When you suggest "would" then it tempts to ignore that which is for that which you suggest will be; while suggesting "to" implies for life "towards" death.
What if before making the choice to want or not want to suggest outcomes towards others; ones choice responses to balance (need/want)? What if consenting to suggestion corrupts ones understanding of needing to respond to perceived balance?
"to seek" implies the choice of want over need; "information" implies suggested by; while inspiration implies perceived as. As form (life) within flow (inception towards death) there's only one source of ALL (flow) for each ONE (form) within.
Ask yourself why the few are in control over the flow of suggested information (MSM; education; entertainment; distribution etc.)? Ask yourself why any suggested information represents a conflict for ones choice (want vs not want); while choice implies the response to balance (need/want)? Ask yourself if RELIGION, noun [Latin religio, from religo, to bind anew.] implies choice (suggesting) to choice (consenting); then what if one ignores the original bond under natural law aka balance (offering) to choice (responding)?
How easy would it be to control the majority by suggesting them to believe that the few represent the source of suggested information; while they ignore to adapt to perceived inspiration?
it's important
Important implies "to bring from another state"; hence not information (from within form); but inspiration (from within spirit) aka spiro - "to breathe"; hence form to flow adaptation.
Ask yourself this...what if perceived inspiration implies sound; while suggested information implies choice shaping suggestible meaning (words) out of perceived sound as substitute meaning (brand; idol) to deceive others? Wouldn't that represent spell-craft aka suggesting shaped words to deceive those consenting to ignore perceived sound?
Want to screw represents lust (temptation luring towards death); need represents self sustenance of life hence intercourse of natural opposites (female/male) leading to offspring aka the collective sustenance of the individual self.
The world runs on base instincts.
INSTINCT', adjective [Latin instinctus.] - "moved; animated"; which implies moved; animated by (flow) as (form) within aka form (life) within flow (inception towards death). Question if each ONE within ALL represents a response to it; hence having choice within balance (need/want)?
What if the parasitic few represent the response to the ignorance of the many towards their own power aka resistance (growth) to velocity (loss) as form (life) within flow (inception towards death)?
What if the ignorance of being moved from inception towards death is what destroys the life ignoring to resist it, and what if the parasitic few simply suggest the ignorant many to go with the flow; to seek outcome; to want achievements; to reach goals; to put faith and fear towards something aka suggested progressivism (towards death)?
What if life isn't outcome oriented; since death is predefined as the outcome at inception? What if life is balance oriented (hence being within the momentum in-between inception and death); hence life representing choice in response to balance (need/want)?
When you suggest "would" then it tempts to ignore that which is for that which you suggest will be; while suggesting "to" implies for life "towards" death.
What if before making the choice to want or not want to suggest outcomes towards others; ones choice responses to balance (need/want)? What if consenting to suggestion corrupts ones understanding of needing to respond to perceived balance?
This is why it's important to seek information to what stresses you from more than one source, and from more than one point-of-view.
"to seek" implies the choice of want over need; "information" implies suggested by; while inspiration implies perceived as. As form (life) within flow (inception towards death) there's only one source of ALL (flow) for each ONE (form) within.
Ask yourself why the few are in control over the flow of suggested information (MSM; education; entertainment; distribution etc.)? Ask yourself why any suggested information represents a conflict for ones choice (want vs not want); while choice implies the response to balance (need/want)? Ask yourself if RELIGION, noun [Latin religio, from religo, to bind anew.] implies choice (suggesting) to choice (consenting); then what if one ignores the original bond under natural law aka balance (offering) to choice (responding)?
How easy would it be to control the majority by suggesting them to believe that the few represent the source of suggested information; while they ignore to adapt to perceived inspiration?
Important implies "to bring from another state"; hence not information (from within form); but inspiration (from within spirit) aka spiro - "to breathe"; hence form to flow adaptation.
Ask yourself this...what if perceived inspiration implies sound; while suggested information implies choice shaping suggestible meaning (words) out of perceived sound as substitute meaning (brand; idol) to deceive others? Wouldn't that represent spell-craft aka suggesting shaped words to deceive those consenting to ignore perceived sound?
And without men and women who want to screw, you wouldn't have ANY people.
The world runs on base instincts.
Want to screw represents lust (temptation luring towards death); need represents self sustenance of life hence intercourse of natural opposites (female/male) leading to offspring aka the collective sustenance of the individual self.
INSTINCT', adjective [Latin instinctus.] - "moved; animated"; which implies moved; animated by (flow) as (form) within aka form (life) within flow (inception towards death). Question if each ONE within ALL represents a response to it; hence having choice within balance (need/want)?
Planned non obsolesence.
Planted fruit trees everywhere.
Gardens everywhere...in parks...rooftops...
Sounds like a good start.
Head over to thw parallel society .win its interesting
And tranny and homo degenerates would be a thing of the past. Couldn't have that now could we?
What if the parasitic few represent the response to the ignorance of the many towards their own power aka resistance (growth) to velocity (loss) as form (life) within flow (inception towards death)?
What if the ignorance of being moved from inception towards death is what destroys the life ignoring to resist it, and what if the parasitic few simply suggest the ignorant many to go with the flow; to seek outcome; to want achievements; to reach goals; to put faith and fear towards something aka suggested progressivism (towards death)?
What if life isn't outcome oriented; since death is predefined as the outcome at inception? What if life is balance oriented (hence being within the momentum in-between inception and death); hence life representing choice in response to balance (need/want)?