like they know everything
Everything (perceivable) implies knowledge for each thing (perception) within..."like" ignores difference of knowledge, and "they" ignores singularity of knowledge.
No sources no links no anything
All implies source; each one within an effect...links imply affection (suggested) to one another, while ignoring source (perceivable).
Nature doesn't link beings together...it sets each one apart from one another with free will of choice.
Like it must be true because I said so n stuff
Because implies "causing being"...an internal differentiation.
- "like" implies differences put together.
- "true" implies two different sides coming together in conflict (true vs false).
- "said" implies the articulation of sound into words held onto aka a coming together of different letters.
- "stuff" implies freely moving differences stuffed together, while restricting each others different expressions.
no sources
Suggested information cannot ever give the one consenting to it the source of it. It's ones consent to suggested which tricks ones perception to willingly ignore the source of all perceivable.
Also...there cannot be multiple sources; only one cause for any multiplication of effects within.
Multiple implies "many fold"...few utilize suggestion to fold consensus among many. Underneath how ever many folds there can be only ONEs consent to the suggested.
Another example...there's a manifold of religions, yet each ONE is based upon ONEs consent to the suggestion of another ONE.
To join together ignores being one apart from one another.
People must unite
UNITED kingdom implies those within to be united, hence the conflict among those being mixed together.
Divide & Conquer
Implies a divided few (sovereign) among a united many (commonwealth). The con in conquer implies "together"...a singular cannot be conquered; only a plural.
willing to risk
Risking implies taking a chance, which ignores being given choice.
The idea is to understand that the Gov can no longer be supported.
Ones consent to suggested idealism supports others to govern ones mind.
must defend...not attack
To choose either side binds one into conflict with the other. It doesn't matter if a boxer defends or attacks, for as long as he's in the ring...he looses.
That ring is called "reason" aka attack vs defense...a fictitious conflict. Reasoning tempts one to attach/attack oneself to a side, while ignoring ones de (life) fence (inception towards death).
failure on the cross
Failure OF the cross... https://img.gvid.tv/i/39TaEXFj.png
Being (life) moved a-cross (inception towards death) implies rising during fall, hence failure of the cross.
A Cataclysmic Event Is About To Occur
a) Cata/kata (down) clysmic/klyzein (to wash). As form (life) within flow (inception towards death)...growing implies anaclysm, and loosing implies cataclysm.
b) Event/evenire - "coming out" implies form coming out of flow. Therefore...being alive implies the only event one can experience.
c) Occur aka ob (towards) currere (to run) implies forms choice to run away from preceding flow, hence away from cause and towards effect...which others exploit by "affect".
d) About/onbutan - "on the outside of; around the circumference of, enveloping"... https://www.etymonline.com/word/about
A jew suggests aboutism to tempt gentiles...from inside (perception) into outside (suggestion); from center (ones choice) towards circumference (chosen one), and from being free into becoming enveloped into bondage to another.
central bankers
a) https://riverbank.biz/ ...it's the running current in-between banks; not the suggested currency. Putting trust into any bank gets one stranded aka solidifies ones access to liquidity.
b) The center of flow (inception towards death) implies form (life)
c) What if solid (perception) within fluid (perceivable) can be tricked into a trade (consent to suggestion)? And what if a jew took down the "center of world trade" among gentiles?
Hoarding Gold
Hoarding ignores malleability. As solid within fluid...malleability implies adaptation.
Running Price Up
A solid within a fluid can only run down...others set prices up to distract from that.
to insane levels in every currency
a) Insane aka "within sound" implies the only current for each one within.
b) Level implies the balance underneath ones choice, not whatever one chooses to stack upon each other.
Once again...others suggest one to "level up", as to distract one from falling down.
doubled in price
A price implies a suggested value, which tricks ones choice to choose one half (suggestion) over the other half (perception).
Consenting to any price (suggested) slashes ones evaluation (perception) of value (perceivable) in half.
A jew suggests progressivism by tempting gentiles with prices "on the double".
"Double time" is a type of pay where an employee earns twice their normal hourly rate, typically for working extra hours under special circumstances, such as holidays or excessive overtime...that's how one is being tricked to spend effort for something doubled in price. It's just a carrot on a stick.
The foundation for double...ignoring one for two. There can be only one...god; energy; whole; all; cause; action; flow, and each one within....christ; power; partial; one; effect; reaction; form.
If it's acting; then the scene was directed. If directed, then why would actors signal each other instead of simply following the script given?
Ufo's are real.
Nature doesn't identify (make equal); it differs each flying (inception towards death) object (life) from one another. What does object imply? Ob (towards) ye (to throw)... https://www.etymonline.com/word/object
Ifo's are fiction.
The current Dalai Lama
Only nature implies current for each being within. Few suggest "Dalai Lama" to tempt consenting many to hold an artificial consensus together, while ignoring natural current.
Dalai implies "ocean" aka oculus/okw - "to see" referring to the current (perceivable) one sees (perception). Lama implies "to cross over"...that's how few utilize suggestion in the name of dalai to tempt consenting many to lama.
free country
Counting holds ones free will of choice accountable. To remain free one needs to resist the wanted temptation to "reckon together" aka to count.
Now check this out...country not only implies "one's native land", but also country/contra aka "against one another"... https://www.etymonline.com/word/country
buddhist
-ist (buddhist) implies ones consent to a suggested -ism (buddhism)...doing that corrupts buddha/bheudh - "be aware" aka ones perception within all perceivable.
Joining Buddhism aka reckoning together (counting) turns one against Buddha, hence away from nature and against one another.
homeless
If few have "more homes", then many have "less homes"...that's the origin of homelessness.
just kill
Killing isn't just...it implies evening the odds. Only nature implies just for each odd being within. Few suggest killing to tempt odds against one another to get even with many.
Altman: "do you believe" + Carlson: "it shakes the faith"
A sleight of hand from both about the nature of the narrative being make believe.
To believe implies holding onto a side within a conflict, in this case murder vs suicide aka staking ones faith. While doing that one ignores that nature continues to move, which thereby shakes ones staked position loose.
To resolve the conflict (murder vs suicide) one needs to resist the wanted temptation to turn against (versus) by choosing one side over the other. Only then can one discern that suicide implies murder and vice versa. Taking from others or from self ignores all given.
Nature sows aka scatters the seed of each being apart from one another, which allows each being to reap within all sown aka to ripen as the fruit.
A grim reaper reaps the living fruit during the process of dying instead of growing self aka feeding upon others.
Also...grim/grima - "goblin" aka gobbling up resources.
The word "sandwich" has "wich" in it, that sounds like "witch". Guess that must mean all sandwiches are cursed demonic food now.
As in John Montague, Earl of Sandwich aka founder of orientalist societies... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Montagu%2C_4th_Earl_of_Sandwich
The magic of Orientalism... https://www.jstor.org/stable/48686920
by math
If God implies 1; then does 2 imply double God and 0 no God?
Couldn't Have Been Taken
That's the issue...if being has free will of choice, then taking (want) whatever is given (need) becomes ones struggle among others who suggest what one doesn't need.
Narratives like the moon-landing are designed to keep those who fail to struggle within a controlled environment. Imagine the benefits for self if one can confine another into the controlled environment "infinite space"?
Now imagine being mentally confined within infinite space...how would one ever notice that confinement?
I agree with everybody online; both right and left, who are saying "this does not look right"
a) Doesn't changing sides change what one looks at?
b) Putting both right and left together...doesn't that prevent one from seeing differences?
c) How can one agree with everybody, when each body is separated from one another, hence in discriminatory position to one another?
d) To agree implies choosing one side (agree) over the other (disagree), which putting both left and right together contradicts.
liberals are waking up
Being at liberty implies to another, hence under control, and thereby following orders given.
former anti-conspiracy
What if pro vs anti (a conflict of reason) implies the conspiracy...no matter which side one chooses?
Edit/edere - "to give out", hence ADD IT...a being cannot add anything nature not already provides. It's ignoring natural (perception) for artificial (suggestion) which permits writers; editors; publishers; censors; advertisers etc.
Maybe he entered the wrong link?
a) How would you know what's right or wrong without others transmitting you what's right or wrong?
b) What if ones consent to what others transmit by suggestion establishes an artificial "link", which binds ones natural free will of choice?
c) How could a link be right if it chains what nature frees? On the other hand...how could anything be wrong if one has free will of choice?
a) What if suggested property distracts one from being temporary restored (life) during ongoing damage (inception towards death)?
b) Why was the definition of property/properte (nature, quality, distinctive character always present) changed into "possession; ownership"? https://www.etymonline.com/word/property
c) What if consenting to suggested advocation implies the transfer of ownership?
He wasn't...
The transmission of information about what was or wasn't...where did you get it from? What happens to the conflict between was vs wasn't if the transmission towers of information collapse?
nothing changed
Transmission can only be established during change.
To print implies covering a surface...to be implies center/core/depth exposed. The more surface covered; the less exposure of being.
The jewish monopoly of printing is about advertisement aka turning the gentile mind away from perceivable towards suggested.
Mono implies each suggesting jew; poly implies the consensus of consenting gentiles...that's why gentiles cannot use print to wake each other up. Whatever ones prints feeds the consensus.
Printing "stop consuming" feeds the contradiction of those consuming the printed. That's like using temptation to teach those tempted to resist temptation.
Communist directive
COM (together) + UNI (apart)...hence using a word as label to put both together into a contradiction. Direction (inception towards death) sets directed (life) apart from one another.
label
Aka lab/lap (to lay one part over another, lay in such a way as to cover part of something underneath) + el (God/whole/all). That's how suggested labels perceivable...if consented to.
What's the opposite of label? Generic! As in nature generating being. A jew suggests gentiles to ignore generic for that which is labeled with a brand.
Work (motion) > spirit (momentum) > flesh (matter)...linear progression; not a turning against (vs) one another.
Everything is predicted and planned except stocks.
The predicted currency implies "nothing" aka a fictitious value, suggested by a jew at will, and held onto by gentiles in denial of reality.
Stocks imply the gentile "life-stock", which even in denial has free will of choice, hence being way less predictable.
wrong
Right vs wrong implies a circular conflict...inception towards death a linear progression. A jew tempts gentiles to choose a side within circular conflicts called "reason", while ignoring linear progression.
Impalement
Im (within) pale (to fasten) ment (mind)...a jew suggests progressivism to fasten within the minds of gentiles an idea of being able to reach an outcome faster.
begin
Aka generated (gin) being (be), which implies an internal separation.
commence
Aka com (together) initiare (to initiate)...an inversion of nature discharging each being apart from one another.
undertake
Nature GIVES being an IN-BETWEEN position...a jew tempts gentiles to TAKE suggested from UNDER the above positioned jew.
Latin capere to take
Nature implies a process giving each being potential...taking anything implies possession restricting potential.
ingest
In (within) gest/gerere (to carry) aka being (life) carried (inception towards death) within nature, which is why a being implies digest aka divide carriage.
pike
No matter how many bodies one physically impales...the mental impalement continues to destroy life way more efficiently, because it operates unnoticed, and doesn't have to make a spectacle for others.
Battery/batter/battle...choosing a side within any conflict of reason implies a battery called "consensus".