For a while, I have had as my working theory of the origins of WW2 that the Sabbateans, underlying both Zionism and ultimately Freemasonry, sent forth into Germany a tiny group with the objective of instigating and guiding a new war. Around this nucleus, their first step was to agglomerate a small cadre of "true believers", German nationalists who wished to rebuild their nation. Among these were Hitler and Rudolf Hess.
So we see that the claim, "Hitler was a Freemason puppet" is not true, but yet not entirely untrue when understood in this complex way. We also witness loud demonstrations of many people that they are entirely unable to grasp such nuanced situations.
There's no bigger firehose they blast in our faces than "fUnNy MuStAsH mAn BaD!". I have sensed a possible correlation between the intensity of that firehose and the truth.
oRaNgE mAn BaD 2! eLeCtRo-CaR mAn BaD 2! pOoTiN bAd 2! aLl BaD!
Understanding represents "standing under" suggested information. The origin of standing under the suggested information by others represents choice (consent) to choice (suggestion) contract law; which tempts one to ignore that choice represents the responding center of perceivable balance (need/want). The latter (balance to choice) represents natural law as defined by the natural order (flow to form) for the resulting form (life) within flow (inception towards death).
Being moved represents being within the "simple way"; ignoring this for trying to stand under suggestions makes it "complex".
many people that they are entirely unable to grasp such nuanced situations.
Because you suggest information that contradict the suggested information they already consented to. They are bound within contract law with a 3rd party; while viewing your suggestions as an opposition to it.
They neither comprehend the 3rd party (parasitic suggestions); the contract law (consent to suggested); nor the origin of the conflict with you (reasoning about suggested meaning). Why? Because the consequence of choosing to ignore perceivable inspiration for suggested information corrupts ones comprehension of perceivable. In other words...the more one consent to stand under the suggested choices of others; the less one comprehends to be the center of perceivable balance.
For a while, I have had as my working theory of the origins of WW2 that the Sabbateans, underlying both Zionism and ultimately Freemasonry, sent forth into Germany a tiny group with the objective of instigating and guiding a new war. Around this nucleus, their first step was to agglomerate a small cadre of "true believers", German nationalists who wished to rebuild their nation. Among these were Hitler and Rudolf Hess.
So we see that the claim, "Hitler was a Freemason puppet" is not true, but yet not entirely untrue when understood in this complex way. We also witness loud demonstrations of many people that they are entirely unable to grasp such nuanced situations.
Greatest Story Never Told
There's no bigger firehose they blast in our faces than "fUnNy MuStAsH mAn BaD!". I have sensed a possible correlation between the intensity of that firehose and the truth.
oRaNgE mAn BaD 2! eLeCtRo-CaR mAn BaD 2! pOoTiN bAd 2! aLl BaD!
More likely that there were no good guys.
The enemy of your enemy isn't always a friend.
Understanding represents "standing under" suggested information. The origin of standing under the suggested information by others represents choice (consent) to choice (suggestion) contract law; which tempts one to ignore that choice represents the responding center of perceivable balance (need/want). The latter (balance to choice) represents natural law as defined by the natural order (flow to form) for the resulting form (life) within flow (inception towards death).
Being moved represents being within the "simple way"; ignoring this for trying to stand under suggestions makes it "complex".
Because you suggest information that contradict the suggested information they already consented to. They are bound within contract law with a 3rd party; while viewing your suggestions as an opposition to it.
They neither comprehend the 3rd party (parasitic suggestions); the contract law (consent to suggested); nor the origin of the conflict with you (reasoning about suggested meaning). Why? Because the consequence of choosing to ignore perceivable inspiration for suggested information corrupts ones comprehension of perceivable. In other words...the more one consent to stand under the suggested choices of others; the less one comprehends to be the center of perceivable balance.