No implies versus yes...a conflict of reason shaped by ones consent towards suggested aka a trade...sell (suggested) meets buy (consent), hence one being willingly marked by the suggestions of others.
Half of any market. The rest of the globe are watching it like how?
a) being implies center (choice) of surrounding (balance)...ones consent to the suggestions by others shapes imbalance, hence a conflict aka side vs side, while ignoring center within surrounding, hence MARKET (consent towards suggested) and SHARE (want vs not want) aka sharing conflict.
b) watching a movie tempts one to believe in rest (cessation of motion). Why? Because a suggested picture represents a "captured moment-um", while a suggested movie represents a "moving picture".
It's not about watching a suggested movie or not; but about ones consent to suggested "motion" (movie). Being implies RE (respond to) MOVE (being moved by), hence life responding to being moved from inception towards death.
One cannot move; only re-move, hence being (living) re-moved (process of dying).
The few suggest movies to a) distract the many from being moved and b) to lure them into conflicts of reason against one another, hence re-moving each other willingly.
Try viewing it from a magic perspective...the trick is about hiding perceivable motion underneath suggested "movie". The distraction is everything within and about the suggested movies.
It works like a CHARM (to subdue or control by incantation or secret influence).
Motion to change
To(wards) implies being within changing motion.
If you make crap show it for free
It's being shown for each ones "free" will of choice. Others cannot make free; only balance (dominating whole) can make choice (free partials). Being choice implies RE (responding to) MAKE (made by).
The suggested conflict between original vs remake tempts one to ignore being re-make (life) within origin (inception towards death).
Writing the above sentence gets others hostile towards me; while suggesting "Robocop...original vs remake?" would get others into countless conflicts of reason.
the same insertion
IN (being within) SERO (thrust by) aka different inserts (life) within same thrust (inception towards death).
it's awful
a) AWE (ones reverential fear) FULL (replete; having within its limits all that it can contain).
b) awful implies vs wonderful aka your consent to reason about the suggestions of others, while ignoring perceivable...being partial within whole.
c) the suggestions by others cannot be "full", since perceivable offers more than suggestions shaped within.
It hasn't changed anything else.
Each temporary thing (solid) can only exist within constant change (liquid)...other suggest movies (stop-motion for example) to distract one from that.
No implies versus yes...a conflict of reason shaped by ones consent towards suggested aka a trade...sell (suggested) meets buy (consent), hence one being willingly marked by the suggestions of others.
a) being implies center (choice) of surrounding (balance)...ones consent to the suggestions by others shapes imbalance, hence a conflict aka side vs side, while ignoring center within surrounding, hence MARKET (consent towards suggested) and SHARE (want vs not want) aka sharing conflict.
b) watching a movie tempts one to believe in rest (cessation of motion). Why? Because a suggested picture represents a "captured moment-um", while a suggested movie represents a "moving picture".
It's not about watching a suggested movie or not; but about ones consent to suggested "motion" (movie). Being implies RE (respond to) MOVE (being moved by), hence life responding to being moved from inception towards death.
One cannot move; only re-move, hence being (living) re-moved (process of dying).
The few suggest movies to a) distract the many from being moved and b) to lure them into conflicts of reason against one another, hence re-moving each other willingly.
Try viewing it from a magic perspective...the trick is about hiding perceivable motion underneath suggested "movie". The distraction is everything within and about the suggested movies.
It works like a CHARM (to subdue or control by incantation or secret influence).
To(wards) implies being within changing motion.
It's being shown for each ones "free" will of choice. Others cannot make free; only balance (dominating whole) can make choice (free partials). Being choice implies RE (responding to) MAKE (made by).
The suggested conflict between original vs remake tempts one to ignore being re-make (life) within origin (inception towards death).
Writing the above sentence gets others hostile towards me; while suggesting "Robocop...original vs remake?" would get others into countless conflicts of reason.
IN (being within) SERO (thrust by) aka different inserts (life) within same thrust (inception towards death).
a) AWE (ones reverential fear) FULL (replete; having within its limits all that it can contain).
b) awful implies vs wonderful aka your consent to reason about the suggestions of others, while ignoring perceivable...being partial within whole.
c) the suggestions by others cannot be "full", since perceivable offers more than suggestions shaped within.
Each temporary thing (solid) can only exist within constant change (liquid)...other suggest movies (stop-motion for example) to distract one from that.