Thanks.
Many are going to lose their minds reasoning against each other over who won the election, which permits a select few to continue undisturbed.
does a monkey smearing poo on a piece of paper make that piece of paper a document?
Doc-u-ment implies mentally holding onto suggested...the monkey adapted to perceivable by utilizing it on the fly.
Change "piece of paper" with "money" and a monkey still adapts to perceivable, while most humans would dock their mind with the suggested values thereof.
a mind of one man perceives the perceivable.
THE implies suggested the-ism by another tempting ones perception to ignore all perceivable.
Only perception is not truth
Perception implies one thing within everything perceivable...others suggest nihil-ism (Latin nihilo; nothing) to distract one from everything perceivable.
Consenting to a suggestion implies holding onto a thesis (truth), which establishes an anti-thesis (lie), and a synthesis (conflict of reason) among all those consenting.
Witnesses recount the same event differently
Aka same event (inception towards death) different witnesses (life). The issue...counting and recounting to each other by means of suggested information. If one counts, then one becomes accountable by another, hence establishing an (((accountant))).
Perhaps from poor memory management.
a) Memory can only operate within a moving process...holding onto suggested information tempts one to ignore being moved within perceivable inspiration.
b) Consenting to suggested information permits another to manage the information held within ones mind.
an overloading of stimulus that scrambles the brain while it is storing memories.
a) Perceivable inspiration inspires resistance (life) to resist temptation (inception towards death)...that's natural stimulation.
b) Suggested information tempts one to hold onto it (overloading memory), hence burdening self aka subduing expression by scrambling repression.
c) Since memory can only operate within a moving process...it isn't a storage device (hard-drive), but a processing unit (ram). Yet, each unit wields the free will of choice to misuse memory as storage, while falling for the temptation of procession, which others exploit by suggesting progressivism to forward one... https://forward.com/
A home can be a box of office...
...if one consents to take shelter (home) within another ones suggested information (box), while ignoring that office/opus - "work; energy" sets each one within free from one another.
A box can be a home or office
Putting self into a box by consenting to a suggestion of another, permits another to decorate the box like a home, while calling it an office for one to work in and more importantly FOR others.
And office can be a home or a box
Being can only exist within office (energy)...being can be tricked to ignore self discernment by others tempting one to live in a box aka WILLING energy retention.
to fight my way out is
a) Fighting implies against others, which implies the bubble (reason aka circular logic) keeping one within conflict.
b) Few utilize rhetoric like "fighting my way out" to tempt many with suggested progressivism (towards outcome) to ignore being within perceivable origin.
Being (life) in (inception) and out (death) of origin...no fighting ones way out required, only ones struggle to sustain self within.
nothing to be learned from it
Suggested nihil-ism (Latin nihilo, nothing) tempts a consenting being to ignore (de-nial) how to teach self to learn and vice versa within "everything" perceivable.
Like true crime
Being implies different from one another; true implies holding onto a suggestion, crime/krei - "to sieve" implies nature law pouring out different beings.
Few suggest many to hold onto "true", while fighting their way out against "false", yet there's no way out of that conflict (reason/logic) but choosing to let go of what one chose to hold onto.
I force myself to listen
Perceivable sound forces itself through ones perception, before one can force self to listen to the suggested words of others.
Sound implies force of velocity; while listening to suggested words implies ones force of resistance being tempted by others to ignore resisting velocity.
I never even fast-forward.
You are the odd (choice) within even (balance) of motion...choosing to listen to what others are suggesting implies fast forwarding (inception towards death) your state of being (life) by ignoring to resist perceivable.
letting your mind flow freely,
Being implies free (choice) within mind (balance) of flow (motion)...consenting to listen to suggested information LETS others shape ones form.
To remain free one needs to resist the wanted temptation of letting others choose for one.
It was solved over two decades ago.
If it was solved, then why are solids remaining two decades later?
you’ll believe that conclusion
If there's an ongoing solution, then why choose to believe in conclusions (of temporary nature)?
How was I so amazingly ignorant of all this before?
a) Others suggested "amazing" information to tempt you to ignore all perceivable inspiration for. Ignorance implies ones mind within A MAZE...
b) Before implies being (life) forwarded (inception towards death), which others exploit by building mazes within ones mind to distract from.
You’ll see the very same phenomenon
Phenomenon (perceivable) and ones sight (perception) are differentiated from one another.
Who is being protected from liability? No one.
Liable/leig - "to bind". Many are liable aka religion/religio - "to bind anew" by consenting to suggestions of few, which in return protects/protegere - "forward cover".
Perceivable forwards ones perception...binding self to suggested covers ones sight.
how easily any of us can file away
Mind/memory can only file during a moving process...a process which removes anything filed within memory.
File/filum/gwhi - "a thread, string; thread of fate; cord, filament; tendon"...few tempt many to file suggested information, which permits attachment. In reality there are "no strings attached", hence each one wielding free will of choice...unless ignored.
a) Is docking ones mind (doc-u-ment) a sign of intelligence (satoshi) or does it prevent a center (nakamoto) from expressing outwards?
b) Does mind/memory operate from center (ones perception) of circumference (all perceivable)?
c) HBO aka Home Box Office aka office (motion) generating a box (momentum) for home (matter).
One Nation Under Siege
a) Nation implies "native of action" aka ones reaction within all action.
b) Few lay siege, by shaping suggestions, to tempt ones native reaction to consent.
Siege/sedere/sed - "to sit" implies a chosen one being permitted to rest (lay) sitting (siege) if ones choice consents to follow a chosen ones suggestion.
"Why are gentiles needed? "They will work, they will plow, they will reap. We will SIT like an effendi and eat" ~Rabbi Ovadia Yosef
c) Consenting to a suggestion implies positioning self UNDER another, which few call intelligence/intelligo - "to understand" aka to stand under. That's why many students (slaves) stand under few teachers (masters) while believing to be intelligent.
- Evolution/evolvere - "to unroll".
Only within a line can a circle be drawn. Only form (life) within a flowing line (inception towards death) can be rolled together; unrolled or encircled.
A kike/kikel (circle) encircles others within conflicts of reason aka circular logic by rolling together (con-trol) those who consent; while natural law unrolls by separating solid (life) within fluid (inception towards death) from one another.
Reason (circular logic) establishes evolution.
israel worries about attacks from Palestinian militants, while Palestinians face restrictions and military presence...
Palestinian equals "militant attackers", while israel equals "worried military presence"...aka co-pilot misguiding.
- Venetian "blinds"
- Phonetician (phonetic; sound) aka Deaf Phonetician (definition).
- Canaan aka zealot/zēlos/zeal - "to emulate; seek; desire"
Light and sound differentiate...if one tries to emulate (strive to make equal) light or sound, then one becomes blind and deaf to it.
A jew suggests words to tempt gentiles to emulate sound, which is called spell-craft, and the very screen you're looking at to blind ones sight within the visible spectrum of light, which implies alchemical projection.
Ones consent to a suggestion implies CANAAN; the description of the suggested implies PHONETICIAN, and ones ignorance of perceivable implies VENETIAN...a JEW shapes these layers to distract YOU from discerning self.
black nobility
Nobel/nobilis/gno - "to know" + Black/bhleg - "to burn"...To burn knowledge within the visible spectrum of light implies a jew tempting a gentile to FOCUS on suggested, which establishes a point of convergence aka a hearth/hertha - "a burning place".
Largely Due To...
DUE; adjective - "owed, payable as an obligation, owing by right of circumstance or condition"
Hence debt aka 2,350,299,480,989 kr (Last Updated: October 1, 2024) due to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wallenberg_family
Wallenberg motto: "Esse, non Videri" (to be, not to be seen)...
Desert Fathers and Mothers
Desert; verb - "to leave; abandon"...
Why create (out of nothing)...
...to distract from transformation (within everything).
nuclear weapon
Each ones weapon of choice implies nucleus (perception) within all (perceivable). Atom/atomos - "uncut"...making a choice within balance implies cutting it however one NEEDS or WANTS it.
to protect and serve
Pro (forwards) tegere (to cover)... https://www.etymonline.com/word/protect aka serving cover (suggestion) within forwarding (perception).
For example...uniform, which implies ones form apart from one another within flow. The suggestion served for cover...uniting together. Uniform implies different from one another, while consenting to wear a uniform shapes many differences alike, which makes it harder to be distinguished from one another.
militarization
Militant - "warfare" aka conflicting passage. Each one (life) passes from inception towards death, engaging in conflict against one another aka "reason" hastens ones demise during passage.
Cops vs robbers implies the WAR which distracts one from FARE. Within war...resistance is futile; while during fare...resistance is fertile.
Follow the law tempts one to ignore that following natural L(and) A(ir) W(ater) doesn't fare well for ones life...
the tiny threads that bind history together
Aka ones consent given to HIS suggested STORY become threads interwoven with all the other ones consenting.
it took an overly lengthy brawl with Keith David, Piper could put the glasses on someone else and they would immediately and unavoidably see exactly what he saw
That's the inversion...perception is unique to each one; while consenting to suggestion equalizes differences.
They live inverts this by making the conflict about suggesting each other to wear the glasses to see. In reality...reasoning over suggested prevents one from seeing perceivable. Suggested information is the looking glass blinding ones sight from perceivable inspiration.
A CARPENTER blankets (suggested) foundation (perceivable). THEY (plural) covers LIVE (singular)...if one chooses to ignore self for another.
parker
Park/parcus - "to save". Towards saving inverts ones struggle (life) during harm (inception towards death).
Try using implication (if/then) on any single sentence, while resisting reason (true vs false; good vs bad; belief vs disbelief etc.). The more you do; the easier it becomes to resist, and the more you'll see what's implied.
Notice that while you're commenting the upvote vs downvote conflict of reason is tempting participation...it's ones free will of choice to resist that temptation.
Life is bound
Animation (inception towards death) implies the boundary for life within to be free from one another.
Few exploit this by tempting many with religion/religio - "to bind anew" into consenting to a suggestion, hence holding onto it aka confining self into a cage.
How else do you explain all
All implies PLAIN for EX-pression of each one. Else/alios/allos - "other" implies ignoring all perceivable for a suggestion by another one.
In other words...seeking explanation forwards, tempts one to ignore expressing self (life) in response to forwarding plane (inception towards death).
One does not need any explanation from another...one needs to discern self as ex within plain, while resisting the temptation to WANT explanations from another.
Asking nature to explain itself is answered by nature offering aka impressing the plain for one to express self.
Impression (motion) plain (momentum) expression (matter)...
all the life forms
That implies suggested collectivism aka counting each one life-form together, in the name of "all" + suggested the-ism to establish an authority over the ones consenting.
In perceivable reality...all implies flow; each one within implies form.
Putting together each one matter cannot establish all motion, because motion generates momentum, which continuously separates matter.
a) zoo/zoion/zion...
b) Zoo (animal) Bio (life). Few suggest zoology and biology to distract many from living within animation.
interrupt positive progress to debate
That's because choosing to hold onto positive establishes a conflict of reason against negative.
Nature cannot be interrupted...each one within implies rupture aka a partial burst forth from whole.
group solidarity
Fluid (inception towards death) sets solids (life) apart from one another...a jew suggests gentiles to come together aka to join groups, which destroys solidarity.
This means that whenever P is true, Q must also be true.
a) Who defines meaning? Who holds onto truth? Who wields the free will of choice to lie?
b) How does implication define (affix); when it implies ATION (action; motion)?
c) How could one hold onto implication (if/then) if it moves?
d) How could one lie without another holding onto truth?
The Nature of Implication...Logical Structure
What if one can only structure (matter) within nature (motion)? What if reasoning (logic) about structure (suggestion) tempts one to ignore nature (perceivable)?
The conflict within implication arises
a) What if fall (antecedent) generates rise (consequent)?
b) What if "within" implies as partial within whole? How could there be a conflict in-between partial and whole, when each partial implies a part of whole?
Could partials in conflict with one another ignore whole?
The antecedent may not always clearly define the conditions under which the consequent holds.
What if antecedent moves (inception towards death), which prevents consequent (life) from holding onto?
Does a suggested definition tempt ones consent to hold onto it? What if letting go of suggested would clear up ones perception?
saying “All birds can fly” implies...
a) Only within all can one say to one another.
b) Suggested collectivism (all birds) tempts one to ignore each one bird within all aka a differentiation/separation from one another.
if something is
IF everything was perceivable; THEN one can suggest to one another what is. Consenting to the latter establishes a conflict of reason (is vs isn't).
exceptions like ostriches or penguins
Why are exceptions alike? Why can one perceive differences among ostriches and penguins? What is the rule...same; different or alike?
The context in which implications are made
a) If there's an origin; then context can be made within.
b) Implication implies being within (im) fold (plica) of action (ation)...it deosn't require context; it offers each one within the foundation for self discernment.
Consenting to context corrupts self discernment.
If it rains, then the ground will be wet
If it's about rain; then why inject "will be" aka being will?
When considering actions and their reactions
a) There can be only action (motion) and reactions (matter), hence a setting apart of oneness into ones.
b) Con-side implies "siding together"; being implies in-between (life) sides (inception/death).
implications often involve predicting outcomes
What if the one predicting outcomes ignores the implication of being moved from inception towards death within origin?
Could a prediction invert ones sight from origin towards outcome?
“-ation” typically indicates a process or action related to a verb.
Action cannot relate to anything, only reactions can relate to one another. Process (action) exists before differentiation (reactions).
Typical implies symbolic...how does one symbolizes action/motion without contradicting action/motion with an affixed symbol/idol/brand/truth/definition etc.?
The context in which implications are made can alter
If implication is made within motion, then what could motion alternate with?
“Creation” implies bringing something into existence.
Show me creation without transformation aka bring something into existence without transforming it within/out of and in response to everything that already exists...
“Reaction” implies responding to an action or stimulus.
An as oppose to another? If action/motion is one stimuli; then what other stimulates reactions?
actions lead to various outcomes or reactions
If one can react by choice; then one lives within the process of dying, which further implies the only outcome of each living reaction...the enacting process of dying, hence back to same origin.
There's no variety in outcome, because coming out of being implies from variety back into same origin.
logical implications
A contradiction in terms aka imbalance (logic) balance (implication).
helps clarify how implications function logically while recognizing their limitations in real-world applications
Implication implies setting apart IF and THEN...to apply implies joining together, which is why applying reason contradicts implication.
Authoritative Sources
There can be only one source for each effect...
Offers clear definitions
Only motion offers clarity; affixed definitions obscure it.
consciousness arises from unconscious matter
a) Matter (life) rises (inception) and falls (death) during motion.
b) Sciou/scire - "to know" implies as matter (perception) during momentum (perceivable) of motion aka differentiation.
c) Few suggest con (together) scious (to know) to tempt each consenting one of many to ignore differentiation for consenting alike.
if we imagine
Image/imitari - "copy" implies an artificial shape (suggestion) within reality (perceivable). Suggested pluralism (we) tempts ones singular perception to ignore self for others.
face a hard problem
Problem/proballein - "throw forwards" implies an origin (motion) throwing (momentum) one (matter) forwards. Whatever one faces tempts one to ignore origin, because facing implies looking forwards, while ignoring what throws one forwards.
an aspect of consciousness
Con implies "together"...aspect implies special aka particular aka "apart" from one another.
sciences have practically stalled out in terms of advancement, only ever capable of spiraling deeper and deeper down their holes of “specialization”
Consenting to suggested scientism implies specialization advancing forwards. Oneself is the special, nature that which forwards one, and ones resistance to the temptation of following implies stalling ones decline.
the true geniuses capable of bridging the gaps between these chasms seem to be so few and far between.
Bridging the gap is what consent to suggested establishes, while ignoring that nature sets each one within apart from one another. Many willingly choose to ignores this by joining together aka bridging gaps, which sets apart few and far between.
capable of entertaining ideas without necessarily believing
Aka letting through (perceivable inspiration) instead of holding onto (suggested information). That capability implies ones free will of choice resisting (need) temptation (want).
the idea that psyche, aka consciousness, exists in some form or another
a) Psyche implies "animating power" aka flow...not form, which implies animated by flow.
b) Another can only exist among form (partial matter), which the animating power of flow (whole motion) differentiates from one another.
c) Ones consent to suggested idealism tempts one to ignore differences, hence also that which differentiates.
infused throughout
Form (life) coming in (inception) and out (death) of flow...not fused together; but diffused apart.
“limited” or different form
Same flow (inception towards death) as the only limit for each free form (life) differentiated within...just because one is free to limit self to others, doesn't mean that a self imposed limit cannot be lifted by raising self.
trust the experts
EX (out of; from) PER (through, by means of), hence ex (life) per (inception towards death).
Suggested TRUST (want to hold onto) inverts perceivable THRUST (need to let go)...
gamed to advance
Aka suggested progressivism tempting "play to reach".
everyone’s knowledge
Each ones perception within all perceivable implies ledge within known.
scientific publishing
To publish implies making publicly known. Knowledge implies privately (ones perception) known (all perceivable).
Science/scio - "to know" aka ones perception or scientism aka as suggested by another.
You are implying things
Things (plural) implies everything (singularity) aka a setting apart of whole...
No dummy. You are doing that.
Reasoning aka no vs yes; dummy vs smarty; you vs me; are vs aren't; doing vs don't; that vs this...tempts one to ignore implication (if/then).
Where's the conflict within implication?
ATION implicates what? Reactions...
When we eat we usually destroy the organism (Chaos)
a) All implies ongoing hunger; each one within a temporary organ being consumed; while struggling to sustain self during procession.
b) Suggested organism tempts one to organize aka to put consent and suggested together. Doing that tempts one to ignore that ones perception is the organ, set apart, within all perceivable.
c) Natural order establishes (inception) and destroys (death) chaos (life). Sustaining an establishment (stable mind) while being destroyed...that's chaotic; that's life.
Sleight of hand: https://genius.com/The-exploited-chaos-is-my-life-lyrics
turn it into energy for
Energy directs forwards...resistance (life) within velocity (inception towards death) can be directed to turn against each other, when ignoring origin.
Being implies forwarded resistance...others tempt resistance to turn against each other.
for the body (order)
FOR (order) THE (inversion aka suggested the-ism) BODY (chaos)
seeds that survive digestion
Digestion (life) implies procession (inception towards death)...hence inter-course allowing a seed of life to perpetuate self through another as off-spring during procession. Ones free will of choice struggles with planting the seed and tilling the soil...
un eaten
No such thing during ongoing consumption. Hunger doesn't waste food....appetite does.
Temet Nosche - Know Thyself
- Nosche/gnosis/gno - "to know" aka to perceive perceivable.
- Temet/töm-et - "letting be filled" aka consenting to suggested.
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/temet + https://venere.it/en/the-meaning-and-history-of-the-name-temet/
cause if you don't
a) Cause moves; effect can choose to de-nial (nihilo; nothing) being moved.
b) Reason (do vs don't) contradicts implication (if/then).
c) Cause does; effects respond to being done aka redo.
will tell you who you are
Others suggest ones free WILL of choice what one wants or not wants to be, which tempts one to ignore that ARE implies being... https://www.etymonline.com/word/are
what does it matter when it's part of the same system
Motion implies same; matter implies different parts within same whole...a suggested system tempts alike consent from different partials, while ignoring same whole.
One joins others to be part of a system...that contradicts being set apart from one another within whole, hence being differentiated (life) during sameness (inception towards death).
forked political system
Being choice within balance implies prodded (press forwards); choosing among suggested choices implies two-prodded (forked) into a conflict of reason against others.
give as illusion of choice
Balance gives choice...taking choices (consenting to suggested) makes given balance illusive to ones choice.
All of our work is for the Creator's Honor
a) Generator (motion) Transformer (momentum) Reactor (matter)...that's how everything generates each thing. Suggested creationism inverts this into "something out of nothing".
b) EN'ERGY, noun (Gr. work) - "internal or inherent power" aka work internally differentiating employees.
Not "our work"; but each one employed within work + not "all of"; but all forwarding each one aka "all for one and one for all".
c) Suggested honorism tempts one to attach; all perceivable detaches each ones perception from one another. If each one honors all, then each different one responds alike to same.
Instead of giving anything...try being within everything given, while resisting the temptation to take.
we are using
All uses one; one reuses all...other ones suggest pluralism (we) to abuse ones consent.
gave us to live
Giving honor back ignores that giving (inception) and taking (death) happens simultaneously, and needs to be (life) resisted.
King David
David implies a suggested noun aka a brand upon; while King implies an addition (adjective) to a noun.
If nature moves, and few within suggest nouns and adjectives to tempt many to hold onto definitions (definite; to affix), then what about verbs denoting motion?
Hebrew Dawidh - "darling, beloved friend; beloved one" aka holding dear; wanting to befriend; loving vs hating...each contradicting motion.
Check this out... https://webstersdictionary1828.com/Dictionary/davit aka "fishing the anchor"...suggestion fishes for consent; which anchors choice when given. Those suggesting are given consent, which implies Maghen Dawidh (shield of david)...
Anyway...thanks for the inspiration to write.
reached this conclusion
a) Con (together) clude (close)...ion (action) opens up reactions by setting each apart from one another.
b) Reaching implies inclining towards, while ignoring to be center within balance.
Sleight of hand: "reach out and touch faith"... https://genius.com/Depeche-mode-personal-jesus-lyrics
higher ups work by subverting
Consenting to a suggestion implies sub (under) vert (turn), which in return permits another up high, who controls (rolls together) those turning under.
Consent shirks choice aka turning from self (ignorance) and against (reason) others. Suggestion turns one from perception and thereby into ignorance.
operating system
a) Operate (to be in effect) tempts one to ignore being effect (perception) within cause (perceivable). A jew suggests operationalism to invert gentiles perception... https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/operationalism/
b) System (organized whole) tempts a partial effect within whole cause to ignore self for joining others.
How does one join another? By consenting to a suggestion. Few suggest -ISMS as systems to operate upon/within/through consenting many.
Your inner ideology
Consenting to idealism (ideo) establishes logic/reason (logy) within self, while permitting another to shape it from outside...ideology ain't yours.
Ideo/idea/idein/weid - "to see" implies ones perception within all perceivable...not the suggestions of another.
Not the things you believe are true. But the things you KNOW are true!
Knowledge cannot be held onto (truth) without establishing a contradiction (lie)...
What matters is that you are powerful.
Motion is the power which fills (inception) and drains (death) matter (life). A jew tempts gentiles to hold onto matter as to gain power over one another...the currency used for that exchange/transaction implies the current draining.
survival of the fittest and Darwinism
a) Consenting to follow an -ism makes one weaker than the one suggesting it. A chosen one becomes the fittest by ones choice weakening itself.
b) Erasmus Darwin aka Eros (to love) Deorwine (dear friend) aka wanting to hold together.
c) FITTING where? Together with others or apart within whole?
the intellectual elite
Intelligo (to understand) elite (selection; choice)...selecting another, while choosing to stand under, tempts one to ignore actual (perception) for fictional (suggestion).
A jew suggests THE-ism to tempt gentiles to understand/stand under an external authority.
ALL people
Aka suggested collectivism tempting one to ignore each one person, while permitting another to suggest in the name of "all people" aka "we the people".
like animals
Animation differentiates matter from one another. A jew collectivizes matter into groups such as "humans" and "animals" to distract gentiles from discerning self as being within the animated hue of man.
Their ideology is similar to Judaism
Suggested pluralism (their); idealism (ideo); logism (logy); determinism (is); progressivism (to) and judaism...tempts each ones different free will of choice to consent "similarly" as one another.
...on the other hand.
If energy implies ones hand, then what does "on the other hand" imply? What is the difference between a suggested alternative and being (life) within alternation (inception towards death)?
through intricate intrigue, plotting, scheming
All perceivable moves through ones perception...the suggestions by another don't go through; but tempt one to hold onto it.
Intrigue (to hinder within); plotting (planing; flattening; spreading) and scheming (shaping figures of speech) implies suggested information by a jew being shaped within the mind/memory of consenting gentiles.
decision making and not always simple puppetry
a) One cannot make...only remake aka respond to being made.
b) Choice within balance cannot decide (settle)...balance forces choice to adapt, hence the struggle withing oneself of needing to resist want.
c) Suggested nihilism (nihilo; nothing) tempts one to ignore that everything perceivable implies ALL WAY for each one within. Consenting to a suggestion establishes a conflict of reason (always vs never) within ones ignorant mind/memory.
d) Puppet (consent) selects master of puppets (suggestion).
Sleight of hand: https://genius.com/Metallica-master-of-puppets-lyrics aka "I'm your source of self destruction...Leading on your death's construction".
jews exactly wanted
Exact implies ones EXpression within all ACTion. A jew tempts gentiles to want or not want suggested, while ignoring perceivable need. A jew manipulates reactions to distract gentiles from action.
extreme ideologies are the response of nations and peoples when their existence is at stake
a) Extreme implies on the outside...ones expressed stance (existence) implies within (life) sides (inception/death).
b) Ones consent to outside (suggestion) over inside (perception) tethers one to another, hence staking self.
different ideas
Any different idea suggested tempts alike consent, while one ignores the same perceivable origin.
agency will
Free WILL of choice implies reaction aka regency. Will cannot act; only react to being (life) enacted upon (inception towards death).
If ones choice consents to a chosen ones suggestion, then one selects another as agency for ones regency, hence..."divergences caused by the agentur of the Illuminati"
3 years and counting without a single post. What's the real issue here...me needing to post, or you wanting me to post?
a) Trust contradicts free because trust tempts one to hold onto it.
b) Why is it called a "bank & trust"? If a jew banks and gentiles hold onto trust, then who is gaining and who is losing?