I know there is no right answer, and secret societies can't all be publically known.
Just wondering who/what people think is the top of the bad guy stairs.
Example: Deep State, when I think of the ultimate highest group, it's the one in control of the US.
Just say Jews.
Larry, from accounting is a Jew. There are little children who are Jews.
These are not They
Okay Ethan.
I'd assume this is an individually specific answer but truthfully I know 'they' are the evil powers and principalities of this world. 'They' come in every packaging imaginable and some at higher concentrations than others at certain times but it's all the same song and dance and God knows their steps. Ask Him about it maybe?
What empowers evil/live?
a) PRIN'CIPLE, noun (Latin principium, beginning; origin; source)
b) Can there be more than one source? How do ingredients came to be within source/sauce?
c) Beginning of energy implies what? Begin aka BE (being) GENERO (generated) aka being (life) generated (inception towards death).
d) Could utilizing suggestion within perception distract one from perceivable origin?
e) what's the origin of world/vault?
Precipitating itself from the origin breaks into many parts, mini 'sources' within low perceivable view.
a) "itself" implies oneself applying "self" to origin, hence ignoring to be partial within whole. Why? Self implies among other, while whole implies entire (sound).
Self can only exist within entire aka in-sanus (within sound) hence per-sonos (by sound). Applying "self" to origin implies personification of origin aka idolatry aka "Thou shalt have no other gods before me" aka labeling perceivable (sound) with suggested (word) etc.
b) others suggest pluralism (many) to distract one from discerning self as partial (one) within whole (oneness). Ones singular consent to suggested pluralism establishes collectivism aka permitting few to collectivize consenting many underneath suggested -isms.
c) instead of using suffix (-ing) try utilizing origin (-tion aka action)...precipita-tion implies action precipitating reactions. Doing that allows one to discern self as reaction (life) precipitates within action (inception towards death).
Choosing suffix tempts one to Latin suffixus; suffigere "to fasten", which for resistance (life) within velocity (inception towards death) implies increase of "suffering".
a) Perceivable (whole) implies only source for each ones perception (partial)...ignoring this by consenting to suggestions by others tempts one to view another as source (suggested information) for source (perceivable inspiration), hence establishing a mediator; media (Latin medius; middle) aka merchants in the middle, selling fiction as reality to anyone willingly buying into it.
b) Consenting to suggested tempts one to seek understanding aka to want to stand under others, which in return prevents one from growing self discernment within perceivable.
Perceivable moving through ones perception implies impression towards expression. Consenting to suggested implies self imposed repression of expression, while ignoring impression.
Sleight of hand: "express yourself, don't repress yourself...and I'm not sorry; it's human nature". https://www.azlyrics.com/lyrics/madonna/humannature.html
Notice the next lines:
That implies others denying perceivable for suggested, while trying to repress one who is longing to express self.
c) ones view is low if one chooses to stand under what others are showing, and ones view is high if one looks down upon others. Both implies suggested sides tempting one into a conflict of reason (low vs high), while ignoring ones sight as center (perception) of surrounding (perceivable).
Resisting the temptation to view what others show (suggest) from a low or high position, allows one to draw from everything nature offers through each one. Information tempts one to view it from high or low position; inspiration inspires one to resist temptation. Ones position within inspiration implies center, hence reacting by breathing (Latin spiro; spirit) within surrounding action aka within-spirit-action (inspiration).
This is very good advice
I've already explored Him. For me, They took what makes Him beautiful and manipulated Him into dogmatic, war mongering, make believe distraction from our unique spirituality.
They, could be demons. They also could be something else
What eles is there but angels and demons? And humans and animals and plants and minerals?
Maybe there are no angels or demons and what you think are angels and demons are just your own learned dogma applied to understand spiritual phenomenon.
Besides the stuff you mentioned, there is Aether.
There are demons. They’re called Jews.
Again. Don't you think some Jews are different than others? I mean, you have to be an evil fuck to be Soros, but what about some regular Jew who you know at work. He doesn't even hang out with Jews.
Energy implies aether/either flow (inception towards death) or form (life) within the same momentum (perceivable moment).
Others suggest besides as the inversion of being center (perception) within surrounding (perceivable). In other words...others suggest sides to tempt ones choice off-center when consenting to either/aether side.
Maybe you think I'm schizophrenic and I'm not
a) Schizo aka schism (Latin scindo) - "to divide"
b) "I'm not" aka I am (implies something) + not (implies nothing)...that's a division of something and nothing.
c) any word shaped implies a division of letters, and any suggested word implies a division within perceivable sound.
d) the conflict of reason...I'm vs I'm not...also implies division.
I'm not divided on the issue, though others may be haha
a) I and others...a division between one and another.
b) Issue (flowing out aka egress), which implies a division from entry.
c) division itself aka divided vision implies in-between ones perception and all perceivable.
d) "schizo", as coined by Eugene Bleuler, is based on Sigismund Schlomo Freunds psychological analysis racket aka utilizing logic (conflicts of reason about suggested) to tempt others to ignore perceivable psyche (animating power).
In short...division (reason) by means of suggestion.
Aka dog/god + ma/matter. What if what you call "god" isn't matter (solid) but immaterial (fluid), and what if your consent to suggested (word) tempts you to ignore perceivable (sound); while holding onto suggested solid within perceivable fluid?
What if words tempt one to want to hold onto meaning (information); while sound needs to be let go of (inspiration)?
a) MONGER aka merchant aka "to trade"...what if ones consent to the suggestion by another implies mercantile contract law between buyer (consent) and seller (suggestion)?
b) What if offer (perceivable) generates offered (perception) with "free" will of choice? What if others suggest currency to distract ones perception from perceivable "current", hence tempting ones "free" will of choice to bind itself to suggestions by chosen ones. Suggestions like RELIGION (Latin religio; to bind anew)?
c) What if choice can only exist within perceivable balance (need/want)? What if choice can be tempted through suggestion into self inflicted imbalance (want vs not want)?
What if this conflict of imbalance is suggested to ones consenting choice as "reason/logic" aka reasoning about suggested information, while ignoring perceivable inspiration and logic aka logos aka suggested word over perceivable sound aka spell-craft?
What if others get permission by ones consent to rebrand conflicts of reason (want vs not want) into for example...truth vs lie; good vs bad; belief vs disbelief; us vs them; rich vs poor; soccer vs football; left vs right; black vs white; cola vs pepsi; capitalism vs communism; trump vs biden; israel vs hamas; ukraine vs russia; vaxxed vs unvaxxed; love vs hate; big mac vs whopper; mario vs sonic etc.?
Demon aka DAI (divider) MON (provider)...what if being implies division (life) within provision (inception towards death)? Angels aka angles imply perpendicular to base-line...could ingredients (life) within base-line (inception towards death) shape perpendicular angles suggested by kike aka kikel aka circle?
What if holding onto suggested implies a perpendicular angle for temporary growth (life) within ongoing loss (inception towards death), and what if the resulting conflict of reason implies circular logic, hence reasoning against one another about suggested information, while never finding conclusion to conflict, yet spending ones resistance within endless conflicts of reason...much like a snake eating its own tail (ouroboros allegory).
English Language was high jacked centuries ago, any analysis with be heteroscedastic with intended but hidden subversion of modern languages anyway, just give up
Aka RANDOM; noun - "motion without direction". Being alive implies directed within motion from inception towards death.
Motion implies velocity (always directing forwards), while the momentum (inception towards death) of ongoing motion generates temporary resistance (life) at its center.
Momentum implies balance within motion, and the center of balance implies choice, hence ones "free" will of choice within "dom"inance of balance aka free-dom...random represents the suggested inversion thereof.
Ones consent to suggested (words; information; fiction) tempts one to ignore; deny; hide perceivable (sound; inspiration; reality).
Nature moves sound forwards; those within tempt each other to hold onto suggested words, while ignoring to resist being an instrument moved within sound. If an instrument resists sound it "resonates", while ignoring to resist implies "dissonance".
Example: suggested "insane person" tempts one to ignore being in sanus (within sound) and per sonos (by sound). Adapting to perceivable sound implies PHONETICIAN (from phonic; sound), while ignoring it for suggested definitions implies DEAF PHONETICIAN.
Another example...if I suggest having a box and you consent, then your consent permits me to define (idolatry); redefine (revisionism) and contradict (talmudic reasoning) what's in the box. That box represents your mind/memory, and your consent gives my suggestions the permission to enter information into it.
Only nature gives all (perceivable) to each one (perception)...others tempt one to hold onto suggested, which when consented to, tempts one to give up.
You could be right and I would implore you remember what has already been done and to know that there is nothing new under the sun.
I don't believe we are even close to understanding humans, this world, or what is controlling us.
Most people think that we have already discovered everything. Because they have become so unconsciously dependant on accepted the reality presented to them...they can't use their reasoning Even the smartest of us humans are brainwashed to believe that everything has already been understood.
This is place is crazy and I couldn't stay here if I wasn't able to check things through God. Hasn't failed me yet.
ZOG
I think humans would create an amazing world. We are not evil or imbalanced towards chaos or greed.
What you see around you now is a result of "Them" not us
Jews.
Right, they’re jews.
If highest equals jew; then "tallest"...
lol
Couldn't help myself...
Nah. It's more complex than that. They hide behind Judaism, 15 min of research will show you that
No, they hide their judaism. Enjoy your slavery.
Ok, ya right, Larry the Jew from accounting is the same as Soros. That's nincompoop logic.
And ya, I am making the best of my slavery.
Literally yes. They publicly admit it.
Sit down and shut up about things you don’t understand.
THIS IS LITERALLY WHY YOU ARE ENSLAVED, DUMBASS. BECAUSE YOU REFUSE TO LISTEN TO THE FUCKING TRUTH.
Oh Jesus. Can't use your own common sense, so you site other brainwashed idiots.
Jews are not the problem. It's people who call themselves Jewish and people who don't.
It's illogical to say a Soros is the same Jew as Larry from accounting, and, I don't know if it makes sense to argue with you, since it seems you have researched and still don't care, it's all Jews to you
Irony.
Cute.
Jews are brainwashed idiots? The literal authors of the Talmud—the holy book of the jews—are brainwashed idiots?
PROVE YOUR CLAIM.
So… the jews. All jews call themselves jewish. The Bible is extremely explicit about this. They’re the problem and always have been since they killed Christ.
“Judaism is the problem” ≠ “judaism is the only problem” ≠ “no one who isn’t jewish is part of that problem.” It’s not just jews, but it is all jews. Period. End of story. No exceptions. Their holy book explicitly says so.
I literally just proved otherwise with direct citations to both religious and secular documentation from some of the most prominent jewish sources in history.
Irony.
Since I have actually done the research—and you have not—why do you persist, in your little sophist brain, to think that you could possibly be correct?
Answer the question, coward.
Bro, you postulated that all Jews are the same, you obviously know that's not true from a generational/geographic history, so I'm not gonna waste my time looking up Khzarians and rambling about how these Jews are not the Hebrews and George Soros and the rest of the fake Jews who are really some twisted devilish freemason cultist posing as harmless Jews. Because there are lots of brainwashed, harmless Jews, who have no fucking clue what's going on.
And your point is that because I believe that obvious truth, that I'm unaware of my slavery? Or what is your fucking poing
a) "deep" state contradicts "highest" group. Others tempt one to "think" within the controlled environment of reason (deep vs high). Suggestion contradicts perception.
b) others suggest pluralism (US aka united states) to tempt singular (one) to ignore self for others.
c) suggested the-ism tempts one to authorize another over self through ones consent to the suggested -ism.
d) as for ones state within reality...center (life) within surrounding (inception towards death).
To know implies to perceive everything perceivable...others suggest nihilism (Latin nihilo; nothing) to tempt one to ignore perceivable (everything) for suggested (nothing), hence tempting one to "deny" reality for fiction.
If "there is no", then where is nothing?
Who implies one. What implies energy. Why? Because all implies one in EN'ERGY, noun [Gr. work.] - "internal or inherent power".
Only oneself can discern to be one (partial) within all (whole), hence one within oneness. Sleight of hand..."all for one, and one for all" aka "there can be only one" aka "alone...ALL(in)ONE".