the temptation to ignore to evaluate (choice) perceived value (balance)? What if each one needs to explore perceived inspiration; while resisting the temptation of suggested information?
a) as life being moved from inception towards death...where do all "wanted" advancements lead towards? Notice that the few are suggesting progress; achievements; goals; wanted outcomes; prices waiting; fear and hope towards and so on...what if one (form) needs to resist being moved (flow) towards death, and what if this resistance (adaptation as choice to balance) represents growth (from) within loss (flow)?
b) what if student (wanting information) under teacher (suggesting information) represents the inversion of learn/teach (balance) by choice based response to it? What if to teach self represents to learn for self and vice versa? What if education represents domestication of free will through submission to the will of others suggesting information to them?
What if each ONE represents a limited growth (form) potential (comprehension) within unlimited loss (flow) of potentiality (perception)? In other words...what if each ONE perceives ALL; yet lacks comprehension of what it means?
a) what if the many are being deceived by the suggestions of the few to "want" information (from within form); while they ignore the "need" to adapt to perceived inspiration (from within spirit)?
b) what if alone represents a sleight of hand for "ALL(in)ONE" aka the ONEness of ALL (energy)? What if each of us represents ONE within ALL, and what if ALL represents ONE in energy? What if another sleight of hand for that represents "all for one and one for all" or "there can be only one"?
What if perceived inspiration represents the open promulgation of ALL (flow) to each ONE (form) within? What if forming ideas (suggestions for others to sense) ignores that what one formed it out of already was sensed as perceived inspiration? What if the few suggested the many to consent to suggested creationism (out of nothing); which deceives those who consent to ignore perceived transmutation (out of everything)?
What if flow to form (inception); form within flow (life), form to flow (death) represents ONEs transmutation out of base ALL aka alchemy? Can you create a "new" thought without shaping it out of everything already perceived? What if one cannot perceived creation (new); only transmutation (shaping out of ALL that already exists)?
What if form (life) within flow (inception towards death) can only exist internally as form (choice) within the momentum (balance) of the external flow? What if you are being deceived to believe that your internal represents the source for creation out of nothing aka mental to physical creation...ask yourself where does the mental input come from? Are you a response; do you have a response-ability to what you respond to? Do you respond as choice? Does choice represent the response to balance? Does movement causes balance (momentum) for the choice within?
As life; can you perceive your own inception/death? What if life (form) already represents the evoked expression of being moved from inception towards death (flow)? What if the balance caused by that movement is what allows you the response (choice) to a need/want (balance)?
a) to think in language (internal monologue)...does that imply consent to suggested language first?
b) what if there's a before internal (mind) allowing beyond (external) internal? What if there's only one perceivable source (ALL) for each ONE within?
What if form within flow represents resistance to velocity for self sustenance? How does form resist being flushed away be flow? Balancing by choice? What if the choice to ignore balancing (want over need) causes imbalance among choice (want vs not want)?
What if the few suggest (-isms) imbalance (reason); while racketeering the ignorance (want over need) of the many towards representing a choice based response to balance?
Question...need (resonance to balance); want (dissonance to balance) aka responsibility (need) or temptation (want).
What if the natural order (ongoing flow) causes balance (momentum) for the resulting chaos (temporary form) within, and what if the parasitic few suggest the inversion thereof as seeking order out of chaos; when we represent chaos (growth) within order (loss)?