this irrational need to insert Soviet Union in everything bad
Soviet/sovet/suvetu - "assembly" implies putting together. Unit/unitas/unus - "one" implies being apart from one another.
Chosen one (unit) implies set apart from gentiles assembled (soviet) together...same trick as with united states; united kingdom; european union; united nations etc.
There was no KGB...
KGB aka Komitet Gosudarstvennoy Bezopasnosti aka Committee of State Harmlessness
Komit/commit - "to commit" implies gentiles giving consent to jewish suggestions, thereby setting a jewish state apart, while uniting gentiles together. That was always the modus operandi for subverting many by few and Bezopasnosti implies the chutzpah to call the suggested harmless upfront, while the later consent by gentiles establishes the harm.
- Merchant: "Would you like to buy?"
- Consumer: "What are you selling?"
- Merchant: "Whatever you want...it's harmless"
First line implies the state; second line implies the committee; third line implies the sales pitch...that's the KGB aka Soviet Union aka happy merchant of temptation operating since Ab immemorabili (time immemorial).
- IN'TELLECT, noun (Latin intellectus, from intelligo, to understand)
Notice that it's gentiles who are "standing under" all these institutions by electing each jew above them.
Religion; Family; Nation; Property
a) Notice that nature sets free, while religion (Latin religio, to bind anew) implies bondage.
b) Notice that nature sets each off-spring apart from one another, while family (Latin familia) implies a collective body held within a house (household).
c) Notice that nature implies native within action (nat-ion) aka moving apart, while suggested nations tempt natives together.
d) Notice that a moving nature cannot be held onto; while property implies artificial value for ownership.
resulting in
Result/resulto/resilio - "rebound; to leap back". What if each effect (life) rebounds back to cause (inception towards death)?
What if gentiles giving consent to a jewish suggestion will always result/rebound in a jew getting and gentiles giving away?
the real problem is the representative system.
a) System implies particular connected together within a whole...nature sets whole (action) apart (reactions).
b) Solution (inception towards death) generates problems (life)...hence ones struggle to sustain life while dying aka to temporary grow within ongoing loss.
c) Represent implies ones response (perception) to all presented (perceivable)...voting "representatives" implies ones consent to the suggestion of another one, while ignoring to respond to what nature presents.
Furthermore...present (before sending) + presense (before sensing) + presence (before being) implies origin sending; making sense available and establishing being.
Weimar
Aka WIH (holy) MAR/MERE (sea) implying the whole (holy) seeing (sea) I. Mere/mori aka body (life) of water (inception towards death).
Frankfurt
Aka FRANK (free) FURT (fort; stronghold) implying binding free will of choice by tempting consent to hold onto suggested. Frankfurt is located in HESSE aka essence of being, and the location for the European (u are peon) Central Bank.
Being implies center (choice) of circumference (balance) and banking a center implies tempting choice to hold onto suggested sides; thereby establishing imbalance for self within an ongoing current by holding onto a temporary currency (current sea), hence Frankfurt am Main aka ones free (frank) will of choice holding onto (furt) what is mine/mein (main).
impossible to find alternate history
Alternation implies change of position...few suggest stories/storage to distract many from alternation by tempting them to hold onto suggested stories, hence becoming the mental/memory storage.
lost the info
Inform implies during flow aka formed growth (life) within flowing loss (inception towards death)...that's why all info gets lost.
the ones which don't parrot the same
What if few suggest all the different information to tempt many to parrot the same consent, while regurgitating it to one another?
Does nature require consent given back from those within? Do those within nature tempt each other with suggestion (does Polly want a cracker) to give consent (Polly wants a cracker)?
recommend
MEND (mind) RE (responding) COM (together)...within nature each different mind responds differently to the same source. Suggested COM tempts different minds to parrot the same consent.
tl;dr: Try adapting to perceivable inspiration instead of searching for suggested information. The former constantly alternates, while the latter tempts you to hold onto it.
What Happens When You Name The Talmud?
a) Choice is being ignored for chance (happenstance).
b) To label (name) makes one liable to another.
c) Suggested theism (the) tempts one into bondage to another.
If one hasn't learned how to teach self to discern the aforementioned, then talmud (instruction) will be utilized by others for destruction.
IN (being within) or DE (against another) STRUCT (to spread) ION (action)...reactions (life) spread within action (inception towards death) both by sustaining self and by destroying others.
In short...motion carries matter as structures (growth) within destruction (loss). In-struction implies talmud aka state of being; de-struction implies talmudic reasoning aka being against another.
they would prefer one thing over another
a) What if chosen ONEs suggest many things to establish a conflict of reason (over vs under) among others?
b) Does "over vs under" contradict "as above so below"? How is a fish in conflict with water?
they control
Control implies "rolled together"...few suggest pluralism (they) to roll the consent of many together within circular logic aka conflicts of reason.
party-line
PARTials (life) within a LINE (inception towards death) need to resist the wanted temptation to follow...
We need to be as flexible
Ones consent to suggested pluralism (we) binds singular, hence preventing ones ability to bend (flexibility) as ray within light.
Participate in any group and try to be more flexible to experience mass resistance.
thinking is also how we arrive
Being implies in-between (life) arrival (inception) and departure (death) as an arriving partial.
unplug every thing for every one
How does one unplug from "we"? How did one (singular) plug into we (plural)?
want linear
Needing to resist (life) linear (inception towards death) progression or wanting to follow suggested progressivism.
TPTB have a rolodex
Reasoning among many aka circular logic implies the rolodex (rolling index) utilized by few, while many ignore power (motion) of being (matter).
to arrive at a destination through numerous scenarios
Same destination (death); different scenarios (life)...numerology (reasoning about enumeration) tempts ONE to ignore the ONE and only scenic route to each ONES final destination.
Sleight of hand:
- "Here we go, yo, here we go, yo" (inception towards death)
- "So what, so what, so what's the scenario?" (life)
Why is life struggling with self discernment?
both war and no-war
Yes vs no implies a conflict of reason aka the foundation of war.
to enslave
a) Slave/slav/slovo - "word; speech"... https://www.etymonline.com/word/Slav
b) Perceivable sound sets choice free; suggested words bind choice by consent.
headed for...trending towards...current trends continue
Aka suggested progressivism tempting ones consent to follow into a conflict of reason (war) against other ones.
only thing they fear is force more powerful than them
Gentiles are the more powerful force...a jew isn't afraid of gentiles; a jew suggests terror-ism to frighten gentiles.
If you give them power over to you
Gentiles are the more powerful force...given consensual to each chosen ones suggestion.
see themselves as superior and others as inferior
a) Chosen one implies selected to be superior by inferior choice.
b) If ones choice selects chosen ones suggestion, then one lowers self while heightening another.
They operate from a completely different set of moral and ethical codes and values
Each chosen one implies differentiated from one another, while gentiles are collectively consenting to suggested norms; morals; ethical codes and values...all suggested by a jew.
Nature implies moving value; each one within a different evaluation thereof.
Lying is no problem to them
Because holding onto a truth becomes a problem within a moving system. Motion cannot lie; ignoring motion for an affixed definition called "truth" permits others to "lie" aka to contradict truth.
They are 100% open about it
a) Because nature offers everything perceivable to each ones perception openly and b) Because gentiles ignore natural (perception) for artificial (suggestion)...artifice like percentages.
What is 1% 25% 50% 75% 100% of energy? Does it take energy to make those measurements? What gives energy to measure?
I engaged...and wasted energy on my replies
ENGAGE; verb - "binding as by a pledge"...hence wasting ones "free" will of choice when engaging into bondage to others.
I have been attacked
By text on a screen? Being offended implies taking an offer willingly. Getting ATTACHed tempts one to feel ATTACKed...
Do you think the Olympics are scripted, the events that is?
If a participant is invited, then that implies a vetting process for a controlled environment. Consenting to such an invite implies following a scripted event, which is accompanied with endless more vetting processes until every aspect of the event is controlled.
Script/skribh - "to cut/separate"...it's compartmentalization; where each participant is tempted into a box until a hidden hand positions the boxes near each other for the event. All these boxes can be separately manipulated without anyone else being aware.
And if so, why?
There's no chance in this world...only choice. Many choosing to watch sports implies mass consent to chosen ones suggestions aka many ignoring choice, while willingly permitting few to make all the choices.
From a different perspective...win/wen - "to desire; strive for". If life desires/strives for a suggested outcome, then it ignores being moved from inception towards the only outcome...death.
Being implies growth (life) within loss (inception towards death)...few suggest "winning" to tempt many to desire outcome over origin.
In short...life cannot win at the end. Why not distract life with a temporary win from ongoing loss?
will say that it is a customers who choose...it is kind of forcing customers
a) How does one use a search engine without willingly consenting to search among information suggested by another?
b) If balance (action) forces choice (reaction), then how could choice force choice without ignoring the origin of force?
c) Can one use GOOGLE without consenting to a GOGGLE distorting ones sight with what others are showing?
d) Can one look/lock/focus on a screen without narrowing ones sight?
with enough compression anything can eventually become a brick
a) Compression implies pressing together...what about impression (inception towards death) generating expression (life) by pressing apart?
b) Brick (suggested information) and mortar (consent) implies free-masonry...
Impossible.
Can a few suggest many to believe in impossibility? Could mass consent to a suggestion be utilized by few as potential?
https://www.footpack.fr/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/adidas-impossible-is-nothin.jpeg
Aging is caused by so many factors
a) Cause implies motion...suggested facts tempt one to hold onto, while ignoring to be (life) moved (inception towards death).
b) Being implies in-between inception and death...few suggest age as an "indefinite period" to tempt many to reason against each other about the definition (definite; affixed) of age, which in return tempts them to ignore being within motion.
c) Age/aetas/aevum/aiw - "life force" implies force (motion) generating life (matter).
biological immortality
Only within zoe (animation) can bio (life) be mortal...logic implies mortals fighting each other about what bio means, while ignoring what zoe does.
something nobody even considered
Like that a body cannot be nothing (no-body); that together (con) contradicts apart (side) or to be odd (choice) within even (balance)?
Disruptive inventions
DIS (divided against) RUPT (broken apart) IN (being within) VENT (emit outwards) ION (action)
Ignorance disrupts ones discernment about being emitted outwards (vent) within (in) action (ion) aka outwards emission (life) within action (inception towards death).
comprehensive list of possible
a) Compression disrupts potential. Potential implies emission outwards; which compression inwards contradicts.
b) List/lysten/lean - "to incline to one side; to please, desire, wish, like"... https://www.etymonline.com/word/list#etymonline_v_12303
Few suggest lists to tempt many to incline towards a side within a conflict of reason (pro vs contra).
harm to corporations
Corp-orat-ion aka corpus-orate-action aka speaking death (suggested words) into life (perceivable sound).
To be implies corpse/cors - "body" within ion/action...others utilize oration to brand that body; to overload it with information; to tempt ones ignorance of being (life) moved (inception towards death).
Consenting to a suggestion by another harms one...resisting temptation heals one.
order means nothing
a) What's the meaning of nothing?
b) How does natural order affect the meaning of nothing?
c) Does "everything" implies order; chaos or both?
boring after few hundreds of years
If one were to be immortal; then why would one keep measuring time? Furthermore...what happens if a mortal resists keeping measure of time?
information overload
Loading implies ones consent to mentally hold onto suggested information by another. One cannot overload on perceivable inspiration since one cannot hold onto it.
reached a point
a) A sentence (life) cannot reach a point (death) without perishing...
b) REACH, verb - "to make straight"...reach (inception towards death) generates departure (life).
point of living
Living implies sentenced from inception towards point of death. Few suggest progressivism towards points to tempt many to ignore sentence/sense/perception within perceivable origin.
Point implies "end of sentence"...
reality of positive and negative
Hold your breath...can you negate the need to breathe? What if negation implies ones de-nial of position?
What if few suggest a conflict of reason (positive vs negative) to distract one from being able to negate ones position through ignorance?
zero energy
Zero/cifre/cipher aka arithmetic/arithmos/tell-craft/numerology etc. tempts ONE to ignore that all is ONE in energy.
Sleight of hand: "there can be only one" + "all for one and one for all" + "alone" aka ALL(in)ONE.
Here's a test...if EN'ERGY, noun [Gr. work.] - "internal or inherent power" implies one; then what's two? How could one double internal power of external energy?
paradox
Aka para/per (forwards) and dox/dek (to take). Few suggest doxology (taking speech) to tempt many to consent to progressivism, hence taking that which moves forwards (inception towards death), while ignoring to resist (life).
Dox contradicts para...matter cannot hold onto motion without destroying itself.
The idea of a God often doesn't add up
Suggested idealism tempts one to hold onto, while ignoring that addition (inception) and subtraction (death) of being (life) cannot be held onto.
look at the universe
a) To look at implies to lock onto aka to focus on...while ignoring that ones sight (perception) implies within the movement of all perceivable.
b) Universe implies turning (vertere) one (unus). Few suggest universe to turn many from perceivable origin towards suggested outcomes.
created everything
Creation implies out of nothing. Everything implies each thing (partials) within everything (whole) aka transmutation within everything.
Suggested creationism tempts one to ignore perceivable transmutation of motion through momentum (inception towards death) into matter (life).
Here's a test...create anything suggestible without using everything perceivable to "create".
One cannot perceive creation, because all perceivable existed before ones perception came to be.
all life could coexist peacefully
a) Living implies one (partial); dying implies all (whole)...only within loss (inception towards death) can there be growth (life).
b) -ist (coexist) implies ones consent to suggested -ism (co-existentialism) aka ones submission of self into bondage to another aka religion (Latin religio) - "to bind anew".
c) CO (together; with) contradicts EX (expression) because expressions put together repress each other.
Sleight of hand: "Express yourself; don't repress yourself...and I'm not sorry...it's human nature"
d) Peace/piece implies being apart from one another as partials within whole. Few trick many to ignore that by tempting them into a perpetual conflict of reason (peace vs war), while ignoring that reason is the foundation for all conflicts and wanting to come together in "peace" contradicts nature differentiating pieces by setting each one apart from one another.
We see a world driven by competition
Competition implies ones consent to take a suggested side within a conflict of reason against another...which tempts one to ignore being (life) driven (inception towards death) apart from one another.
our understanding
a) How could it be ours if we "stand under" others?
Are many students stand under few teachers? What about many followers standing under few leaders or many slaves standing under few masters?
b) What if suggested pluralism (our, we) tempts singular (one) to ignore self discernment?
less centered around human beliefs.
Being implies center (perception) of circumference (perceivable)...believing implies ones consent to the suggestion of another.
To believe tempts "being to leave" ones position at center, while inclining outwards. How does one belief? By free will of choice. What does choice imply? Center of balance. What does choice at center of balance choosing to incline outwards towards "chosen ones" suggestions imply? Imbalance!
so many rules
Rule/reg - "to move in a straight line"... https://www.etymonline.com/word/rule#etymonline_v_16625
There's only one rule (inception towards death) for each one within (life). Ignoring oneself for another establishes many under ever increasing rules by few.
Christians and Muslims are culturally incompatible
a) Both consented to suggested abrahamism aka abh (father) raham (multitude). They are being cultivated by mixing to equalize natural differences.
b) Reason makes both sides of every conflict compatible to each other. One cannot reason "for" without establishing an "against".
c) As for the natural foundation...christ implies one who's been set free; while muslim implies one who submits to bondage. Both imply ones free will of choice within a balance based system.
countries jews run
a) Nature runs (inception towards death) natives (life)...suggested progressivism tempts natives to run along with nature instead of resisting.
b) A jew suggests gentiles to count..gentile consent establishes a jew as the account. To count implies "to sum up, reckon together" which tempts one to ignore that nature sets units apart from one another.
the rulers than embed either in each other's countries.
It's the few who are embedded at the center of surrounding matter...a surrounding established by many reasoning against each other in the shape of ouroboros.
Nothing about any election is honest any more
Free will of choice hONEs ones elective response-ability...selecting others puts one against others aka dis-one.
How dishonest to self is it to elect another as ones representative?
a) YOU/jew...if one claims self as "me; myself or I"; then one views others as YOU/jew.
b) Real aka re-al aka ones REsponse (perception) to ALL (perceivable).
c) Fiction aka fic-tion aka feigning (suggestion) action (perception).
a) Familiar/family/familia - "servants of household" implies held by bondage, which contradicts being set free (revealed)... https://www.etymonline.com/word/family#etymonline_v_1107
b) FAMILIAR; adjective - "the noun meaning "demon, evil spirit that answers one's call" is from 1580s (familiar spirit is attested from 1560s). The Latin plural, used as a noun, meant "the slaves"... https://www.etymonline.com/word/familiar#etymonline_v_1106
c) Revelation aka sharia/shari'ah (the revealed law) shar (revelation)