false promise
Promise aka per mittere - "sending forwards"... https://www.etymonline.com/word/promise#etymonline_v_2663
a) Only nature sends (life) forwards (inception towards death)...ignoring this by consenting to a suggested promise tempts one to take a mental promissory note... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Promissory_note
b) Ignoring perceivable (need) for suggested (want) establishes a fictitious conflict (want vs not want) in reality, which few rebrand into for example "true vs false" to distract many from consent given.
goyim are easily swayed
WAY implies being (life) moved from inception towards death. SWAY implies "bending from side to side", like for example within a conflict of reason such as "easy vs hard".
Suggesting an S-curve before a direct WAY is enough to tempt ones choice to loose balance...
achieving world domination
By distracting FREE (choice) from DOM (balance) with suggested liberties. Ones choice consenting to such permits a chosen one dominance over one.
create divisions
Suggested creationism tempts those consenting into a conflict of reason (new vs old) against each other.
elder
a) Elder/eldra/ald/old/al - "to grow; nourish"... https://www.etymonline.com/word/elder + https://www.etymonline.com/word/old
b) Parent/pere -"to produce, bring forth" began to replace native elder after c. 1500... https://www.etymonline.com/word/parent#etymonline_v_7209
ONLY nature nourishes; grows; produces; brings forth...few suggest parents and elders to distract many from discerning that for self, while seeking care from others.
That's for example why VATI-can implies father, and Marine Admiralty Maritime Acts aka MAMA implies mother...for the lost children.
a) Acceptance implies death to life.
b) Anode (up the way) + Cathode (down the way) implies an internal separation of same line (inception towards death) and different curve (life).
Suggested catholicism tempts those coming up the way to accept going down the way...without resisting temptation.
c) Suggested "common good" by few implies communism and conflicts of reason (good vs bad) among many...if consented to.
Nature doesn't generate common...it sets each one within apart from one another, hence same flow (inception towards death) generating different forms (life).
it's surreal
a) Nature WAS perceivable before anyone within can suggest what something IS...like surrealism.
b) Real implies ones response (re) to all (al)...sur (beyond) implies being yonder aka within sight, yet not near aka perceivable in sight, yet ignored for suggested.
AI-generated
Only nature generates...artifice is shaped within what nature generates.
a video similar to this one
a) One implies different from one another.
b) Video/videre - "to see" implies ones perception within all perceivable...not looking at a suggested video.
all the rest
Rest implies "reminder after separation"...ALL implies that which separates into each ONE within, hence "before" not after, and before implies forwards (inception towards death) being (life) aka the internal separation of all into each one.
sort of middle-grounding
The opposite of sort implies differentiation. Few tempt many together aka casting lots aka sorting shares to equalize differences among them, hence making many "similar" to each other.
As for natural differentiation...sides (inception/death) generate middle-ground (life). What do moving sides imply? Balance! What's the center of balance? Choice!
artful wording
Artificial (words) tempts one to ignore natural (sound)...
fucking good
Fucking (coming together) good vs bad (conflict of reason)...choosing a suggested side fucks oneself over. Choice needs to balance, not fight other choices withing imbalance (want vs not want).
In alchemy there's a process where "contrasting elements in proper proportion neutralize each other"...it's called neutral/neuter - "neither of two". If only ONE had the free will of choice to choose neither of two...
behind ALL the illusions
Illusions implies suggested pluralism tempting ONE being to ignore (hinder self) ALL perceivable. Consenting to a suggestion makes perceivable illusive to ones perception.
There cannot be "all" of something...only each one out of; within and in response to all.
The Psyops
Psyche implies animating power aka perceivable reality...operations imply suggested fiction shaped within, like the-ism, which tempts those operated upon to ignore psyche.
media concerning
a) Ones perception within all perceivable implies media/medius - "middle"...consenting to a suggestion permits a chosen one to "mediate" for one from outside the middle.
b) Cern/cernere - "to perceive" implies ONEs dis-cernment as partial within whole, which suggested con-cern (perceiving together) contradicts.
Watching media implies con-cern; seeing through ones eyes implies dis-cern. Self discernment cannot be attained by concerning self with others.
the rest of it are all...
All doesn't rest...it moves so that each one within can respond to being (life) moved (inception towards death). Rest aka restitution (bringing back to a former state) implies dying, hence bringing life (form) back to origin (flow).
don't want us talking about
Talking establishes want vs not want conflicts of reason about the suggestions of one another, while ignoring that a person aka per sonos (by sound) needs to adapt to sound, which is "silence".
Silence isn't the absence of sound, but the origin one ignores when talking aka when articulating (suggestion) natural (perception) sound aka when polluting sound with noise.
here they are in order...123456789
There can be only one order (action) for each one chaos (reaction) within.
Chaos/khnwos/ghieh - "to yawn, gape, be wide open"... https://www.etymonline.com/word/chaos#etymonline_v_8422
Natural order (inception towards death) opens itself up through differentiation into chaos (life), which allows re-ordering aka temporary chaos responding to ongoing order.
Few suggest enumeration to tempt many to seek order out of chaos by building hierachies; constructs; civilizations; scales; rankings; levels; sequences; graduations etc. That's a pyramid scheme...there can be only ONE foundation and anything build within collapses back into it.
Want implies suggestion; need implies perception. The latter allows one to draw from; while the former permits others to draw one behind. The chosen ones suggesting imply "entrepreneurs", while the consenting gentiles drawn along imply the "success".
Here's what an entrepreneur had to say about success:
- Your success took a shot at you, what are you going to do now?
- How are you gonna kill it? You're gonna become unsuccessful?
- I used to give a fuck, now I give a fuck less
- What do I think of success? It sucks, too much stress
there is no conspiracy
a) Con-spire aka breathing together. Breathing apart implies relief; breathing together implies contract.
b) All perceivable generates each ones perception through relieving (inception towards death) alleviation (life)...others tempt ones consent into a contract with suggested, which accumulates debt/death as a burden upon life.
pray
Aka putting together that which nature sets apart aka asking for more, while ignoring all that was given.
https://www.azlyrics.com/lyrics/djbobo/pray.html + https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aJbsdoDHUrI
Here's Baumann in 2024 still deceiving the masses with the lion of judah (lies of judea) on his chest... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DJ_BoBo#/media/File:DJ_Bobo,_Ergo_Arena,_02.11.2024_39.jpg
a) The second picture comes closest to depicting knowledge...partials differentiated from one another within a moving whole. The white background implies all perceivable, each different form implies ones perception.
b) The first picture depicts a differentiation of background and form, yet without color aka without a visible spectrum of light. Differentiation implies spectrum.
c) Pictures three to six imply layers of inversion aka drawing together that which nature differentiates apart from one another.
d) Notice that picture four and five suggest light seeking connection...that's a dis-charge; not a re-charge. Few tempt connections among many to establish a circuit of dis-charges, hence short-circuiting re-charging life.
e) Notice that the sixth picture misses a point within the suggested constellation...the viewpoint of each different viewer. Using suggested constellations to distract from ones perception implies the conspiracy.
successful entrepreneur
Entrepreneur/entreprendre - "to undertake" implies taking from under. To establish oneself above; one has to tempt another to stand under while giving.
How? Shape a suggestion to tempt consent. Once consent was given, one can under-take from a suck/succ-er.
A sucker represents the success of an undertaker (entrepreneur) who buries consent given underneath suggestions offered.
AI
Suggestion implies artifice, consenting to stand-under a suggested artifice implies intelligence/intelligo- "to understand".
Artificial (entrepreneur) Intelligence (success)...same shit; different branding. Wholesale and retail.
if you want to be
Being implies want within need, hence needing to resist wanted temptations. The success of an entrepreneur is based upon distracting others from need (perceivable) with want (suggested), which establishes a conflict of reason (want vs not want) among the suckers, which implies a success for the undertaker above reason.
fall for the same tricks
What one perceives implies rise (life) during fall (inception towards death)...others trick one to hold onto suggested, which burdens rise during fall.
Why is that a trick? Because one cannot cheat ones rise by getting something from another.
zero hope
a) Both hope and fear tempt one to ignore perceivable origin for holding onto suggested outcomes.
b) Zero implies a common denominator aka a suggested foundation by few to trick many to count each other from, while ignoring to be ONE within all of nature.
In other words..."base10" (one and zero) contradicts "1base1" aka oneness (whole) as the base of each one (partial) within.
c) Combining zero (artificial origin) and hope (artificial outcome) imbalances ones free will of choice...if consented to.
need to define
a) How does one define (affix) acceleration without contradicting it?
b) De-fine aka division (de) end (finis) implies the division of beginning (inception) and end (death) for those in-between (life), hence those in-between need (origin) and want (outcome).
category of everything
Why gather together that which nature sets apart?
accelerating ANY current
Can form (life) accelerate flow (inception towards death) or only diminish self, hence feeling accelerated in demise?
towards breaking point
What if the break implies beginning (inception) of sentence (life), while being moved towards point (death)?
What if a point doesn't break apart but dissolves each partial sentence back into origin?
Jacbobinism
Jacob/Ya'aqobh - "one that takes by the heel; a supplanter"... https://www.etymonline.com/word/Jacob
Hence not a follower marching towards extremes, but the Achilles' heel most ignore to take advantage of aka the one suggesting the -ism, which others follow towards their demise.
It's few who suggest, which use consenting many as tools, within the box of reason, where many fight each other.
a) Holocaust aka the burned offering of many by few who suggest -isms to tempt others to follow towards outcome aka towards death of life.
Works like a charm...
b) Steady (inception towards death) generates imbalance (life), hence life wielding the free will of choice to balance...or ignore steady pace (growth) for deliberate acceleration (loss).
c) Life moves towards death. A jew dangles -isms in-front of gentile eyes to tempt them forwards. It's the carrot (suggested outcome) and the stick (perceivable outcome)...
- Porn/ pornē/perə/per - "to traffic in, to sell" + graphic/graphe - "writing, drawing"
a) A jew writes suggestion (to sell) to draw in gentile consent (to buy), hence tempting gentiles to sell out when buying into temptation.
b) The foundation of traffic (carry on trade) implies becoming a traitor to self by carrying along others, hence trading ones FREE will of choice for a chosen ones pricey options.
c) Trade as a suggested exchange tempts one to ignore being ex (life) within change (inception towards death) aka free expression of resistance during velocity...not selling self out by paying others for burdens to take on aka debt/death.
- Pose/posen - "to suggest (something is so), suppose, assume; grant, concede"; from Latin pausare - "to halt, rest, cease, pause"
Hence a jew utilizing exposition to corrupt the "pose of expression" among cooming (masturbating) gentiles.
There' no cessation of motion within perceivable nature, hence a jew suggesting it as the inversion of nature.
Lutnick
a) Nudnik is a Yiddish word that has entered modern Hebrew. It describes a common and even respected modus operandi in Israeli society. A nudnik is someone who is constantly asking you for something or otherwise taking up your time. Nudnicking is just an extension of this view of social networking. If you pester people long enough, you can wear them down... https://www.thejc.com/judaism/jewish-words/nudnik-yr7n7wmq
b) Strong's Hebrew: 3874. לוּט (lut) - "to wrap closely or tightly, enwrap, envelop. wrapped"... https://biblehub.com/hebrew/3874.htm
In short...a gift wrapped pest. Just like Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (Lenin) being transported within a concealed train to spread the pestilence of -isms into Russia.
if true
a) True vs false (reason) contradicts if/then (implication)...
b) The shirt he's wearing reads "Occupy Mars" aka to take possession of mars/mers - "to trouble, confuse"
You being tempted to ignore implication for reason implies you taking into possession a side, which fuses together (con-fuse) both sides into conflict/trouble.
c) Elon/elongate - "to prolong" simply uses a suggestion to prolong conflicts of reason among all those who consent to it.
to draw the attention to something
a) What is one already attending (perceivable) before others can draw (suggested) ones attention from it?
b) What if few utilize suggestion to tempt many to withdraw from nature drawing a line (inception towards death)?
c) If a drawing draws towards, then why are drawings tempting one to keep looking back...like museums filled with artificial drawings to draw in generations of onlookers?
the point
a) Death. Any suggested point implies end of sentence (life)...
b) Can you give me an example of a point being made without the dialogue aka dia (two) log (logic; conflict of reason) continuing?
c) Religion; -isms; suggested information; definitions; consent; temptations...what's the point?
You wipe a stinky fish across the trail so people can't follow
a) Why would FREE will of choice suggest others to follow trails? Following implies binding self to another, hence being drawn by suggested directions...
b) People implies ones singular consent to a suggested pluralism. Nature doesn't shape people...it generates each person.
Few suggest e pluribus unum (out of many, one) to collectivize many together to establish "united states"...as opposed to nature setting units apart from one another.
c) What if ones choice to hold onto suggested nihilism (Latin nihilo; nothing) by writing CAN'T represents the stinking fish rotting within self, which corrupts ones senses to blame anything from outside for the smell?
Consider being a fish (life) within an ocean (inception towards death)...a state of decomposition.
It's not helpful
Help implies support/supportare - "bring forward" aka flow (inception towards death) bringing forward form (life)....not form helping each other, while burdening self within flow.
FREE will of choice implies being FREE of burden...unless chosen to put burden onto self by helping others. Meanwhile...the fruits of ones less burdened labors, within the work of nature, permit others to draw support from.
it's not....as you think
I think about nihil-ism whenever others suggest "nothing" to me, and the implied de-nial of everything perceivable for it. Why? Because that helps me to be less ignorant than before.
All perceivable is offered to each ones perception at any moment...others utilize suggestion to draw ones attention away.
The red herring isn't the issue...taking the bait by ones free will of choice is.
extend for millions of miles
Measuring curtails the extension of ones mind to the suggested measurements of others.
All implies one in energy...no measuring required for each one (fractal) within all (entire) to discern self.
Everything science and tech is bullshit that distracts us from life
Suggested tech/tekhno - "artifice" tempts one to ignore science/scio - "to know" aka ones perception of all perceivable reality.
The trick...suggested scient-ism tempts one to consent to artifice.
is not a crime to be someone’s friend
a) Friend aka fri/fre - "to love"... https://www.etymonline.com/word/friend
Love implies versus hate, hence friend containing fiend...
b) Natural L(and) A(ir) W(ater) implies a setting apart, while the conflict in-between friend (love) vs fiend (hate) implies the crime of artificially setting together that which natural law sets apart.
Furthermore...crime/cri/krei - "to distinguish" aka that which natural law (inception towards death) distinguishes (life).
my point is to rebrand choice into yes or no
Which implies using your choice to agree or disagree with the choice of another. Doing that binds FREE will of choice, hence putting ones choice into bondage to a chosen ones suggestion.
saved some trouble
One doesn't need to be saved...few tempt each one within to seek salvation.
a meeting place that has moved on.
Notice that to meet during motion implies being set apart before being able to meet. This setting apart aka the internal differentiation of motion into matter...one can only discern for self as partial matter within whole motion.
If you choose to agree or disagree with that statement, then you established yet another meeting place, hence yet another contradiction of being ONE.
Da J̶e̶w̶s̶ Catholics
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sicut_Judaeis
"The Church's stated attitude against the mistreatment of jews goes back to the early Church. Around 400, St Augustine, one of the most influential and foundational figures of Catholic theology, preached that the jews must be protected for their ability to explain the Old Testament."
Furthermore...
"Christians were nevertheless duty-bound to protect the jews as an important part of Christian civilization..."
The whole article does not mention once what the mistreatment is based upon...
Yet your answer rebranded "true vs false" into "yes vs no"...a dualistic conflict chosen by oneself. A self inflicted contradiction of self.
Question and answer implies suggestion and consent...giving consent to any suggestion establishes a dualistic conflict of reason. It puts ONEs consent together with another ONEs suggestion, hence 1+1=2. That's math-o-magic...a trick.
a moot point
Moot/mod - "to meet; assemble"... https://www.etymonline.com/word/moot
Nature disassembles sentences (life) by setting each one apart from one another, before point of death assembles each partial back into whole.
The points we (pluralism) suggest each other are tempting consenting ones (singular) together...hence making ones sentence/sentire - "sense" moot.
Can there be "true" without a dualistic conflict against "false"?
Free-Willy is a word smith....definitely
Few smith words to tempt many to hold onto definitions...free will of choice takes apart the words few smith and many hold together.
DE (division) FINI (end) TION (action)...it's action, which divides into beginning (inception) and end (death) for each ones reaction (life) within.
De-fini-tion put together contradicts ones FREE will of choice...if consented to.
A spell (suggested information) confines one within (circular logic) self...talmud instructs one who learned to teach self how kabbalah aka reception/recepiere - "to hold/confine" works.
A jew suggests spells (suggested words within perceivable sound) to tempt consenting gentiles into circular logic within self and conflicts of reason against each other. Consent itself implies holding onto suggestions by another, while confining self to it.
a) Consenting to any suggested -ism makes one an -ist. This bond of holding onto suggested, through ones consenting free will of choice implies religion/religio - "to bind anew".
Consent implies self inflicted bondage to another, and another utilize suggestion to tempt consent to be given willingly.
b) Race/raddix/radius/ray implies ones outwards growth...not ones belonging to others. One cannot be part of a race...only a partial racing outwards within whole.
Ones consent to suggested race-ism makes one a race-ist, hence binding self to others, which confines ones race (course of life) radius (roots growing outwards) ray (beam of light emitted outwards)...
In short...a jew suggests -isms to tempt consenting gentiles to bind self (religion) as -ists, which permits a jew to steer consent given with suggestion offered towards mutual destruction (conflicts of reason).
A gentile is blind to this because circular logic keeps his mind confined to suggested fiction, while ignoring perceivable reality. A gentile holds onto fiction, while ignoring that reality moves...that permits a jew to remove oblivious gentiles.