For some time now I am noticing that if mainstream tells you something, 95% of the time its exact opposite of that.
I know Adolf Hitler did some nasty stuff but I never believed he was insane and just evil.
Now I am starting to think,he was probably one of most informed human beings at that tim,I mean if I was to bet on who had best access to information at that time, he probably had intel from all areas, chances are he knew much more than we do today,so it got me wondering, is there a chance, a slim chance, there was some valid reason behind what he did to Jewish ?
DEUTSCH from DUTCH from DISH...YID-DISH?
The conflict of reason aka yes vs no aka agreement vs disagreement aka wanting vs not wanting aka believing vs not believing aka true vs false aka good vs bad aka confirmation vs denial etc.
Is there such a conflict of reason between partial (living) and whole (process of dying)? How could the living deny the process of dying, and does confirmation by the living changes the process of dying?
a) all (process of dying) is given to each one (living) within. What could the partial represent; that the whole not already implies?
b) suggested REST (cessation of motion) tempts temporary form (life) within ongoing flow (inception towards death) to ignore constant change perceivable.
c) ID'IOT, noun - "a human being if form; but destitute of reason"...to reason implies the conflict caused by consenting to the suggestions of others; hence submitting to those suggesting; while fighting against others over the suggested. Those who resist the temptation of submission are being labeled idiots, and both sides reasoning will attack them for not conforming to the norm of submissive behavior.
Why brew highly rectified spirits; just to dilute it with natron?