Needing to resist (life) linear (inception towards death) progression or wanting to follow suggested progressivism.
TPTB have a rolodex
Reasoning among many aka circular logic implies the rolodex (rolling index) utilized by few, while many ignore power (motion) of being (matter).
to arrive at a destination through numerous scenarios
Same destination (death); different scenarios (life)...numerology (reasoning about enumeration) tempts ONE to ignore the ONE and only scenic route to each ONES final destination.
Sleight of hand:
"Here we go, yo, here we go, yo" (inception towards death)
"So what, so what, so what's the scenario?" (life)
Why is life struggling with self discernment?
both war and no-war
Yes vs no implies a conflict of reason aka the foundation of war.
We can postulate that they would prefer one thing over another but lets be honest in saying that they control the world with such immensity now that if they do not get xyz one way, they will take it another more tedious way.
Seeing the linear of plots puts us in a party-line style of thinking.
We need to be as flexible as they are when speculating.
That said -- this style of thinking is also how we arrive at the means to combat it. Well.. we already know how --> unplug every thing for every one. #eAnarchy
Its not civil war if its natives vs foreigners. That's just called war.
Needing to resist (life) linear (inception towards death) progression or wanting to follow suggested progressivism.
Reasoning among many aka circular logic implies the rolodex (rolling index) utilized by few, while many ignore power (motion) of being (matter).
Same destination (death); different scenarios (life)...numerology (reasoning about enumeration) tempts ONE to ignore the ONE and only scenic route to each ONES final destination.
Sleight of hand:
Why is life struggling with self discernment?
Yes vs no implies a conflict of reason aka the foundation of war.
a) Slave/slav/slovo - "word; speech"... https://www.etymonline.com/word/Slav
b) Perceivable sound sets choice free; suggested words bind choice by consent.
Aka suggested progressivism tempting ones consent to follow into a conflict of reason (war) against other ones.
We can postulate that they would prefer one thing over another but lets be honest in saying that they control the world with such immensity now that if they do not get xyz one way, they will take it another more tedious way.
Seeing the linear of plots puts us in a party-line style of thinking.
We need to be as flexible as they are when speculating.
That said -- this style of thinking is also how we arrive at the means to combat it. Well.. we already know how --> unplug every thing for every one. #eAnarchy
a) What if chosen ONEs suggest many things to establish a conflict of reason (over vs under) among others?
b) Does "over vs under" contradict "as above so below"? How is a fish in conflict with water?
Control implies "rolled together"...few suggest pluralism (they) to roll the consent of many together within circular logic aka conflicts of reason.
PARTials (life) within a LINE (inception towards death) need to resist the wanted temptation to follow...
Ones consent to suggested pluralism (we) binds singular, hence preventing ones ability to bend (flexibility) as ray within light.
Participate in any group and try to be more flexible to experience mass resistance.
Being implies in-between (life) arrival (inception) and departure (death) as an arriving partial.
How does one unplug from "we"? How did one (singular) plug into we (plural)?
Inception toward impalement of kikes