1
free-will-of-choice 1 point ago +1 / -0

where did you get that "knowledge" from?

Knowledge (perceivable) one got through all; understanding (suggested) one gets from one another. One cannot hold onto knowledge, since it moves, which is why others tempt one to understand aka hold onto each others verbal diarrhea.

it might all begin with gradually infiltrating

Nature implies an ongoing process; each temporary being within implies a solid (life) filtering a liquid (inception towards death). That's the foundation of infiltration.

Ignoring a moving process (perceivable inspiration) for holding onto a product (suggested information) permits few to set additional filters into many. That's the infiltration you talk about.

the process of teaching a person

Teaching one another isn't a process, but a product, hence buying (student) and selling (teacher). Person implies the ignored process aka per sonos (by sound).

to accept a set of beliefs

Aka ones consent (accept) to a suggestion by another (set), while holding onto it (believe)...holding onto a product contradicts being within a process.

once a "belief" begins

Aka at the moment one gives consent to a suggestion by another.

couldn't you just "bust", whatever other claim with real proof

Reality moves; fictitious claims (consent) and proofs (suggestion) tempt one to hold onto, while ignoring that reality moves.

scientific evidence

Science/scio - "to know" implies each ones perception within all perceivable..suggested scientism tempts one to ignore that.

Evidence implies as perceived by one...not as suggested by another. One cannot share evidence without tempting others to contradict what's evident to each of them.

how about film clips I saw

Aka moving pictures (film) shaped by captured moments (photo)...distracting one from being (life) within momentum (inception towards death) of motion.

Momentum cannot be captured by those within, neither does moving (film) captured moments (photo) represent reality...only fictitious mimicry.

if I'd look around...

...then I'd confine myself to circular logic, while ignoring that all perceivable directs through each ones perception.

Perception isn't circular...suggestion is...if one consents to hold onto it.

Here's the sleight of hand... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ruKCw797JM4

  • I'm gettin' bugged driving up and down (life) the same old strip (inception towards death)
  • I gotta find a new place (suggestion) where the kids are hip (joined by consent)
  • My buddies and me (consenting many) are getting real well known (by suggesting few)
  • Yeah, the bad guys know us (from outside) and they leave us alone (fighting inside)
  • I get around (Get around, 'round, 'round, I get around)...aka circular logic within self and conflicts of reason against others.

hang on

Hanging onto suggested while being (perception) within a process (perceivable) implies ignorance.

1
free-will-of-choice 1 point ago +1 / -0

God who is Unity

Unit; noun - "single number regarded as an undivided whole"... https://www.etymonline.com/word/unit#etymonline_v_4515

God implies the dividing whole, with each one within being a divided partial of God.

Unity; noun - "the state of being one; a thing undivided itself, but separate from every other thing"... https://webstersdictionary1828.com/Dictionary/unity

Unity implies being within state of separation...not the God that separates beings from one another.

In short...only within whole (unit) can there be separation (unity).

Many denotes separation from.

To denote (identify; identic; same) contradicts separation from one another. God doesn't generate many by putting together...God generates each by setting apart.

Holding onto the suggested word "God" aka a suggested denotation/identification, tempts many together, while ignoring the ongoing state of separation.

Words themselves do this as they attempt to conjoin in communion, no?

a) Word implies shaped by letter. One being tempted to LET another shape words into denotations/identifications/definitions etc. implies the already successful attempt to conjoin in communion ones consent and another ones suggestion.

b) Yes vs no reasoning can only exist after one already LET another shape words into denotations to reason about. Whatever side one chooses reconfirms the same conflict aka that which imbalances ones choice against another.

c) A word cannot do...God does sound by separating each instrumental being from one another. Words are then shaped by instrumental beings to trick many to play along few, while ignoring Gods sound.

And once again...GOD implies such a word tempting many to follow few. Holding onto the word "god" tempts one to ignore moving sound.

Oxy-moronic, like the word.....itself.

Letter into words implies a being who freely lets another being bind together.

If one uses FREE will of choice to let another choose for one, then one restricts self. One isn't free because of others...one is FREE (choice) because of DOM (balance), hence not "because", but cause (balance) of being (choice).

This is how an oxymoron can be reverse engineered by using implication (if/then) over reason (vs)...yet, one can only do this by self, not for or from others. If you agree with my statement, then your agreement implies an oxymoron aka another contradiction to your FREE will of choice.

I chose to discuss rather than argue against with you, because you're always half right.

Discuss/discutere - "to shake apart"...as oppose to arguing "against" one another within a conflict of reason.

The issue..."you're always half right" implies 50/50 hindsight from within a conflict of reason (right vs wrong).

There's no "half" of God...only each partial being within whole God aka a perpetual balance of whole/partial for each partials choice within whole balance.

Choosing either "half" within a conflict of reason imbalances ones choice.

you're always

a) I can't be "always"...only one being (life) within all way (inception towards death) of God.

b) The suggested word "always" implies both pluralism (ways) and collectivism (all ways)...either of which contradicting separation from one another, and thereby the ONE and only God.

1
free-will-of-choice 1 point ago +1 / -0

Kalergi Plan aims at Europe...US aka UNITED STATES aka e pluribus unum (out of many; one) is it's own plan aka it's own variation of tikkun olam (healing the world by bringing together).

Richard Nikolaus Eijiro, Count of Coudenhove-Kalergi was just a mouthpiece for the world-wide unification of gentiles under each jew...a mouthpiece used to obscure the plan/plane/plain aka hidden in plain sight.

1
free-will-of-choice 1 point ago +1 / -0

the insertion of disloyals into government

Government implies mind being governed by outside influence, hence by inserted influence through separation (dis) of outside (perceivable) into inside (perception).

It's ones consent to a suggestion, which establishes loyalty to another, while ignoring that loyal/legal aka natural law separates each one within from one another.

agency positions

Being implies reaction (life) positioned within action (inception towards death) aka regent within agent aka reactor within generator aka growth within loss.

some of them were even foreigners.

Being implies different from one another, hence native (one) within nature (all) and foreign to one another.

1
free-will-of-choice 1 point ago +1 / -0

a war for our minds

Reality forwards input (perceivable inspiration) through each ones mind...ignoring this by holding onto output (suggested information) like pluralism (our) establishes a fictitious war (reason) within reality.

to create some kind of chip to control your mind

Suggested creation-ism implies a chip of another ones block, which ones consent implements into ones mind/memory, while permitting others control.

If one believes in creation, then one blocks transformation. The block implies ones ignorance; the chip ones consent to the suggestion of another.

It's called "chip off the old block" because ignorance tempts one to ignore new/now (perceivable) for holding onto old (suggested).

1
free-will-of-choice 1 point ago +1 / -0

puppets are not real people

a) Only within reality can each free person be puppeteered with fiction.

b) Real implies ones RE-sponse to AL (all)...responding to one another, by consenting to a suggestion, attaches strings to a puppeteer.

when they say and do things, that's not real either

  • Fiction: say; do
  • Reality: sound; being done

One can only say within sound, and do while being done. Fiction simulates reality...it cannot replace it.

it's part of the show

Being implies partial within whole...while being tempted by what other partials are showing.

1
free-will-of-choice 1 point ago +1 / -0

FUCK YOURSELF in the face

Whose face looks fucked?

The reason....I will go to war

Hence war (reason) being based on will (choice)...

america

A (one) MER (to get a share of something) ICA (of, like, related to, pertaining to)...

1
free-will-of-choice 1 point ago +1 / -0

God communes

God differs...from all into each one. Few within suggest commun-ism to tempt many together, as to equalize differences.

1
free-will-of-choice 1 point ago +1 / -0

Vicar; from vicis (interchange) and weik (to bend)... https://www.etymonline.com/word/vicar#etymonline_v_7759

Christ (anointed one) implies each being bend (life) within change (inception towards death), hence each Christ being a vicar.

Few suggest one christ and a second in command (vicar) to tempt each one of many to ignore self by giving consent to another. Tempting consent with suggestion makes one a vicar/wicca/witch.

1
free-will-of-choice 1 point ago +1 / -0

mass purge of...accounts

Implies for each one to not be held accountable by another anymore. The issue...those being set free from accountability are desperately trying to reach the masses and wake them up.

No matter how often few purge the undesirables...most come back and willingly ask for accounts.

fallout

Being implies rising (life) within fall (inception towards death)...one cannot fall out, while being within fall.

Furthermore...each being isn't radioactive, but radius re-active, hence the radiating center (ones perception), reacting to an enacting circumference (all perceivable).

1
free-will-of-choice 1 point ago +1 / -0

-Ist (islamist) implies ones consent to suggested -ism (islamism)...consent propagates "garbage" exponentially as an amplifier.

2
free-will-of-choice 2 points ago +2 / -0

Do we use social media or does it use us?

a) As partial (ones perception) within whole (all perceivable)...each one mediates all. Few suggest "social media" to trick many together (social) under mediation by few.

b) Media implies "middle"...coming into being implies from circumference (inception towards death) into center (life), hence "Clowns to the left of me...Jokers to the right...Here I am stuck in the middle with you".

The suggested "media" permits few at center to feed many within circumference, while cutting off (circumcise) anyone undesirable.

c) Nature generates being from the center outwards, hence a seed sprouting into soil. Few centralize power to prevent many from sprouting.

Why use any social media at all?

In reality each one implies the mediating center of all aka the temporary growth (life) within ongoing loss (inception towards death).

Few suggest a fiction called social-ism to tempt each one of many together, which establishes few as the center of many...if consented to.

1
free-will-of-choice 1 point ago +1 / -0

satanic portal

Portal/port/per - "to pass over" implies each life being passed over from inception towards death. Satan (one who opposes) implies life turning against each other within conflicts of reason, while being passed over.

Ones consent to the suggestions of another implies the portal/gateway, which by ones free will of choice establishes each conflict of reason. Consent furthermore shirks ones free will of choice onto another, hence hang/hon - "to suspend" aka the suspension of disbelief, when reasoning about suggested.

1
free-will-of-choice 1 point ago +1 / -0

blob; swamp; deep state...

Ignorance...all consuming; sticky, spongy, spreading like fungi; without a bottom.

took out a prime...

A first cannot be taken by any second/seco - "to divide"...seconds (partials) can only exist within first (whole).

UK

UNITED Kingdom...it's not really hidden; isn't it? Too real? Then how about in fictitious form... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Salvaging_of_Civilization (a kosher sales pitch to transform the league of nations into a vehicle for a world state).

1
free-will-of-choice 1 point ago +1 / -0

animal senses

ANIMA-ted senses, hence being able to sense moving input.

conscious

Con (together; with) contradicts sious/scire - "to know; to perceive". Why? Because all perceivable sets each ones perception apart from one another, which only then allows awareness of each other aka sensing moving differences.

1
free-will-of-choice 1 point ago +1 / -0

Radical implies "viral to life; thoroughgoing" hence moving. If HT tries to placate jews as..., then a jew responds radical to move the goal post.

Or to quote Hitler..."Wherever one attacked one of these prophets, one's hands seized slimy jelly; it slipped through one's fingers only to collect again in the next moment."

Matter (life) within momentum (inception towards death) of motion can only be shaped while moving...a jew knows that; gentiles ignore it.

2
free-will-of-choice 2 points ago +2 / -0

unusual

Sensual. Hence heart over mind. The mind is being tricked with idolatry aka sign language (traffic sings) to confirm and proceed, while ignoring that the heart at center adapts to any change within its circumference.

synchronicity

Aka syn (together; with) chronos (time; to divide) city (center)...few suggest synchronism to tempt each one of many to ignore that circumference (all) divides into center (one), hence setting EACH center apart from one another...not together.

A heart doesn't synchronize...it differs.

1
free-will-of-choice 1 point ago +1 / -0

Get new jobs

  • JOB; noun (Hebrew Iyyobh) - "hated; persecuted; hostile to; enmity"
  • JOB; verb - "to deal in public stocks on one's own account; to cheat, betray; to pervert public service to private advantage"

https://www.etymonline.com/word/job#etymonline_v_6472

3
free-will-of-choice 3 points ago +3 / -0

cities are sterilizing people

a) Fertility implies through center outwards...few suggest city centers to draw many into, hence sterilization by inversion of fertility.

b) Nature fertilizes person (per sonos; by sound)...few accumulate each consenting person (singular) into a suggested people (plural), which also sterilizes fertility.

eating better in the big city than I have been in the smaller city

The trick... few export from smaller cities to import into big cities. The exporting stresses the circumference, while the importing calms the center.

1
free-will-of-choice 1 point ago +1 / -0

Who knows how to lay the four corners?

Left/right + up/down + front/back implies ones perception within all perceivable, hence ones perspective seeing four corners wherever ones eyes bring anything to a point by convergence.

The issue...to lay implies "causing to rest, hence laying down", which tempts one to ignore being an effect within a moving cause, hence "no rest for the wicked".

There ain't no rest horizontally, while being (life) moved (inception towards death) vertically.

original builders

Only within origin can one build, and it's the moving origin, which internally divides into each builder (or destroyer).

literal

a) Literal (by the letter) implies oneself using free will of choice to "let" happen. Lateral (pertaining to sides) implies letter (choice) holding onto a side (imbalance), hence bound between covers.

Iteration (repetition) implies as choice within balance, hence frequent adaptation.

b) The foundation of let/le - "to allow; to depart from; to let go" implies all allowing ones by departing internally, which establishes a balance (needing to let go/wanting to hold onto) for each ones free will of choice.

The founders of the foundation,seen fractally

a) Foundation implies singular (all for one, one for all) hence whole for each fractal within. Few within suggest pluralism (founders) to tempt consenting many together aka fictitiously joining real fractals.

b) To see implies as ray (matter) within spectrum (momentum) of light (motion) aka re-frac-tion (reacting to the fragmentation of action).

need spell-ing lessons.

One needs all sound; yet wants others to spell it out for one, which when consented to "lessens" one to one another.

associated words

Letters associate words, hence ones consent "letting" the suggestions by another shape words. Sound dissociates refraction, which only then allows intercourse for more off-spring.

1
free-will-of-choice 1 point ago +1 / -0

It Is to Find Something

Which implies another deception...only within a foundation can something be found. To find implies seeking an outcome, while foundation implies origin.

Laying Foundations

Only within a foundation can one lay.

legal definition

Natural law cannot be defined (affixed) without ignoring that it moves...those within natural law can easily be tempted to ignore perceivable motion by holding onto suggested definition.

All...were equally founded

All implies equal foundation for each different one within. ALL cannot be founded, cause there cannot be more than ALL to found upon.

all of society

Society implies ONEs aggregated together within ALL setting each one apart from one another.

There's no such thing as "all of"...only each one of all.

1
free-will-of-choice 1 point ago +1 / -0

CAN implies ones expressed potential; SHOULD implies a suggested motivation by another, tempting one to suppress self by wasting expression.

2
free-will-of-choice 2 points ago +2 / -0

Can you show me an example of AI adapting to inspiration instead of information?

1
free-will-of-choice 1 point ago +1 / -0

a) Questioning "when" permits those who answer to date/datus/dare - "to give; grant; offer", which ones consent to the answer then takes.

b) The natural order doesn't generate "common people", but each unique person. Ones consent to suggested common-ism and popul-ism permits few to ordain many into groups.

c) A birth implies a setting apart of an off-spring. Few exploit birth-daze to date birth, hence gaining control over an affixed date, while distracting each off-spring from the passage of self-discernment aka the coming into being from origin.

Thanks to birthdays...ones origin can be buried within calendars, which makes one accountable to others, who also utilize numbers to distract ONE from discerning self. Calendars utilize DAZE (days) of the WEAK (week) to distract from sun (son) and moon (month).

d) Celebrate/celeber - "frequented, crowded"... a suggested inversion of action (perceivable) setting frequent reactions (perception) apart from one another. Consenting to a suggestion crowds many frequencies together, hence distorting them.

In other words...each ones free will of choice implies frequent adaptation, while following the choices of others lowers ones frequency.

view more: ‹ Prev Next ›