patriots.win is hella divided on this as are liberals.
As in patriot vs traitor + win vs loose + is vs isn't + heaven vs hell + divided vs united + on vs off + this vs that + are vs aren't + liberal vs conservative?
These represent conflicts of reason; shaped by ones consent to anything suggested, while permitting those suggesting control over both sides of every conflict. In short...reason implies division by suggestion.
Control the narrative and you control perception
a) narration (producing particulars) implies from whole (inception towards death) into partials (life)...not the suggested narratives by other partials.
b) control aka restrain aka ones response (life) to being strained; drawn by force (inception towards death)...consenting to suggestions by others "permits" them control over self, hence one permitting another to respond; choose; represent for oneself, hence representative control (govern) of mind (ment).
Control perception and you control people.
a) A people implies each one person aka per sonos (by sound), which is what each perception (partial instrument) perceives (whole; entire; sound).
b) notice...YOU (phonetic jew) control people...sounds familiar?
Media is crying...What is really going on?
Nature (inception towards death) goes on; those within (life) ignore perceivable for what others mediate by suggestion.
wait and see what this sh*t show will bring
Nature (balance) brought will (choice)...each one wields it; most choose to watch the sh*t show of others instead.
more restrictions
Perceivable sets perception free...suggested tempts one to restrict self by consenting.
Unless they want to be hated for some reason...
a) reasoning (want vs not want or love vs hate) is for goyim only, while a chosen one utilizes suggestion to distract others from perceivable.
b) Theodor Herzl acknowledged the jewish question and promoted the fermenting of anti-semitism to bring about the "Judenstaat".
suicidal thoughts; peaceful genocide
Suggestion represents the temptation to ignore perceivable. Consenting to suggested implies suicidal consent to genocidal suggestion.
Ignorance harms self; self harm harms others.
of the future
a) TIME, noun (Latin tempora) - "part of duration"...being alive implies part (life) of duration (inception towards death).
b) suggested FU'TURE, adjective (Latin futurus) - "to be or come hereafter" represents the inversion of coming (inception towards death) to be (life).
c) one can only be "now"...not before or after.
d) OF, preposition - "from or out of; proceeding from, as the cause, source, means, author or agent bestowing"...effect (life) can only proceed from cause (inception towards death).
The Brain Is the Battlefield...
...of reason; if one consents to any suggested information.
Stated Objective is “Altering the Human Being”
a) being alive implies altered from inception towards death aka flow (animal) alters form (human).
b) ones consent to suggested "stated object" tempts one to ignore being subjected to motion.
we are all vulnerable
Ones (singular) consent to suggested pluralism (we) implies self inflicted vulnerability upon the sustenance of self.
mind interference
a) reasoning over suggested interferes with ones adaptation to the implication of perceivable.
b) to interfere implies internally (inter) bearing (fero) the concerns (suggested information) by others, while ignoring the externally perceivable flow of inspiration.
coverage
Aka concealing (cover) the whole duration of a being (age) with suggested information. Ones consent to suggested implies ones ignorance of perceivable, hence permitting others to shape suggested underneath the cover of ones willing ignorance of perceivable.
may not even notice
a) NO'TICE, noun - "observation by the eye or by the other senses" aka perceiving perceivable, which one willingly ignores when consenting to suggested.
b) even (inception towards death) generates odds (life)...ignoring perceivable even for suggested odds tempts one "at odds" with others aka into disagreement aka into a conflict of reason.
Seems more like an eminent domain.
The suggested brand "israel" got its eminence (distinguished above others) by all those who consent to suggested nationalism aka from the many willingly submitting to the suggestions by a chosen few.
In other words...if a few suggest "this is israel" and many consent to believe or disbelieve it, then those many permit a few to define perceivable (reality) with suggested (fiction).
Suggestion tempts one to ignore perceivable...it has no power of itself; it's fueled by power of consent.
tied itself to the nation of Israel?
Using the brand "israel" implies ones consent to suggested nationalism, hence binding self by consent to suggestion of another.
Meanwhile...perceivable nation implies each one of a people aka one apart from one another...not bound together.
a) nation implies each one of a people; territory implies terra (earth).
b) state implies being send (life) within order (inception towards death) aka condition of being.
State of Israel
ISRAEL (Hebrew yisra'el) - "he that striveth (life) within god (inception towards death)"...State of israel implies being alive.
I personally doubt that the socialist mass genocide events were hoaxes
a) ignoring perceivable (person; per sonos; by sound) for the suggestions uttered by others implies falling for a hoax. Suggestion deceives from perception.
b) doubt (to hesitate; to be in suspense)...being alive implies being suspended in-between inception/death, hence an intermission of temporary form within ongoing flow.
Schicklgruber
Aka Shekel Digger...who do you think writes those narratives?
Another example: Stalin (steel/iron/eisen) to Eisen-hower (phonetic hauer aka hitter) to Hit-lter...EISEN (Stalin) HAUER (Hitler).
Put one fire out, ten more fires start
a) ignition aka action (tion) kindles (ignites) reactions aka whole (inception towards death) generating partials (life). Oneness cannot be put out; it puts more ones within.
b) ten aka 1 (everything perceivable) vs 0 (suggested nothing)...a conflict shaped by ones consent to suggested collectivism (ten).
whole situation
Being implies situated as partial (life) within whole (inception towards death).
my assertion
Ones choice to want to claim (assert) what others are suggesting; permits others to define (idolatry); redefine (revisionism) and contradict (talmudic reasoning) the suggested at will.
Meanwhile...temporary (life) cannot claim ongoing (inception towards death) without ignoring to sustain self.
the...government
Ones consent to suggested THE-ism (ones submission to authority of another) permits others to control (govern) ones mind (ment) with the suggested.
israel
ISRAEL (Hebrew yisra'el) - "he that striveth (life) within god (inception towards death)" aka jew (phonetic you).
meat shield
SHIELD; from schild; skildus; skel - "divide, split, separate"...it's whole (inception towards death) that shields each partial (life) momentarily aka within momentum of motion. Most meat-heads ignore that.
Others suggest meat-grinder (grinding meat together) to distract one from the shield (inception towards death) which sets meat (life) apart from one another.
past weekend, apparently
a) suggested past; present and future tempt one to ignore perceivable "now" aka moment of existence aka existence (life) within momentum (inception towards death).
b) apparent (visible to the eye) implies perceivable towards perceiving eye...not shown to eye by suggestions from others. Consenting to suggested tempts one to view perceivable (reality) through the lens of suggested (fiction), while permitting those suggesting to shape it at will.
a) NATION implies each one of a people. Suggested nationalism slaps a label upon a people to collectivize them.
b) consenting (want or not want) to suggested (nationalism) tempts one into a conflict of reason (want vs not want), while permitting those suggesting to rebrand the sides into for example Palestine vs israel.
c) focusing on a brand (nationalism), distracts one from what's burning within (each one of a people). Reasoning (Palestine vs isreal) over suggested; tempts one to ignore each one underneath the labels, hence distracting one from all the ethnic cleansing of other ones.
d) to distract from nationalism...others suggest internationalism to tempt one into an internal (nationalism) vs external (internationalism) conflict of reason. The external side is now called "globalism".
What one ignores..."internationalism" implies INTERNAL NATION, hence within and among a people. But if nationalism burns a people (nation) and those who suggest internationalism are not outside but inside, then how do they protect themselves?
Situated at the center (chosen ones) of every conflict (imbalance among reasoning choices), the local few can make a burned offering out of the many within their circumference, hence circumcising external imbalance to sustain internal balance.
Why does that work? Because being implies center (choice) of surrounding (balance), and consenting to the suggested choices of others puts oneself into imbalance. If a many ignore perceivable balance (need/want) for suggested imbalance (want vs not want); then only a chosen few remain balanced.
now solve
Solvent aka solution aka motion generates momentum, which implies perceivable moment of "now" for those perceiving it from within. To be alive implies "now"...before (inception) and after (death) implies dissolved being. Now (life) simultaneously implies after (inception) and before (death).
super generous
a) being implies re-generation aka being a generated (inception towards death) response (life).
b) others suggest generosity to distract one from nature generating all (perceivable) for each one within (perception). One cannot give to another, before taking from all, yet...one can ignore all, while taking/giving from/to one another, which tempts one to ignore that..."the winner takes it all" (inception towards death) + "the loser has to fall" (life).
https://genius.com/Abba-the-winner-takes-it-all-lyrics
interesting
Aka INTERNAL (life) ESSENCE (inception towards death)...being interested within the suggestions by others tempts one to ignore that.
Also 1+1= 3.
a) "also" aka ALL (whole) + SO (followed by as aka partials). If whole; then also partials within.
b) oneness (whole) adds (+) ones (partials) by dividing (/) aka from same (inception towards death) into differences (life)...others suggest equality (=) through diversity (/) as the inversion thereof.
The winner (death) takes it (life) all by subtraction (-).
c) being one implies set apart from one another, hence differentiated. This enables differentiated partials to be able to discern self at the center of equal whole...others suggest collectivism to tempt alike responses, while branding them "equal".
d) all additions (+) to energy (1) implies inherent/internal division (/) of ongoing loss (-) into temporary growth (+). In other words...if energy; then everything else within.
e) if one ignores perceivable unit (oneself) for suggested unit (1), then one binds self by consent to suggestions of another one, hence 1+1=2. That's the foundation of dualism, tempting one into a conflict of reason (agree vs disagree or belief vs disbelief or true vs false or want vs not want etc.)...hence ones (1) mind trapped within dual (2) conflict.
f) the ones (1) who consent to want or not want the suggestions by another one, will then reason against one another (want vs not want) within dualism (2), while ignoring the third-party (3) shaping the suggestions they fight each other over. This represents the foundation for trinitarianism.
In short: one (1) fighting a dual (2) conflict with others over a suggestion made by one outside the conflict, hence the third (3) hidden hand.
Example: "in nomine patris et filii et spiritus sancti"...another makes a suggestion in the name of (in nomine) a trinity aka patris (1); filii (2); sancti (3). Oneself consent to belief or disbelief the suggested, which puts everyone consenting into a conflict of reason (believers vs disbelievers)...neither side is aware of the permitted authority of the chosen one making suggestions in the name of (in nomine). Why? Because each side already gave willing consent to the suggested, and both are now busy reasoning against one another.
In short: ones consent (1) reasoning with others (2) the one suggesting what others are reasoning about (3). If 1 consents to 2; then 3 is being permitted to exploit both.
solein
SOLE (only) EIN (German; one)...there can be only one aka all for one and one for all aka alone...ALL(in)ONE. All equals one in energy; which differentiates internally into each one being.
Let's go over his "recipe"
RECIPE, noun (Latin imperative of recipio, to take.) aka utilizing suggestion to command (imperative) others to consent (take). How to formulate a suggestion? By use of spell-craft aka crafting spells (words), which enchants ones mind (enchantment) aka WITCH, verb - "to bewitch; to fascinate; to enchant" + CRAFT, noun - "art; skill; manual trade".
Eric Dubay: 200 Proofs Earth is Not a Spinning Ball - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Ax_YpQsy88
Note, the term "value"
Only within value (perceivable) can there be evaluation (perception)...suggested values tempt one to ignore that.
It is a mythical perception
Suggested information represents the mytho (spoken aka suggested) logy (logic aka reason) within perceivable inspiration.
cling to valuation
Aka ones consent to suggested values by another.
a fake value
a) If perception (evaluation) ignores perceivable (value) for suggested worth, then that shapes a conflict of reason (real vs fake).
b) Value imports loss (inception towards death); evaluation exports growth (life).
That says 18. Not 9.
No notation for zero, and the numeric values for individual letters are added together (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9)...in this example 1+8=9.
jewmatria
There are multiple layers of utilizing numerology (numbers and logic/reason) to deceive one from foundation...nature (whole) only designates units (partials), hence each individual ONE (Latin unus).
Ones addition (inception); ones subtraction (death); ones multiplication (intercourse for offspring) and ones division (whole into partial).
11-year-old...caring for him for 18 months
9/11 encoding.
Less joy; more Passione Italiana...
i'mma just pretend...and call out all your shit
a) notice the use of implication (if/then) to call out the tricks of reason (alambicchi della ragione).
b) notice also that alambicchi translate to "stills", hence implication being based on motion, while reasoning implies over affixed definitions.
Perceivable (moving) or suggested (still) aka need to let go of or want to hold onto...a choice.
ma poi alla gente piace interpretare
Aka the temptation to interpret perceivable (sound) with suggested (words), while shaping "e fa ancora più casino!".
I wouldn't be so reduced like you people are
"express yourself; don't repress yourself...and I'm not sorry; it's human nature".
no peace for anyone until they are wiped out.
a) SHLOMO (Hebrew šālôm, peace) aka shalom, solomon.
b) solomon aka "alone peaceful" implies "among warlike", hence if alone peaceful, then among other ones warlike. That's why "one" needs to wipe out "they" aka resisting suggested pluralism.
c) WIPE (to clean by rubbing) for resistance (life) within velocity (inception towards death) implies separation by friction (rub).
a) everything perceivable implies natural (produced; generated through action)...everyone perceiving within implies a "reaction" to everything perceivable, hence a generated product.
b) ignoring perceivable production for suggestions by other products implies ignoring natural (sound) for artificial (words).
Therefore; the suggested; artificial description by others, and ones consent to it, implies "nano-tech" aka lessening (nano) self with artificial (tech), while ignoring natural.