Some excerpts from the Protocols Of Zion.
(twitter.com)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (17)
sorted by:
a) everyone tempting others to consent to suggested information by free will of choice represents a "mason of free", hence building ignorance within the memory of others, while shaping their view of ignored reality with suggested fiction; through choice (suggestion) to choice (consent) contract law.
b) perceivable inspiration represents the "revealed", suggested information represents the "occult", hence the fiction concealed by ones willing ignorance of reality.
c) the few suggest occultism to tempt the many to believe reality is hiding something from them, which tricks the many to willingly consent to the suggested fiction of the few, which the few can then withhold; conceal; hide from the many.
a) by growing comprehension about what ignorance represents...ones choice to ignore perceivable (need) for suggested (want). Example...suggested Pepsi (want) vs suggested Coke (not want) tempts one to ignore perceivable thirst (need).
b) suggested "we" (plural) tempts the perceiving "one" (singular) to being partial (perceiving) within whole (perceivable). "we" represents multiple ones consenting to a suggested label, while given those who suggest the power of mass consent to speak in the name of the suggested label, like "we the people".
c) as for overcoming...living within the process of dying implies coming out of, while being a perceiving response (life) to perceivable origin (inception towards death). One doesn't need to overcome suggested obstacles, one needs to grow resistance (living) within temptation (dying), hence resisting suggested want for perceivable need.
a) everything perceivable "was" before the perceiving one within can make a suggestion about what it "is".
b) true (want) implies versus false (not want), while ignoring change (need).
c) choice exits within balance (need/want), choosing want over need tempts one into imbalance (want vs not want). The few suggest the many these imbalance conflicts as "reasoning" aka logic aka as the means of problem solving...which it never does. Instead it perpetuates more conflicts of reason.
a) nature reveals everything (perceivable) to everyone (perceiving)...ones choice to ignore perceivable (reality) for whatever others are suggesting (fiction) gives others the power of ones consent to "conceal" the suggested and "reveal" it at will, which they obviously utilize to exploit ones consent aka "if you want what I have; then you'll do what I say...or else".
The few control the many through choice (suggestion) towards choice (consent) contract law, which represents the inversion of balance (perceivable) to choice (perceiving) natural law. One doesn't need to consent to the choices of others; one needs to utilize choice to adapt to balance aka to the ongoing momentum of motion.
"free" will of choice within the "dom"inance of balance implies free-dom aka free (living) within dom (process of dying).
b) whatever others suggest you reality means tempts you to ignore reality (perceivable) for fiction (suggested)...that's the trick. You can't see perceivable, because you consent to view it through the lens of suggested....starting with suggested words over perceivable sound.
The few trick the many to consent to label (word) the world (sound) aka affixed labels upon a moving system. "wind" isn't wind because you call it "wind", but because it moves. Motion doesn't require labels from those within, it demands adaptation, hence breathing (Latin spiro, spirit).
c) those who adapt to perceivable sound represent PHONETICIANS (from phonics; sound), while those who ignore sound for suggested word-based "definitions" represent DEAF PHONETICIANS.
Suggested "insane person" tempts one to ignore perceivable IN SANUS (within sound) + PER SONOS (by sound), hence being within, by, out of and in response to perceivable sound.
Thank you for inspiring me to write.