nature teaches us that in the realm of plants and animals changes and further formations occur
Nature implies animation planting each formed being....animal; plant, and human formations represent artificial categories of the mind.
transform
Flow (inception towards death) transfers form (life)...
the
Aka suggested the-ism tempting many to give few authority to speak in the name of God (theos).
real
Aka ones response (re) to all (al)...not to the fiction suggested by another.
ones
One implies singular...a chosen one suggests pluralism to invert this.
anything that isn't about jews
What conspiracy isn't about jewish involvement?
a) The chutzpah of rubbing in that migration prevents a jury of ones peers.
b) On the other hand...peer/par (equal) implies natural law judging each different being within. It's the courts of men which are artificial, hence "judge not, lest ye be judged" ~Matthew 7:1
If there's only one God, then there can be only one value (perceivable) for each ones evaluation (perception) therein.
Any conflict about values implies denial of God.
profiting by politics
What if public affairs (politics) distract one from private (life) affair (inception towards death) aka being set apart within that one has to do?
What if profit implies "set forward"... https://www.etymonline.com/word/profit and only loss (inception towards death) can set forth profit (life)?
This capitalistic people
Capital implies capit (head) al (all) aka each ones head (perception) within all (perceivable)...what if consenting to suggestions by another permits the suggested into ones head?
the unscrupulous exploitation of men
Exploit implies "outcome of action"...being implies reaction (life) coming in (inception) and out (death) of action.
Why should one doubt (scruple) those who seek death over life?
how to get the leadership
By suggesting vessels to follow willingly.
by acting both on the Right and on the Left
A chosen one reacts to an enacting left/right balance...those who choose representative government bind themselves into a left vs right imbalance.
Within nature...left and right cannot turn against one another, yet each being within has the free will of choice to ignore natural for artificial, which shapes make-believe conflicts.
greed of money
What if a jew offers gentiles money for free by simply suggesting artificial prices upon natural value? What if taking money by free will of choice becomes exponentially more expensive for oneself to hold onto...since all natural value moves?
What is more greedy? Offering currency in exchange for interest or taking currency including interest upon self?
hard- heartedness
What if being implies solid (life) struggling to sustain self within fluid (inception towards death)?
What if temptation softens even the hardest resistance?
alienated from its own people
a) What if nature separating each being from one another implies alienation? What if ignoring nature by artificially coming together implies an alien invasion?
What if each jew defense itself from an alien invasion by gentiles?
b) What if ignoring person (singular) for people (plural) permits each jew to own gentiles collectively?
He exploited the poor
Poor or rich implies a measurement aka ones mind TAKING measure, while ignoring all GIVEN. A jew simply exploits gentiles by taking advantage over whoever ignores given.
took everything from you and made you a slave
a) What if a jew suggests public affairs (politic) to tempt gentiles to take part in it willingly aka shirking response-ability onto representative government?
b) What if everything perceivable cannot be taken...only denied by ones perception when taking suggestions by another? What if denial aka nihilo (nothing) implies the inversion of everything?
the Führer is deeply religious
Religion aka re (to respond) ligio (to bind) implies follower selecting leader...
There's a great German saying: "Jemanden an der Nase rum-FÜHREN" (to lead around by the nose) aka to deceive someone.
a) "Having nothing" implies the fantasy tempting ones devotion to deny reality aka each thing being processed within everything aka all running through each one aka cold (inception towards death) running through hot (life)...
b) Charles/carl (bondsman; common man, man of low birth) + Darwin/deorwine (dear friend)...with friends like these who needs enemies?
a) Non (nothing) contradicts all (everything).
b) Christ (to anoint) implies the separation of everything into each thing.
c) Views taken (plural) contradicts sight given (singular). What came first...sight given or view taken? The answer...God aka all giving.
afterlife
a) What if living implies the state in-between...not before or after?
b) What if before implies forwarded being, and after/aft - "off; away"?
c) If being alive implies within the process of dying, then living adapting to dying...wouldn't that describe "afterlife communication" ?
If one sets self further apart (analysis), then could one learn about ones ancestors?
communication
What if together (com) tempts one (uni) to ignore being forwarded away within action (ation)?
modern
If modern implies "existing now", then how could ancient and futuristic exist outside perceivable now?
What if one can only perceive "now"...never before or after?
godless
a) How could there be more than God?
b) What if less vs more implies a conflict among partials within God?
c) What if being within God implies an ongoing lessening (inception towards death) allowing temporary growth (life)?
- Deuteronomy aka deuteros (second) nomos (law) implies the division (seco) of natural law into each being within...immigration together contradicts that.
- Curse/course/kers - "onward movement" + bless/bhel - "to thrive"...only during a curse (inception towards death) can one be blessed (life).
Others suggest that there can be more than one law, and that one can curse and bless one another...that's artificial.
Is there a real chance
Real implies choice given...chance implies fiction taken.
Unity means total freedom.
Unit implies apart from one another. Freedom implies dominance setting free by separation. Total implies without parts.... "meaning" implies holding onto something, while tempting others to do alike aka the building of artificial consensus.
That is something despised by both lefties and righties... true freedom.
a) Choosing left or right; true or false; is or isn't implies binding ones free will of choice into a conflict against another.
b) Freedom implies natural balance setting each beings choice free from one another.
c) Dom gives free...true or false are taken.
Who funded BLM?
The foundation of living matter implies light...black implies the absence of light. A jew suggests Black Lives Matter to invert each gentiles perception of light (discernment) into dark (ignorance).
It's black magic.
Christian influence for society
Christen implies "to anoint" aka the separation of solid within fluid...a jew suggests society-ism (socialism) to invert this by tempting gentiles together.
a negative for society
Positive implies each solid position within fluid aka apart from one another...a jew inverts this by tempting gentiles together, which establishes a feedback loop. György Schwartz for example exploits this under the brand "reflexivity"... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reflexivity_(social_theory)
outcomes...are the cause
There can be only one cause for each effect within. A jew suggests multiple outcomes (plurality) to distract each gentile from discerning self as effect within the one and only cause (singularity).
most of the problems
Nature implies solution for each problematic being within...a jew suggests a) to seek solutions to problems, and b) to summon problems together.
Pro (forward) blem (to throw)... https://www.etymonline.com/word/problem As simple as nature throwing forward each being within.
Time to decouple from Israel. It's just better for the US.
a) Decouple (division of two) contradicts United States (ones together)
b) Israel aka yisra'el (he that striveth with God) implies each ones struggle to resist the temptation of uniting states together.
No offense to
God offers everything through each thing within...no/not/nothing implies suggested nihilo-ism tempting ones de-nial of everything perceivable.
we love you
a) We implies an artificial plurality tempting one to ignore natural singularity.
b) Love implies versus hate...an artificial conflict among beings who ignore nature.
c) You originates from I AM (je suis; jesus) aka taking possession over oneself, while branding everyone else into a YOU ARE (judah).
Nature implies a singular process (inception towards death) generating each singular potential (life)...no plurality; no conflict; no taking possession unless willingly ignored.
How do we do that?
a) Letting go of we (plural) to discern one (singular).
b) Doing implies nature; re-doing implies being within nature.
a) All implies procession; each one within implies potential...own implies possession. A process cannot be owned; but the potential to ignore process given by taking into possession is offered towards free will of choice.
b) Allow aka ad (forwards) laud (to praise)... https://www.etymonline.com/word/allow
Value (all perceivable) forwards evaluation (ones perception)...that's ones allowance. Others invert praise into price, which tempts one to willingly forfeit (ignorance) ones allowance (discernment) aka the battle between the forces of light and darkness (within self; not against one another).
One's choice (whole or fraction)
One's choice cannot be whole...only a fraction (matter) adapting to balance (momentum) of whole (motion).
Others suggest a sum of fractions, while calling it whole. If one consents, then one permits another to alter the sum and any fraction within. Furthermore...the sum of fractional consent implies consensus.
One's choice alters, is not altered
All implies change aka alternation of each one within...choice adapts to being altered by both all (need) and one another (want).
Being implies breaking within whole action
Others invert this by exchanging breaking (analysis) with uniting (synthesis), hence suggesting photo-synthesis for natural light, and photo-analysis for artificial light aka for captured moments (pictures) and artificially moved pictures (movies).
Who did more damage to America...Joseph Göbbels or those who firebombed Dresden?
a) Permitting another to put tempts ones state of mind to pull and affix artifice, while ignoring that nature moves.
b) Few suggest "assassin" to distract many from "sicarii"...the former implies muslim, the latter implies jewish.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sicarii (one of the earliest known cloak and dagger assassination forces).
Using both word and spirit is right
God was right before anyone within can misuse spirit to animate words to one another...
not a fraction of a letter of the Bible would be altered
a) Letter implies ones choice letting a chosen one alter...
b) Fraction implies breaking (fract) action (ion), which cannot be altered by any broken reaction within.
Being implies fract within ion...so coming into being implies alternation aka one (reaction) after another (action).
a) People implies an artificial plural aka counting together what nature separates from one another during a singular process.
b) Neither white (pure light) nor black (absence of light) can be perceived from within the visible spectrum (color) of light...others suggest the labels "white" and "black" to distract from the spectrum of differentiation.
c) Sensing implies adaptation to a moving process...not labeling; measuring; trading and holding onto labels shaped within. Labels are suggested to dull sense/sentience.
a) -ist implies ones consent; -ism implies a suggested consensus...others suggest -isms to tempt ones consent into a consensus. That's how the power of many gets transferred to few.
b) -ist and -ism aside...race/raddix/radius/ray implies each ray (matter) within the spectrum (momentum) of light (motion).
Not the race one belongs to (synthesis), but the ray on represents (analysis) aka each beam (living tree) of light aka each emission (living) during absorption (dying) of light.
Living within the process of dying also implies as a particle-wave within a whole-line, hence each ray bending from one another within a spectrum, which also implies a prism/prison setting each ray within free (will of choice).
Edit: Nigger. Why? Just to see who takes offense, while ignoring offer given...