-
These people get intimidated easily, usually physically. They're attracted to your masculinity. You gotta get beefy and look as tall as you can.
-
They get intimidated with bluffs. They may be able to call out your bluff but bluff them even harder.
-
Because they're emotional, they'll keep attacking as many things to get you emotional. Getting as stoic as possible is the best way to deal with this. You'll make a fool out of someone once they get violent. It's getting real difficult with this in terms of whitefolk like I think a lot of you are.
-
You're going to have to be sharp and make many connections. I have my own intelligence agency for example. I'm still recruiting but it's getting difficult to function.
-
Because they like to attack and destroy, ban and destroy you have to be as much immune to attack as possible.
If you have any questions lads, I'll answer them to the best of my ability. What I'm talking about right now is gnosticism but I am a Christian, I believe the KJV. I have reached around the seventh dimension. I'm trying to teach as many intelligent people as I can but it's difficult dealing with emotional people.
If you're a Christian, please pray for me. I was just thinking prey sounds like pray.
Noticing the weakness can always be reverse engineered to sustain yourself (need) over the temptation to exploit others (want). Both coexist and it's your response-ability (choice) to resist one over the other.
I just adapt to what your posts inspire me to.
Information represents the issue; since suggesting it tempts want vs not want reasoning; while ignoring to adapt to perceivable inspiration (need).
"Informing you directly" ignores that direction (inception towards death) communicates itself as perceivable inspiration for the growth of comprehension by the reaction (life) within.
CENTRAL (choice as the center of perceivable balance) INTELLIGENCE (understanding aka standing under the suggested information by others) AGENCY (action aka perceivable enacted upon the reaction of perceiving).
A sleight of hand for this goes "Intel Inside" which implies suggested information inside; perceivable inspiration from outside.
Whatever information you collect and suggest to others operates in ignorance of all perceivable inspiration available to everyone at every moment. The parasitic few exploit that ignorance by suggesting the many to utilize information over inspiration. Sleight of hand: "Library of Alexandria" aka accumulate as many information as you want; it's all gonna burn within the ongoing flow of inspiration.
The few can only keep tabs on the many; by the many consenting to the suggested information of the few; which keeps them within a feedback loop. Those who choose "wanted" information over "needed" inspiration are tempted to want more...entrance the happy merchants of temptation with endless more information to reason over.
a) truth (want) implies versus false (not want); hence a conflict of reason caused by your consent (want or not want) to suggested information.
b) the aforementioned conflict (reason) contradicting your want for peace aside...temporary form (life) within ongoing flow (inception towards death) represents being temporary chaos in need to resist the ongoing natural order.
The parasitic few suggest the many to the inversion thereof aka seeking order out of chaos aka truth out of lies aka peace out of war.
c) "by the way we will make" ignores being those within the way (inception towards death) with the choice to remake (life).
d) MOTTO; noun (from Latin muttum "a grunt; a word," from muttire "to mutter, mumble, murmur") ignores that before the suggested word exists the perceivable sound.
That wall of text is me adapting to perceivable inspiration out of which I grow my comprehension...it does not represent suggested information for you. It is your choice of want (information) over need (inspiration) that curtails your growth of comprehension. I can point this out; yet not help you to choose otherwise; since that represents your free will of choice.
Try using implication (if/then) while resisting the temptation of reasoning (true vs false; want vs not want etc.) when reading what others write.