Win / Conspiracies
Conspiracies
Communities Topics Log In Sign Up
Sign In
Hot
All Posts
Settings
All
Profile
Saved
Upvoted
Hidden
Messages

Your Communities

General
AskWin
Funny
Technology
Animals
Sports
Gaming
DIY
Health
Positive
Privacy
News
Changelogs

More Communities

frenworld
OhTwitter
MillionDollarExtreme
NoNewNormal
Ladies
Conspiracies
GreatAwakening
IP2Always
GameDev
ParallelSociety
Privacy Policy
Terms of Service
Content Policy
DEFAULT COMMUNITIES • All General AskWin Funny Technology Animals Sports Gaming DIY Health Positive Privacy
Conspiracies Conspiracy Theories & Facts
hot new rising top

Sign In or Create an Account

0
TPTB want us to be angry and hate each other (i.imgflip.com)
posted 3 days ago by guywholikesDjtof2024 3 days ago by guywholikesDjtof2024 +2 / -2
13 comments share
13 comments share save hide report block hide replies
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (13)
sorted by:
▲ 1 ▼
– free-will-of-choice 1 point 1 day ago +1 / -0

Sorry for the late reply...

False. It implies a true line and a false line colliding until there is none of the false line and only the true line remains.

a) God implies one aka singularity...true and false implies dualism aka a plurality.

b) False versus true implies versus/verto - "to turn" aka a circular rotation.

c) Before one can collide (strike together) there has to be a separation from one another...only during linear progression (inception towards death) can there be potential separation (life) to collide against one another.

d) True and false imply options for ones choice...God giving choice implies a linear procession of cause into effect aka of action into reaction aka of if into then.

e) Remain implies each ones response (life) to the main line (inception toward death)

f) What you call true and false lines implies the beginning and end of one line put together into a circle aka the ouroboros eating its own tail. This circle of self harm represents logic inwardly and reason outwardly.

g) If there's only truth, then there couldn't be choice.

You don't even need to take anything.

a) YOU is based on taking possession of self as "me; myself or I". Without I no YOU, hence I O U (I owe/own You). All gives each one the free will of choice to take self into possession, but not without getting possessed by another, hence IAM (jesus) getting possessed by YOU ARE (judah).

b) DON'T implies taking possession of "doing nothing", while ignoring being done within everything given.

c) Both YOU and DON'T put one at odds with one another, while ignoring that even (balance) gives odd (choice).

d) Anything implies a separation of everything, which requires from each thing the need to resist the wanted temptation of anything else.

Being given free will of choice implies being able to choose to take anything...taking binds choice within given.

Someone can just drop something

One implies apart from one another (analysis)...some/sum implies together with one another (synthesis). What you call just is at odds with one another aka a contradiction.

The sum of all things implies dying; the separation of each thing implies living. A jew utilizes mosaic law to summon gentiles together; thereby inverting living into dying.

a gift

Only all perceivable gives/gifts ones perception; while any suggested gift implies poison... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Der_Giftpilz

If you take something, you only do one or the other (right or wrong)

a) Nature does, while each being within pretends to do right or wrong against one another, instead of re-doing self.

b) Right/reg - "to move in a straight line"... https://www.etymonline.com/word/*reg- not right vs wrong circular conflict.

So are you a Christian?

Coming into being implies christ (to anoint)...joining christianity destroys the anointed mind through possession aka I AM (jesus).

What's Christianity without Jesus? Torah (instruction) aka being within (in) structure (struct) of action (ion).

And don't do any "THIS IMPLIES THAT"

Implication (if/then) represents the foundation for thinking straight aka if cause (perceivable); then effect (perception)...others tempting one into do vs don't reasoning doesn't change the foundation.

The giver exists.

EX implies "outwards". If God could express outwards, then there would be more than God outside of God...that contradicts "one and only".

So what if God (whole) impresses each ones (partial) expression within God? What if God implies energy (internal/inherent power)?

Only inwards (impression) can there be outwards (expression). Nature impresses before a being expresses. Nature forces animation through before a being inhales/ exhales in response.

GIVING THINGS TO PEOPLE KILLS THEM

God giving person aka per (by) sonos (sound) generates each instrument (mind structured within)...a singular process. A jew suggests plurality (people) while distracting gentiles from perceivable sound with suggestible words.

"Inception towards death" doesn't exist.

What about the life in-between? Doesn't life have an inception and a death? What moves life from beginning towards end? If life is animated, then how could animation not generate a momentum (inception towards death) for matter (life) to become re-animated?

Nobody but you believe in such a concept.

a) Concept implies taking together... how could "nobody but you" take anything together?

b) To believe implies holding onto, so how could one hold onto "inception towards death", which implies an ongoing momentum?

c) Concepts and beliefs imply synthesis (holding together)...free-will-of-choice analyses (sets apart). This is why you had to ask me if I am a christian believer.

you base WORLDVIEW BELIEFS on SONGS?

Only within sound can a song be shaped...few write songs to distract many from sound, while using the written spell-craft as a sleight of hand for those with eyes to see.

Or to quote another song... https://www.azlyrics.com/lyrics/simongarfunkel/thesoundofsilence.html

  • People talking without speaking
  • People hearing without listening
  • People writing songs that voices never shared
  • No one dared
  • Disturb the sound of silence

wordgame-based

Words are based on sound. Games are based on given choice taking chance.

PUT CERTAIN WORDS IN CERTAIN POSITIONS

What if sound allowing instrument to discern self reveals ones position within all to each one, while the words shaped by one another make everything uncertain?

THIS MEANS SOMETHING

Something implies "sum of things". Thinks within a sum implies a measurement taken aka a meaning. While beings hold artificial meaning together...nature separates each being from one another.

guywholikesDjtof2024 + free-will-of-choice means "two"; yet being apart from "one" another contradicts meaning...what if one was perceivable (natural analysis), while two is suggested (artificial synthesis)?

If your worldview is false, then you should reject it

a) True vs false (reason) contradicts if/then (implication)...if and then aren't in conflict with one another. If was before then comes into being.

b) Re-ject-ion implies reaction (life) ejected by action (inception towards death).

If you stop

If...then...implies motion. Stop implies the suggested "cessation of motion". If I park a car at a stop sign, then does it stop the car from rusting? What about saying "stop" while being raped? Seems like stop represents a mental distortion of an ongoing reality...

be normal

Normal/norma - "carpenter's square"... https://www.etymonline.com/word/normal A jew uses a compass to draw a circle around gentile norms aka freemasonry.

What if free will of choice allows each one to be exceptional instead of a normie?

will come your way

Being implies coming into will (life) within way (inception towards death)...

will come your way. Linear progression!!

Your implies taking possession aka holding onto a side (yours vs mine) aka circular conflict.

"true implies versus false (circular conflict)" ...Arbitrary

a) Arbiter; noun - "person who has power of judging absolutely according to his own pleasure"...hence judge not; lest ye be judged.

b) Versus/verto - "to turn" aka a circle.

It could be shaped an octagonal prism for all I care

All was linear before anything can be shaped within. Try to shape a circle or an octagonal prism without a line...

There is no circle for trust to be in

Trust VERSUS (verto; to turn) distrust...holding onto either side shapes the circle. Same trick as is vs isn't and yes vs no.

You think trust is a physical thing, don't you.

Physical trust implies reason, mental trust implies logic...baiting mental trust (consent) into physical trust (consensus) implies logos.

Like how athiests believe all is matter.

Consenting to an -ism (atheism) shapes different beings alike one another. Believing implies consenting to one another's suggestions. Only within all motion can each one matter come into being.

Show me this imagined "circle".

Imagination aka image (artificial circle) within action (natural line). Image; noun - "piece of statuary; artificial representation "... https://www.etymonline.com/word/image

Holding onto anything during linear progression establishes rotation...

Your claims about circles are unfounded and not true

Claim/clamer - "to call, name, describe"... https://www.etymonline.com/word/claim Notice that nature doesn't call; name or describe any being within.

Because it (nature) allows other things to give them.

Nature gives the separation of each being from one another...pretending to give allowances to one another ignores that all was already given to each one within. Nature (linear progression) cannot hold back; only give forwards.

Notice that them (plural) contradicts it (singular)...

And it's not sentient, so how could it care?

Sentience implies being SEND, to care implies being CARRIED aka a transfer of life from inception towards death. Nature sends each sentient being, while carrying things to carry for those who ignore singularity for plurality.

Wait, you're not the source of FWOC????

a) Nature cannot wait; it moves, which generates momentum (balance) for matter (choice).

b) Free implies within dominance; will/want implies within need; of implies out of/within/in response to, and choice implies within balance.

c) Being within nature implies effect within source...viewing one another as source of anything implies the temptation of "affection".

Source separates each effect (analysis); affection tempts effects together (synthesis).

"True and false are optional"...INCORRECT

How did you choose between correct or incorrect? Option (choice) al (balance) implies nature giving each being the option how to adapt. True vs false represent artificial imbalance for ones optional choice.

we live

Living implies apart from one another, hence as an OFF-SPRING. Others suggest pluralism to invert each singular mind into a controlled environment called "consensus".

integrated into all

Integration (together within) represents the inversion of separation (apart within). Only within whole can there be partials, putting partials together implies summation, hence being summoned by others.

A sum of partials cannot ever form a whole, because the process of separation from whole into partial takes a toll. Look at any puzzle...putting the pieces together cannot ever achieve the whole picture on the box, because the separating lines will always show.

Mosaic law implies a game of puzzle each jew plays with the sum of consenting gentiles. That's tikkun olam (repairing the world by bringing together)...falling for it tricks each gentiles to waste being on trying to fix and fit into, instead of shaping temporary form (life) within ongoing flow (inception towards death).

"Primary" can't and doesn't give anything because it's not a noun

Prim (first) al (all)...then anyone within. Nouns are utilized by chosen ones to trick consenting to ones to hold onto secondary labels within primary motion.

Nature doesn't noun/name any being. Natural sound moves each instrumental being apart from one another, which another exploits to shape words as names to direct instruments aka each jew playing most gentiles like a fiddle.

Maybe you meant "optional"

Prim (first) al (all) + option (choice) al (all)...that's how analysis works, while holding onto meaning implies a synthesis.

permalink parent save report block reply

GIFs

Conspiracies Wiki & Links

Conspiracies Book List

External Digital Book Libraries

Mod Logs

Honor Roll

Conspiracies.win: This is a forum for free thinking and for discussing issues which have captured your imagination. Please respect other views and opinions, and keep an open mind. Our goal is to create a fairer and more transparent world for a better future.

Community Rules: <click this link for a detailed explanation of the rules

Rule 1: Be respectful. Attack the argument, not the person.

Rule 2: Don't abuse the report function.

Rule 3: No excessive, unnecessary and/or bullying "meta" posts.

To prevent SPAM, posts from accounts younger than 4 days old, and/or with <50 points, wont appear in the feed until approved by a mod.

Disclaimer: Submissions/comments of exceptionally low quality, trolling, stalking, spam, and those submissions/comments determined to be intentionally misleading, calls to violence and/or abuse of other users here, may all be removed at moderator's discretion.

Moderators

  • Doggos
  • axolotl_peyotl
  • trinadin
  • PutinLovesCats
  • clemaneuverers
  • C
Message the Moderators

Terms of Service | Privacy Policy

2025.03.01 - j6rsh (status)

Copyright © 2024.

Terms of Service | Privacy Policy