there's stuff going on around us that we can't see
All perceivable moves straight through each ones perception, hence establishing sight. It's circular logic turning into conflicts of reason, which prevents one from thinking straight.
Holding onto suggested information prevents one from seeing perceivable inspiration.
Like the clairvoyants
Clair (clear) voyant (to see) implies differentiation (ones perception) within sameness (all perceivable)...likeness obscures clarity.
see dead people
Living implies within the process of dying, so all one can see are the living dead. It's suggested outcomes like "afterlife"; which mystifies death into something people don't want to see.
float out of their body
Flowing in (inception) and out (death) of ones body (life)...that's the status quo of being.
other realm
Being implies RE (ones response) AL (all)...RE (responding) to ALM (charitable relief of the poor) permits others to run charitable foundations, while keeping wealth from the poor.
go in a machine
Machine/magh- "to be able, have power"...consenting to a suggestion empowers others, while denying self of power. The use of suggestion to tempt others into denial, while drawing power is called magh-ick.
Sleight of hand: "Welcome to the Machine" by Pink Floyd.
something with "vibration"
Each one (matter) within vibra (momentum) tion (motion)...not some/sum/sem (one with another).
how to manipulate reality
Manipulate/manipulus - "to fill by hand"...doing that implies fiction. Reality raises the hand (life) during fill/fall (inception towards death).
Few manipulate reality with fiction by influencing many with suggestion to hold onto information by consent, hence "informed consent".
witches in the occult
A witch operates within all revealed (perceivable), while crafting spells (suggested) to conceal anyone falling for it.
Many are "in the occult" when ignoring perceivable reality for suggested fiction by few, which in return prevents natures ongoing revelation to reach those hiding from it.
fast healing
Health/helge (holy; whole) + sick/seek (cause to pursue)...if one seeks outcomes, then one ignores being an effect within whole cause.
Fasting implies resisting the temptation to hold onto...not to reach a desired outcome faster.
searched for the word healing
Sound heals...words sicken those who hold onto them.
infowars
"new data" implies INFO; "white vs black aka british vs foreign aka minority vs majority" implies WAR.
That's how it works...few suggest information to tempt many to choose a side within a war aka a conflict of reason.
Nature neither suggests information; nor does it turn beings against one another.
education
Education/educere - "to bring out" implies action (inception towards death) bringing out reactions (life)...not many students held within by few teachers.
School/skholē/segh - "idleness; a holding back"... https://www.etymonline.com/word/school
Look at the choices they give us in the "alt media"
a) Only balance gives (inception) and takes (death) choice (life)...taking suggested choices gives up ones free will of choice.
b) Look/lock contradicts alternation by choice aka adaptation. A jew utilizes suggestion to tempt gentiles look at/lock onto suggested by consent.
c) Each one (perception) within all (perceivable) implies "alternating mediation". Any suggested media tempts one to ignore ones position at the middle/medius/media of all.
InfoWars
Aka suggested information tempting those who consent into war (conflicts of reason). It doesn't matter what the information is or from which side it wages war against the other...only ones consent to any suggested side matters.
One side wants...the other wants
It's want vs not want tempting one to ignore being want (life) within need (inception towards death).
It's all leading to the same place, a One World Order
a) All implies same direction (inception towards death) for each ones different placement (life) within.
b) There can be only one order...natural order. Any artifical orders tempt those who follow to run in circles aka circular logic turning into conflicts of reason against one another.
satanists
A jew suggests -isms (satanism) to shape consenting gentiles into -ists (satanist).
Satan implies "adversary, one who plots against another", which refers to gentiles turning against one another, after consenting to a jewish suggestion.
Nature straightens; artifice turns...thinking straight requires ones resistance to the temptation of circular logic turning into conflicts of reason.
A poll found that 82%...
Poll/pol - "head" implies one by one...percent aka per centum implies by the hundred.
Pol-itics tempts many to cast votes for representatives among few, hence contradicting one by one. Suggested polls then tempt the ignorant many to ignore perceivable whole for a suggested proportion of the whole amount by the hundred.
Israel want to...
Israel aka the jewish people aka the hebrew nation aka yisra'el - "he that striveth with God" implies each ones struggle to resist want during need.
A jew suggests polls and percentages to tempt gentiles to ignore need for want.
God himself says that the entire people of Israel is evil (Ezk 3:4-7, 5:4-8)
Ezekiel suggesting in the name of God tempts consenting gentiles to break the first commandment aka "thou shalt have no other gods before me". These gentiles also ignore ezekiel/yehezqel aka hazaq (to strengthen) el (god), which is what tempting others into ignoring resistance establishes...strength of being fed back into origin.
God implies perceivable sound...not suggested words shaped within perceivable.
religious leaders were responsible
Religion/religio - "to bind anew" implies the response of followers, willingly choosing to bind themselves to leaders, when giving consent to any suggestion.
Consent shirks ones response-ability (free will of choice) onto a chosen ones suggestion.
the people of Israel themselves
Yisra'el implies each singular ones perception within perceivable...not suggested pluralism.
There's also no people OF israel, but only each isra of EL (god).
the Bible clearly states
The mental state of ones sight in-between covers, when reading any book, implies ignorance of perceivable for suggested.
A book obscures clarity...if a reader reads/re - "to reason", hence establishing a conflict of reason about suggested words within perceivable sound.
I'm just quoting the Bible.
a) I'm (I am aka je-suis aka jesus) isn't morally righteous (just)...but the dishonest taking into possession of what God divines/divides apart from one another, hence Christ/christen - "to anoint".
Potential (life) during procession (inception towards death) cannot take anything into possession without destroying self and others.
b) Quote/quot - "how many"... https://www.etymonline.com/word/quote tempts one to ignore that there can be only each one within all oneness. That's why quoting God (e nomine aka speaking in the name of) denies singularity of God.
a) Pride/prith also implies price/prise/prize/praise...hence the price one pays when ignoring demon aka dai (to divide) mon (to provide).
b) To extent; throw; send; direct implies nature extending/throwing/sending/directing (inception towards death) each being (life) by providing (mon) division (dia).
c) Month/mene (moon) from me (to measure)...that's how the natural division provided is being inverted through measurement aka minds holding onto value (price). Doing that permits others to suggest prizes/prices for one to sell out to.
"Everyone has a price, the important thing is to find out what it is" ~Pablo Escobar
d) Sanskrit aka san/sem (one together with) + krta/kwer (to make form) implies ones consent making form out of another ones suggestion...while ignoring that nature provides flow (perceivable) to divide form (perception) from one another into part (particular) hayati (life).
a new political party
a) "What has been will be again, what has been done will be done again; there is nothing new under the sun" ~ Ecclesiastes 1:9
b) The last time the US left became too radical; the overtone window was moved towards the right, which established liberal vs conservative as well as far-right vs far-left. For more look into E. Michael Jones work on the "Birth of Conservatism".
The same jewish trick of rebranding is being played right now...
c) To be implies a partial within whole of nature...joining any "party" tempts one to ignore this, while denying self for others.
healthy alternative
To alternate implies adaptation by choice...not holding onto a choice within a conflict of reason (healthy vs ill).
Israel is arming
Arm/ar - "to fit together", hence Greek arthron - "a joint"... https://www.etymonline.com/word/arm
That's what each jew tempts gentiles to do...join together, which in return permits each jew to israel/yisra'el - "he that striveth with God" aka struggle for separation/apartheid... https://www.amazon.com/People-Apart-Europe-1789-1939-History/dp/0198219806
Gentiles are tricked to ignore the perceivable implication of arms (join together) and weapons (free will of choice) by a jew arming gentiles with weapons to fight each other.
Wahhabism is a sect
Sect/seco - "to divide"...consenting to any suggested -ism tempts one to ignore that by joining together what nature divides apart from one another.
Wahhab (to bestow) implies given naturally (perception)...not artificially (suggestion). Same trick with sunnism aka sunna "way of action", which implies nature acting a way (inception towards death) for each reacting being (life) within.
It's consenting to the -isms which tempts gentiles against each other and into circular logic aka a circle drawn around ones cubic (left/right + up/down + front/back) perception called the KABBA (cube).
Gaza
Gasa - "to gape" aka to look with open mouth, and hence with the bumpkin's idle curiosity, listlessness, or ignorant wonder. Gaza/gasa is about the jewish mockery of gentile ignorance.
Is this all
This implies that...so this cannot represent "all". Few tempting many to collectivize this or that as "all"...that's how public opinion is being shaped.
Opinion implies private, hence "everyone's a critic"...
The "planet" deception is a prison for your mind that is self perpetual
a) Plane (inception towards death) perpetuates mind (life). The division of plane into mind implies a "prism" aka a solid (life) whose sides are parallel (inception towards death).
b) The "T" added to plane implies "tee" aka the letters ability to hold (tenere/tenir), which is why a golf-tee upholds the ball.
The "letters ability" refers to the letter (ones consent) enabling another (suggestion). This trick is also used by subtracting the "T" from satan into nasa, hence T minus... 9,8,7,6,5,4,3,2,1...liftoff.
a) Prison implies primary (pri) sound/sonos (son)...each being implies secondary/seco (to divide) instrument.
b) A prism implies a solid (life) whose sides are parallel (inception towards death) aka lying in the same plane but never meeting in either direction.
The division of all perceivable into each ones perception implies a free "prism", while ones consent to any suggestion implies a confining "prison".
changes everything and nothing at the same time permalink
If everything changes, then nothing implies each things denial of change. Others suggest "same time" to tempts ones denial of everything (same) changing into each thing (difference).
There are more important things than the shape of
Flow imports form...shapes imply a formed export within flow.
- Preside; verb - "to be set above others".
Nature sets each being (perception) at the center (perception) of all (perceivable); hence as above/so below. Few suggest presidents to tempt many to set themselves below.
replace
Replacement implies ones response (re) to position (place) of mind (ment)...consenting to a suggestion permits others to deposit suggested information within ones mind, which is how a golem/goyim can be controlled from outside.
I'm rooting for you
Being implies growth (life) within loss (inception towards death)...rooting for another uproots self.
Palantir aka Palan (far) Tir (to watch over) aka a far-seer aka PHAR-I-SEE... https://www.etymonline.com/word/Pharisee
How was it broken?
Nature breaks beings apart from one another...beings tempt each other together with artifice.
fill the Caliphate
Caliphate/khalifa - "successor; succeed". Succession during procession implies ongoing separation (inception towards death) of temporary beings (life)...filling up on artificial possessions only tempts one to ignore nature.
jews and Muslims fought together against the Crusaders
Crusade/crux - "cross"...one cannot fight together while being (life) moved A CROSS (inception towards death).
False. Who or what is getting "destroyed"??
True vs false tempts one (life) to ignore change (inception towards death)...hence holding onto a SIDE corrupting ones SIGHT.
This isn't a gun, bomb, missile war.
a) There can be only one weapon...ones weapon of choice. No gun; bomb or missile could be utilized without it.
b) Ideological war implies a conflict of reason (war) based on circular thinking (logic) over suggested ideas (ideo)...that's the foundation for any gun; bomb or missile war.
Using reason is NOT going to destroy anything
a) Nothing (not) implies the inversion of everything aka ones de-nial of perceivable for suggested...that's self destructive logic, which turns into mutual destruction within the resulting conflicts of reason.
b) Nature uses; each one within re-uses nature. Few tempt many to ignore that by suggesting them to use artifice within nature.
When was the last time refuting and defending resulted in actual damage?
a) Time aka holding onto past; present; future, while ignoring ones presence within the perceivable moment(um) of motion aka now.
b) Suggested abortion tempts gentiles into a conflict of reason...pro-life vs pro-choice. It's this conflict of reason which sustains abortion, because it keeps many busy against each other, while ignoring that few are aborting the off-spring of many.
And to add insult to injury...being alive implies having choice; while having choice implies being alive. Pro-life vs pro- choice represents an asinine contradiction. "Hey goyim, which side do you choose...life or choice?"
If two people argue in a house, will the house explode?
If implies then...a separation by motion. Two implies one separated unit of matter holding onto another one within a conflict of reason, while ignoring the natural separation of motion (inception towards death) into matter (life).
Ignorance implies an implosion. The argueMENT happens within ones mind, which is also where the enemy resides...en-e-my (within me).
The only thing reasons "tempts"...
The only thing implies ONE...reason implies a duel (one vs one) aka dual-ism (two). Reasoning contradicts the only thing.
hate growth
Growth (life) implies ones struggle within loss (inception towards death)...love vs hate implies growth vs growth, while ignoring loss aka the temptation to ignore resisting.
the Ken Ham vs Bill Nye debate. There was a "winner" there
Two losers fighting within a ring...the one losing less being declared a "winner" from outside the ring. Whatever those losers were debating...others losers will continue to debate each other over.
Win/winnan/wennanan - "to seek to gain"... https://www.etymonline.com/search?q=win
Coming into being implies one (perception) gaining access to all (perceivable)...seeking to gain more than all is offering one...that's self destructive denial of reality for fiction.
"analysis implies separation"...Ehh, no it doesn't.
- ANAL'YSIS, noun - "the separation of a compound body into its constituent parts"... https://webstersdictionary1828.com/Dictionary/analysis
- Ana (throughout) lysis/leu (to loosen, divide, cut apart)... https://www.etymonline.com/word/analysis
I'm not tempted to ignore anything.
Everything moves each thing apart from one another...focusing on anything tempts one to ignore everything else.
Being implies resistance (life) within temptation (inception towards death); hence everything tempting one to ignore resisting.
Ignorance implies the path (inception towards death) of least resistance (life).
When have YOU ever been "tempted" to ignore anything?
Whenever one chooses want over need. Reasoning implies want vs not want, while ignoring need.
Test this by holding your breath...does wanting vs not wanting to breathe change the need to breathe, or does the artificial conflict tempt one to temporary ignore the ongoing force of nature?
Nothing can't tempt anything if it tried.
Everything forces each thing to adapt...ignoring to adapt implies the temptation. To distract from ones ignorance...others are suggesting nihil-ism (nihilo; nothing) to tempt ones willing de-nial of perceivable for suggested. The resulting conflict of reason (yes vs no) distracts one with others from resisting ignorance, which represents each ones "trial" within natural law.
SIDE 1: Word analysis
Analysis implies ones sight...not one side against another.
SIDE 2: Reason
Reasoning against one another is based on ones consent to suggested words, hence a synthesis of consent (to buy) and suggested (to sell) aka a binding contract for ones "free" will of choice with the happy merchant of temptation, who tricked both sides to sell out by buying into mutual destruction.
Which side do you pick?
Balance allows free will of choice to pick...picking a side imbalances choice.
Nature doesn't suggest sides...nature (all perceivable) generates sight (ones perception).
Do you continue
Continue/continere - "to hold together"...being implies apart from one another, while needing to let go of whatever one wants to hold onto, hence wielding free will of choice within a need/want balance.
One cannot hold onto need, while holding onto want establishes an imbalance against not want.
Please tell us how that is a "bad thing".
a) Nature moves sound straight through...words (logos) tempt circular thinking inwardly (logic), which turns against one another outwardly (reason).
b) Pleading implies wanting, while ignoring need.
c) A thing implies a partial within whole; separated from one another. Good vs bad reasoning turns things against one another artificially, while ignoring natural separation.
Just accept it
If being implies form (life) within flow (inception towards death); then both acceptance and denial destroys being. Only resisting the temptation to hold onto sustains being.
choose reason
a) Choice implies within balance...choosing to hold onto any side implies imbalance for choice.
b) Reason implies a conflict towards outcome (winning vs losing)...choice implies adaptation to origin, hence reason tempting one with suggested outcomes to TURN from perceivable origin. An inversion.
it is a far better exercise
Both sides within any conflict of reason consent to VS aka versus/verto - "to turn" aka turning against each other for mutual destruction.
A conflict of reason cannot be dissolved by those fighting each other within it, only by resisting the temptation to hold onto either side, which would sustain ones choice within balance.
Conflicts of reason are 10X superior to word analysisism.
a) Can you name one conflict of reason that was dissolved?
b) Notice the sleight of hand for those with eyes to see...RE (ones response to) SON (all sound), hence resonance...not conflicts of dissonance.
c) Analysis implies separation; both words and -isms imply combination.
Imbalance implies an artificial combination of choice vs choice; while being choice within balance implies a natural separation.
d) There can be only one....one for all and all for each one within. 0 (nothing) tempts one to ignore 1 (everything).
Both sides take massive leaps of faith
a) Nature gives choice in-between sides...taking any side ignores choice.
b) Consenting to a suggestion implies choosing a side...want or not want, while ignoring perceivable need.
c) Perception needs to respond to origin (perceivable)...suggestion tempts one to "leap" towards outcome.
Why do...talk about
Because speech aka dis-course was suggested by another to tempt one off-course. What does a course imply? Onward movement! What does dis-course imply? Circular logic turning into conflicts of reason!
timelines has been distorted
a) Line implies ongoing motion; time implies temporary measurement...holding onto measurements tempts one to ignore being moved.
b) Dis (to divide) tort (to twist)...to be implies division (life) of line (inception towards death)...holding onto measurements implies a twist aka circular logic.
ABEL was murdered by CAIN.
Being able implies being enabled...taking possession (cain/i can) over self disables ones potential (able/abel).
Now compare "able" and "I can" with Abel the shepherd (herding sheep) and Cain the farmer (renting land)...the ability to herd is enabled by sheep, while renting out land is based on taking possession of property.
It's taking possession over sheep which transformed herding into livestock farming, which implies mass murder. Just because I CAN (cain) doesn't mean one was enABLEd (abel) to do so...
you are trying to get people's foundations to shape their beliefs?
Shape implies matter; foundation implies motion...believing implies holding onto matter, while ignoring motion. I try to break apart the matter others are mentally and physically holding onto so that the ignored move-ment of nature can be perceived without suggestive restrictions shaped by others.
people's OWN ideas
Matter cannot own anything within motion, since motion moves possessions out of the grasp of matter.
Few suggest ideas (idealism) to tempt many to hold onto ideas (idolatry)...hence getting owned aka possessed by suggested possessions.
Any idea tempts one to ignore that others are shaping (idealism); reshaping (revisionism) and contradicting (talmudic reasoning) whatever one holds onto...on the fly...from outside.
Ideas represent a remote control for idols held onto.
convince them
Again with the CON (together) shaping the (pluralism them), while ignoring to be a singular apart from one another.
You are not a "them"...joining "them" does not make you more than one. Counting others together as "them", while using the word "them" to speak in the name of others does not make you more than one...but if easily distracts anyone consenting to the suggestion thereof.
a) Contra implies turning against another, which binds "free" will of choice together.
b) Both CONtradict and CONsistent implies "together", while being implies apart from one another, hence off-spring.
c) Exact implies ones EX-pression within all ACTion...suggested beliefs; methods and worldviews are suppressing that; if consented to.
Sleight of hand by Madonna: "express yourself; don't repress yourself...and I'm not sorry...it's human nature".
d) Self doesn't imply CON (together) but intercourse through another for the perpetuation of self by off-spring.
tl;dr: What I'm trying to describe isn't a belief; method or worldview, but the foundation within others are shaping beliefs; methods and worldviews to get control over one.
Pattern recognition...
Patent/patente - "open". Only nature reveals perceivable towards perception...suggested patents and trademarks are concealing ones mind from nature, while permitting others to conceal by license.