The most successful attacks are the ones that go unnoticed and do not alert the system as a whole, or convince the system that they do not exist. Invisible parasites, subtle entrances, etc.
An exploit that straightforwardly pillages an ecosystem (as long as it's not utterly destroyed) will immediately produce anti-bodies/defenses against the attack. It will alert other systems that are vulnerable to the attack.
An exploit that slips between the cracks unnoticed and siphons energy or resources or mindshare is infinitely more effective.
This technology has been developed over millenia, its current form is the fiat money printer
Before one can consent to suggested fiat...one has to ignore being form (perception) within current flow (perceivable).
Aka artifice (techno) and logic/reason (logy)...the suggested inversion of natural implication.
This does all boil down to ignorance of our true nature, no? The sorcerors leverage that ignorance by using money as a proxy for life force energy, flow state, unity consciousness. (money, currency, banks, etc)
Yep, and it's using words to describe, which tempts one to ignore that nature doesn't shape words...it moves sound.
You using the words "true" and "no" establishes artificial conflicts of reason aka "true vs false" and "yes vs no" among those who ignore nature. Me writing "yep" establishes "agreement vs disagreement"...
a) A sorcerer shapes an ingredient (suggested information) to tempt others to ignore source (perceivable inspiration). Information tempts others to hold onto it, while inspiration moves and cannot be held onto, only drawn from and expressed at the moment(um) of adapting to it, while being within it.
A being implies an apprentice (life) within a moving source (inception towards death)...a sorcerer suggests "The Sorcerer's Apprentice" to become the substitute source directing for those submitting by watching, while laughing at the foolishness of the apprentice making mistakes.
b) Consenting to a suggestion (fiction) implies permitting another the power of attorney for oneself within perceivable (reality).
In other words...consent to suggested implies ones choice selecting a chosen one, by shirking ones response-ability onto another. That's how a proxy is being established.
a) All implies energy (internal power); which forces action (inception towards death) through reactions (life).
b) Flow isn't a state...it's the ongoing foundation for temporary form staying within.
Opposite of state implies "terra nullius" (unclaimed land) and refers to the flow which the form within cannot hold onto; claim for self; take possession of.
c) CON (together) SCIOUS (to know; perceive) tempts one to ignore that all perceivable sets each ones perception apart from one another, hence giving each one a different perspective.
Unity/unit (one) therefore implies apart from one another, which a sorcerer inverts with for example e pluribus unum (out of many; one) or tikkun olam (healing the world by bringing together) or united states; united nations; european union; soviet union; united kingdom etc.
In short...a moving nature generates UNITS by setting itself internally apart, which few within nature invert by tempting many together using suggested UNITY.
a) Hostility includes host...what if host (inception towards death) implies hostility towards guests (life)?
b) ATTACK = ATTACH...does nature detaches those within from one another?
Success implies outcome...attack (inception towards death) implies origin for defense (life).
...implies VERSUS least aka a conflict tempting one to join the attack.
What if energy implies source and oneself implies re-source aka response within source? Could the suggestions by others tempt one to ignore perceivable source, while siphoning ones consentual energy?
What if cause (whole) and effect (one) cannot be more than one aka energy?
a) System aka syn (together) sta (to stand) implies as partials within whole...not as a whole.
b) A whole implies as opposed to another whole...there can only be one whole for each one partial within.
c) What if few suggest "a whole" to tempt many to consent to "A HOLE"...would many even notice what consent was given to?
The introduction of Christianity in the Middle Ages, the French Revolution, the Fiat Money Printer, the false savior Hitler, and Obama's final sellout that led to the compromised Internet.
All shapeless, all insidious, all causing the indignant end of the free men.
A suggestion implies extro (outwards)...consent implies intro (inwards). A jew extroverts (turning the outside) to tempt gentiles to introduce a suggested inversion into self.
Only within all can one shape.
All cannot be inside...only being can be inside all. Ones ignorance of all perceivable for the suggestions of another one implies the insidious trap.
All causes beginning (inception) and end (death) for each effected one (life) within wielding free will of choice.
One cannot experience the end of free...ones choice can be ignored for a chosen ones suggestion, which tempts one to believe in the end of free.
Like federal school curriculum (public and private are both required) and higher education puts the mail in the coffin as we self Institutionize