Consider, black people, asian people, white people, hispanic people and jews.
Why is it that the jews have the lead in all crime over history? Why are all criminal words of jewish origin?
Why when we consider financial crimes, the only significant numbers are jewish?
Is it because they are smart? or because the religion teaches them to be criminals from day one?
I think we know the answer, there is a reason why they continue to be scrutinized. Numbers don't lie, like the jews do.
They are the Synagogue of Satan if you believe that the Bible is the Word of God.
Revelation 2:9
They are also the real NAZIs. ashkeNAZI Jews.
Exactly, the data shows the facts that cannot be denied.
Genghis Khan, Umayyad, or Alexander the Great could be the biggest criminals. Except they fought and WON. Winning invalidates criminality.
If you are in a war and die. It wasn't a crime of murder, you just lost. You will have all of eternity to argue with your gravestone if you feel I'm wrong.
Fantasy stories from the jews. None of those lies are true.
Tell that to the holohoax supporters.
Crime is simply a label used with the english language.
The meaning of crime is huge, in the most simplest terms, Crime is an act that produces victims in the current or future.
I think the rat utopia experiments are a joke and do not represent value when considering human counterparts. Rat lives simply do not have the pieces required to repair a scenario such as that.
When we see rats develop organization skills to match or the ability to invent and be creative, then we can talk. For now, the brain they use does not have a comparison to the number of facilities in the human brain, therefore any data collected from such experiments is useless.
We have massive families of rats to study over hundreds of years and yet they have not done anything notable at all, aside from propagate and spread.
I am more inline with the understanding that, training is critical. The more advanced the training the more advanced the outcomes. When we train criminals from a young age, they become capable criminals that operate in society using criminal tactics.
Compare this to people that do not raise criminals, but instead raise upstanding honest and thoughtful beings, the ones we always want to be around. This division in training is the reason we have entire societies out of line.
I believe the training that is contaminated is primarily driven by corrupt religion and its operators.
Religion can be good, or it can be bad. It is a tool and given that criminals are on the prowl, then that tool is now fallen into corrupted criminal hands.
Once we can get that understanding across, that it is the information and practice of process that defines what acts follow we can then realize our group preservation is correct and moderated, not a group of vengeful criminals trying to lay out future plans.
Because the many are consenting to follow their leading suggestions (progressivism).
Because the many consent to ignore perceivable sound for suggested words.
a) if the many ignore to evaluate (perceiving) value (perceivable) for suggested values by the few, then the few gain the power to put a price on reality; make compound interest out of the ignorant many, while drowning them with mental and physical debt and continue to devalue their choice of evaluation.
b) the few suggest numbers (plural) to tempt each "one" of the many to ignore perceivable NUM'BER, noun - "the designation of a unit", from U'NIT, noun [Latin unus, unitas, unity.] - "one" (singular).
Those who consent to suggested counting of others, ignore expressing "one" self, while the suggesting few call themselves "counts"... https://pic8.co/sh/1rIGYa.jpg
If the many consent to suggested INTEL'LIGENCE, noun (Latin intelligentia, from intelligo, to understand), then that implies them willingly "standing under" the suggesting few. If the many would adapt to KNOWL'EDGE, noun - "perception of that which exists", each one of them could grow comprehension of perceivable, yet putting themselves underneath others seems to be more tempting than the effort of growing oneself...
Reasoning represents ones consent to want versus not want suggested information aka a conflict among the many about the suggestions of the few. A self imposed mental hamster wheel that gives the suggesting few the power to control both sides of every conflict of reason by first defining (idolatry); then redefining (revisionism) and finally contradicting (talmudic reasoning) the suggested information for both sides within every conflict of reason.
a) what if all represents one in EN'ERGY, noun [Gr. work.] - "Internal or inherent power" alas partial ones (living) within whole oneness (process of dying)?
b) what if perceiving differences (living) within perceivable sameness (process of dying) can be tempted by suggested likeness, under disguise of sameness, to ignore differences? Hence equality (sameness) through diversity (differences)....
c) what if ones consent to suggested truth (want) tempts one into a conflict against suggested lies (not want), while both sides ignore perceivable change (need)? Why need? Because being (life) within change (inception towards death) implies the need to resist being changed from alive to dead.
What if HE BREW HIS STORY to tempt you to ignore yours? What if your story within nature doesn't require narration?
Precisely the point, we do not need some bobble head to attempt to tell us anything at all, you either present with cold hard data, implementations or beat it.
a) suggested "we" (plural) contradicts perceivable "one" (singular). Your consent to the suggested "we" gives the suggesting few the power to suggest "in the name of" (in nomine) of others. Those suggesting in the name of others are distancing themselves from the suggested, which is why the consenting many fail to comprehend who's making the suggestions. Instead the many are reasoning among each other over the suggested.
b) suggested "do" tempts one to ignore being (living) done by (process of dying), hence only able to "redo" aka RE (respond to) DO (being done by).
c) suggested "not" (nothing) represents the inversion of perceivable everything. A "thing" implies something, while suggested "no" represents ones denial of something perceivable.
d) tell me how one needs "we", how one being done needs to "do", and how one thing within everything needs "nothing"? How are any of those representing a perceivable need, a necessity for the sustenance of ones existence?
a) look at my profile....Post Score 0 (no offering); neither upvotes; nor downvotes (no judgement). I adapt to what inspires for the sustenance of oneself....others represent both inspiration (need) and temptation (want) for my struggle to sustain self through free will of choice.
b) a telling implies suggested information; I adapt to perceivable inspiration, while taking apart the suggested information by others, hence reverse engineering the fictitious narratives shaped within ignored reality.
a) nature sets itself apart, from whole (process of dying) into each partial (living), which implies from everything into each one thing given.
b) known aka KNOWL'EDGE, noun - "perception of that which exists" implies perceivable inspiration, hence "hot flowing data"...not the "cold hard data" of suggested information.
The process of dying represents the ongoing flow of inspiration for those living within to adapt to, to draw from, to grow resistance within (need) or to be tempted into ignorance by (want).
c) PRES'ENT, adjective [Latin proesens; proe and sum, esse, to be.]...to be implies temporary living within the essence of the ongoing process of dying. What others suggest you about it tempts one to ignore it, hence becoming "absent".
IMPLEO (to fill) MENT (mind/memory) -ATION (through action)...comprehending this requires self discernment about being reaction (living) within enacting (process of dying), and therefore with the need of life to resist the incoming movement towards death. Filling ones mind drowns one faster, which is why the few suggest endless information to tempt the consenting many to accumulate as much fictitious ballast as possible into their minds clouded with ignorance.
A memory needs to be used for temporary adaptation to ongoing input (like a ram), while resisting the temptation to want to be misused for accumulation of suggested information (like a hard-drive).
Reasoning with others about suggested information represents beating oneself. Sleight of hand for those with eyes to see: "No one wants to be defeated...It doesn't matter who's wrong or right...just beat it"
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FU-N-ZgXsAEmAxA.jpg
Who are these people?
What's that on Putin's head?
Why does your daddy Putin love to surround himself with Jews?
Does he? Name a few.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FU-N-ZgXsAEmAxA.jpg
One of them.is Russia's chief Rabbie, no idea who the rest is.
Do you know? Do you know why Putin is wearing a kippa? Is he a jew?
To cover up a bald spot?
That does look suspicious.
I can see that this embarrasses you.
Delicious
How so? You found a 20 year old picture of Putin smoozing with some jews.
Putin is only an enemy of the jews so much that the jew media spends 24/7 news coverage propaganda depicting him and Russia as evil monsters, election stealers of 2016 by means we still haven't been told by the jew liars, and hundreds of billions of war against Russia over what is only seemingly two small regions of land in which 90% of the inhabitants speak Russian and assume be annexed into Russia opposed to racist treatment by current coup corrupt fraud jew government in control of Ukraine.
Russia has long history of smoozing with jews. The entire marxist communist revolution in Russia was led by Jews.
Want to see how propaganda in web searches works?
Type "Russia condemns israel" into a search engine.
Get nothing but propaganda in return.
So, Putin is against the Jews? Yes or no?
When it comes to Ukraine, Putin has been in dispute and at odds with USA/Israel dating back to at least 2004 when "Orange Revolution" took place in Ukraine, allegations of stolen election, and claims that Russia unsuccessfully poisoned Yushchenko.
On a side note, back in 2010 Paul Manafort, the guy who DemoKKKrats accused of Russian collusion, helped the Russian-endorsed candidate in Ukraine, Yanukovych, get elected.
DemoKKKrats and Jews wanted their guy Yushchenko in there. So they were seeking revenge against Paul Manafort and then went after Trump when Manafort was Trump's campaign chair.