How are there so many Jews in Hollywood?
First 450 names: https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movies/movie-news/open-letter-condemning-jonathan-glazer-zone-of-interest-speech-1235855216/
Then 500 MORE Hollywood Jews came out of the woodwork to sign:
Going over the list, these arent even the big hollywood name Jewish actors/producers youd recognize - implying Judaism is prevalent throughout ALL levels of Hollywood - writers, producers and everyone behind the scenes.
Its clear Hollywood has an anti-white bias, a sick fetish of degeneracy ... Is it all connected?
Great, saves somebody a helluva lot of time compiling the list...
I'm sure it's a coincidence. Stop noticing now.
A remake of "but not all jews" using a jew vs jew narrative to curtail one racket (zionism), while sustaining another (holocaust).
All sets itself apart; few (jew) within connect/aggregate many (gentiles) together to make it easier for few to remain apart... https://www.amazon.com/People-Apart-Political-History-1789-1939/dp/0199246815
Hasidic Jews do not support Zionism
Zion supports hasidim. The former implies jewish self emancipation aka being set free, while the latter aka hasidhim (pious ones; pure; purification) can only remain pure if the free ones go balls to the wall corrupt.
Everything perceivable is within balance, which jews exploit by suggesting gentiles that "not" (nothing) exists, which tempts gentiles into imbalance aka reasoning (do vs don't).
I bet they hate you at the DMV
Gamblers love loosing...
Vehicle (life) within motor (inception towards death) implies ones mind (memory aka momentum) departed (matter) within whole (motion).
Others suggest AT (Heb to come, to approach) to invert IN (coming to be within). Suggested "at" tempts being to advance; nature inspires being to resist advancement.
Myopic is an adjective meaning shortsighted in every sense. Whether you need glasses or a new attitude, if you can't see the forest for the trees, you're myopic.
Sight implies center (perception) within circumference (perceivable)...others suggest sides (short vs long) to distract ones sight.
Try applying theses sides to "life"...it can be cut short or prolonged, but being alive came first; so both "short" or "long" implies a suggested adjective aka a fictitious addition to real being.
Nature doesn't add (adjective) to mind (meaning)...all of nature separates into each ones mind/memory, hence all perceivable input going through each ones perception.
The trick...tempting many to hold onto suggested (information) as "meaning", while ignoring perceivable (inspiration).
"You" implies one claiming self as "me; myself or I"; which in return labels everyone else as "you". This claim upon self implies wanting to ignore need.
In short...me vs you (want vs not want) ignores being one (want) within oneness (need). Other words for want...will; wish; desire aka temptation, which is what one NEEDS to resist.
New, néwos, now...perceivable moment(um) within everything implies now; suggested creationism (out of nothing) implies new...it's ones free will of choice to discern this for self or permit others to define, redefine and contradict it at will.
Sleight of hand: "nothing new under the sun/son/one"
a) Does being an infant imply short-sight? Does being an elder imply far-sight?
b) If sight implies from oneself outwards, then how could others measure the length of it?
c) If one cannot see what another suggests; yet perceives what goes on around another; then is one short or far-sighted?
d) Myopia aka MYEIN (to shut) OPS (eye)...what if one exists in-between (life) open (inception) and shut (death) without being able to obstruct the process? Do those "without eyes to see" have sight?
Notice MY (a claim over self) EIN (one; state of being) and EYE (I; ones claimed self)...could those who suggest "myopia" have weaved contradiction; inversion; dualism; phonetics; numerology etc. into its "meaning/definition/truth"?
Let's go over the suggested meanings and perceivable implications...
a) Disposition...aka divided position within action; an inversion of ones position as separated reaction within action. Division implies against another; separation implies as partial (one) within whole (oneness).
b) Posture...aka situation of a figure with regard to the eye. REG'ARD, verb - "to look towards; to point or be directed" tempts one to ignore being a sentence (life) within direction (inception towards death) hence pointed towards end of sentence.
Ones situation implies within perceivable origin...not in regard towards whatever outcomes others are suggesting aka "pointing out".
c) Aptness...aka inclined (leaning one side or the other). Doing that tempts one to ignore being in-between (choice) sides (balance). It's ones consent to hold onto suggested sides; which imbalances ones choice off-center, hence inclined towards side.
Free will of choice cannot be apt/inclined without ignoring to be "free".
d) Promptitude...aka obedience or compliance to the suggestions by others, while ignoring that perceivable (inception towards death) forces adaptation from each one (life) within, while inspiring resistance...not obedience/compliance.
e) Instead of judging the "attitude" of others; consider why a jew suggests gentiles to behave like "Niggaz wit Attitudes (NWA)" or a fixed point of time (era)... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attitude_Era
tl; dr...Can you expand my sight? What glasses would you suggest to fix shortsightedness?
Learn about context