I remember when the first truthers started to post on internet about 9/11 being an inside job. Some people become really mad, saying "you do not respect the memory of the victims". I still can't understand what the fuck did they mean. I hope those were shills bullshitting, because I can't believe people this stupid exist. Anyway, the same pro-vaxx bullshit "my vaxx doesn't work without your vaxx" really resembles the crazy ramblings of anti 9/11 truthers.
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (30)
sorted by:
Truth implies versus lie..a conflict of reason; based on consenting to want or not want a suggestion (9/11 narrative). Those who consented to the suggested information (wanting the official 9/11 narrative) are holding it within memory (believing); while those who consent to not want the official narrative are a) in a conflict of reason between want vs not want and b) being perceived as liars by those who uphold wanted "truth".
Respecting memory implies viewing existence in response to uphold memory (aka consented to information suggested by others). That isn't what memory is for...accumulation of affixed suggested information (like a hard drive) ignores adaptation to ongoing perceived inspiration (like a ram).
You don't understand this because you responded to the "wants" of others by" not wanting" the same suggestion (9/11 narrative). Both of you are consenting to suggested information by the parasitic few; who utilize suggestion to cause division (conflict of reason aka want vs not want) among the many. Both sides of reason (want vs not want) are ignoring need (perceived) for want (suggested), and ignorance corrupts comprehension of perceived. How could one understand what one chooses to ignore?
Dude, there simply people who are mentally impaired, even if they are functional and able to use a computer. As simple as it gets. Why don't you relax and start talking like a human instead of like a bot.
What does a suggested "computer" imply? That the suggested computes for those consenting to it; while those ignore the need to COMPUTE, verb transitive - "to think".
Ignoring perceived (inspiration) for suggested (information) is what impairs the mental aka choice of want over need.
Notice also that "functional and able to use a computer" implies the conformity for the mind of others to consent to suggested technology. You are being domesticated to understand "functional" to mean in accordance to the norm; to the rules of society; to the suggested rules of behavior from others.
How can the explanation suggested to one another; be simpler than the existence of whatever perceived one tries to explain?
RELAX', verb transitive [Latin relaxo; re and laxo, to slacken.]...for life being moved from inception towards death; does slacken represent the inspiration to struggle for self sustenance of life or the temptation to ignore the struggle?
HU'MAN, adjective [Latin humanus; Heb. form]...implies out of flow; in response to flow; as resisting form to velocity of flow; hence in need of a response ability (choice).
BOT, ROBOT, noun [from Latin roboro, from robur, strength.]...for form within flow; strength represents resistance to velocity; yet the parasitic few suggest the many to view suggested technology as strength (bots; robots). When you call free-will-of-choice a "bot" you imply strength; yet believe to judge weakness; hence showing ignorance to those who comprehend.
a) TALK, verb intransitive - "persons interchanging thoughts". If one represents a person (per sonos aka by sound); then one needs to respond to source of sound for resonance; not to what others shape out of sound and then suggest as meaning for sound to you (dissonance).
b) does nature communicate itself by talking; by suggesting branded information as words to the perceiving senses of those within? How can all other life-forms perceived; respond by choice to, and comprehend function of a "tree" without anyone telling them that it's called a tree?
c) question if suggested word is shaped by suggesting choice out of perceived sound?
d) choice vs choice (aka agreement vs disagreement over suggested information) does not represent communication; it represents a conflict (dissonance) caused by choice ignoring to respond to balance (resonance).
uoy era a daehkcid
If you suggest I'm a dickhead; then that implies you believe mine is bigger than yours...