there is no conspiracy
a) Con-spire aka breathing together. Breathing apart implies relief; breathing together implies contract.
b) All perceivable generates each ones perception through relieving (inception towards death) alleviation (life)...others tempt ones consent into a contract with suggested, which accumulates debt/death as a burden upon life.
pray
Aka putting together that which nature sets apart aka asking for more, while ignoring all that was given.
https://www.azlyrics.com/lyrics/djbobo/pray.html + https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aJbsdoDHUrI
Here's Baumann in 2024 still deceiving the masses with the lion of judah (lies of judea) on his chest... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DJ_BoBo#/media/File:DJ_Bobo,_Ergo_Arena,_02.11.2024_39.jpg
a) The second picture comes closest to depicting knowledge...partials differentiated from one another within a moving whole. The white background implies all perceivable, each different form implies ones perception.
b) The first picture depicts a differentiation of background and form, yet without color aka without a visible spectrum of light. Differentiation implies spectrum.
c) Pictures three to six imply layers of inversion aka drawing together that which nature differentiates apart from one another.
d) Notice that picture four and five suggest light seeking connection...that's a dis-charge; not a re-charge. Few tempt connections among many to establish a circuit of dis-charges, hence short-circuiting re-charging life.
e) Notice that the sixth picture misses a point within the suggested constellation...the viewpoint of each different viewer. Using suggested constellations to distract from ones perception implies the conspiracy.
successful entrepreneur
Entrepreneur/entreprendre - "to undertake" implies taking from under. To establish oneself above; one has to tempt another to stand under while giving.
How? Shape a suggestion to tempt consent. Once consent was given, one can under-take from a suck/succ-er.
A sucker represents the success of an undertaker (entrepreneur) who buries consent given underneath suggestions offered.
AI
Suggestion implies artifice, consenting to stand-under a suggested artifice implies intelligence/intelligo- "to understand".
Artificial (entrepreneur) Intelligence (success)...same shit; different branding. Wholesale and retail.
if you want to be
Being implies want within need, hence needing to resist wanted temptations. The success of an entrepreneur is based upon distracting others from need (perceivable) with want (suggested), which establishes a conflict of reason (want vs not want) among the suckers, which implies a success for the undertaker above reason.
fall for the same tricks
What one perceives implies rise (life) during fall (inception towards death)...others trick one to hold onto suggested, which burdens rise during fall.
Why is that a trick? Because one cannot cheat ones rise by getting something from another.
zero hope
a) Both hope and fear tempt one to ignore perceivable origin for holding onto suggested outcomes.
b) Zero implies a common denominator aka a suggested foundation by few to trick many to count each other from, while ignoring to be ONE within all of nature.
In other words..."base10" (one and zero) contradicts "1base1" aka oneness (whole) as the base of each one (partial) within.
c) Combining zero (artificial origin) and hope (artificial outcome) imbalances ones free will of choice...if consented to.
need to define
a) How does one define (affix) acceleration without contradicting it?
b) De-fine aka division (de) end (finis) implies the division of beginning (inception) and end (death) for those in-between (life), hence those in-between need (origin) and want (outcome).
category of everything
Why gather together that which nature sets apart?
accelerating ANY current
Can form (life) accelerate flow (inception towards death) or only diminish self, hence feeling accelerated in demise?
towards breaking point
What if the break implies beginning (inception) of sentence (life), while being moved towards point (death)?
What if a point doesn't break apart but dissolves each partial sentence back into origin?
Jacbobinism
Jacob/Ya'aqobh - "one that takes by the heel; a supplanter"... https://www.etymonline.com/word/Jacob
Hence not a follower marching towards extremes, but the Achilles' heel most ignore to take advantage of aka the one suggesting the -ism, which others follow towards their demise.
It's few who suggest, which use consenting many as tools, within the box of reason, where many fight each other.
a) Holocaust aka the burned offering of many by few who suggest -isms to tempt others to follow towards outcome aka towards death of life.
Works like a charm...
b) Steady (inception towards death) generates imbalance (life), hence life wielding the free will of choice to balance...or ignore steady pace (growth) for deliberate acceleration (loss).
c) Life moves towards death. A jew dangles -isms in-front of gentile eyes to tempt them forwards. It's the carrot (suggested outcome) and the stick (perceivable outcome)...
- Porn/ pornē/perə/per - "to traffic in, to sell" + graphic/graphe - "writing, drawing"
a) A jew writes suggestion (to sell) to draw in gentile consent (to buy), hence tempting gentiles to sell out when buying into temptation.
b) The foundation of traffic (carry on trade) implies becoming a traitor to self by carrying along others, hence trading ones FREE will of choice for a chosen ones pricey options.
c) Trade as a suggested exchange tempts one to ignore being ex (life) within change (inception towards death) aka free expression of resistance during velocity...not selling self out by paying others for burdens to take on aka debt/death.
- Pose/posen - "to suggest (something is so), suppose, assume; grant, concede"; from Latin pausare - "to halt, rest, cease, pause"
Hence a jew utilizing exposition to corrupt the "pose of expression" among cooming (masturbating) gentiles.
There' no cessation of motion within perceivable nature, hence a jew suggesting it as the inversion of nature.
Lutnick
a) Nudnik is a Yiddish word that has entered modern Hebrew. It describes a common and even respected modus operandi in Israeli society. A nudnik is someone who is constantly asking you for something or otherwise taking up your time. Nudnicking is just an extension of this view of social networking. If you pester people long enough, you can wear them down... https://www.thejc.com/judaism/jewish-words/nudnik-yr7n7wmq
b) Strong's Hebrew: 3874. לוּט (lut) - "to wrap closely or tightly, enwrap, envelop. wrapped"... https://biblehub.com/hebrew/3874.htm
In short...a gift wrapped pest. Just like Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (Lenin) being transported within a concealed train to spread the pestilence of -isms into Russia.
if true
a) True vs false (reason) contradicts if/then (implication)...
b) The shirt he's wearing reads "Occupy Mars" aka to take possession of mars/mers - "to trouble, confuse"
You being tempted to ignore implication for reason implies you taking into possession a side, which fuses together (con-fuse) both sides into conflict/trouble.
c) Elon/elongate - "to prolong" simply uses a suggestion to prolong conflicts of reason among all those who consent to it.
to draw the attention to something
a) What is one already attending (perceivable) before others can draw (suggested) ones attention from it?
b) What if few utilize suggestion to tempt many to withdraw from nature drawing a line (inception towards death)?
c) If a drawing draws towards, then why are drawings tempting one to keep looking back...like museums filled with artificial drawings to draw in generations of onlookers?
the point
a) Death. Any suggested point implies end of sentence (life)...
b) Can you give me an example of a point being made without the dialogue aka dia (two) log (logic; conflict of reason) continuing?
c) Religion; -isms; suggested information; definitions; consent; temptations...what's the point?
You wipe a stinky fish across the trail so people can't follow
a) Why would FREE will of choice suggest others to follow trails? Following implies binding self to another, hence being drawn by suggested directions...
b) People implies ones singular consent to a suggested pluralism. Nature doesn't shape people...it generates each person.
Few suggest e pluribus unum (out of many, one) to collectivize many together to establish "united states"...as opposed to nature setting units apart from one another.
c) What if ones choice to hold onto suggested nihilism (Latin nihilo; nothing) by writing CAN'T represents the stinking fish rotting within self, which corrupts ones senses to blame anything from outside for the smell?
Consider being a fish (life) within an ocean (inception towards death)...a state of decomposition.
It's not helpful
Help implies support/supportare - "bring forward" aka flow (inception towards death) bringing forward form (life)....not form helping each other, while burdening self within flow.
FREE will of choice implies being FREE of burden...unless chosen to put burden onto self by helping others. Meanwhile...the fruits of ones less burdened labors, within the work of nature, permit others to draw support from.
it's not....as you think
I think about nihil-ism whenever others suggest "nothing" to me, and the implied de-nial of everything perceivable for it. Why? Because that helps me to be less ignorant than before.
All perceivable is offered to each ones perception at any moment...others utilize suggestion to draw ones attention away.
The red herring isn't the issue...taking the bait by ones free will of choice is.
extend for millions of miles
Measuring curtails the extension of ones mind to the suggested measurements of others.
All implies one in energy...no measuring required for each one (fractal) within all (entire) to discern self.
Everything science and tech is bullshit that distracts us from life
Suggested tech/tekhno - "artifice" tempts one to ignore science/scio - "to know" aka ones perception of all perceivable reality.
The trick...suggested scient-ism tempts one to consent to artifice.
is not a crime to be someone’s friend
a) Friend aka fri/fre - "to love"... https://www.etymonline.com/word/friend
Love implies versus hate, hence friend containing fiend...
b) Natural L(and) A(ir) W(ater) implies a setting apart, while the conflict in-between friend (love) vs fiend (hate) implies the crime of artificially setting together that which natural law sets apart.
Furthermore...crime/cri/krei - "to distinguish" aka that which natural law (inception towards death) distinguishes (life).
my point is to rebrand choice into yes or no
Which implies using your choice to agree or disagree with the choice of another. Doing that binds FREE will of choice, hence putting ones choice into bondage to a chosen ones suggestion.
saved some trouble
One doesn't need to be saved...few tempt each one within to seek salvation.
a meeting place that has moved on.
Notice that to meet during motion implies being set apart before being able to meet. This setting apart aka the internal differentiation of motion into matter...one can only discern for self as partial matter within whole motion.
If you choose to agree or disagree with that statement, then you established yet another meeting place, hence yet another contradiction of being ONE.
Da J̶e̶w̶s̶ Catholics
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sicut_Judaeis
"The Church's stated attitude against the mistreatment of jews goes back to the early Church. Around 400, St Augustine, one of the most influential and foundational figures of Catholic theology, preached that the jews must be protected for their ability to explain the Old Testament."
Furthermore...
"Christians were nevertheless duty-bound to protect the jews as an important part of Christian civilization..."
The whole article does not mention once what the mistreatment is based upon...
Yet your answer rebranded "true vs false" into "yes vs no"...a dualistic conflict chosen by oneself. A self inflicted contradiction of self.
Question and answer implies suggestion and consent...giving consent to any suggestion establishes a dualistic conflict of reason. It puts ONEs consent together with another ONEs suggestion, hence 1+1=2. That's math-o-magic...a trick.
a moot point
Moot/mod - "to meet; assemble"... https://www.etymonline.com/word/moot
Nature disassembles sentences (life) by setting each one apart from one another, before point of death assembles each partial back into whole.
The points we (pluralism) suggest each other are tempting consenting ones (singular) together...hence making ones sentence/sentire - "sense" moot.
Can there be "true" without a dualistic conflict against "false"?
Free-Willy is a word smith....definitely
Few smith words to tempt many to hold onto definitions...free will of choice takes apart the words few smith and many hold together.
DE (division) FINI (end) TION (action)...it's action, which divides into beginning (inception) and end (death) for each ones reaction (life) within.
De-fini-tion put together contradicts ones FREE will of choice...if consented to.
they
There can be only one...
Wondering about free will of choice from within the confinement of reason...
believe in a singular
To believe implies holding onto...if you are a part within a singular whole, then there has to be separation by motion.
we are all part of whatever it may be
Letting go of ones belief in pluralism (we) allows singular (one) to discern self as partial within whole.
I believe what you do to others
Believing what others are suggesting binds one to others, hence permitting them to do to you.
ripples in a pond
Ripples can only be made within a level (balanced) pond and balance can only exist within motion.
What if matter are the ripples within the momentum of motion?
cant be fathomed
Being can fathom...suggested nihil-ism (nihilo,nothing) tempts one to believe that being can't.
My views align more with native americans than they do any singular religion.
a) Native (internal) implies within foreign (external)
b) Religion/religio - "to bind anew" implies bound together, while ignoring to be singular.
c) Ones view aka visual perception is based on motion..."my" implies holding onto, while ignoring motion. One cannot take possession over self, while being moved. Others tempt one to cast "me; myself or I" upon self to become possessed by the belief of being able to hold onto self.
This point really reaches out to me for some reason.
a) Those spiritual attacks imply reasoning against others and circular logic within self. Nature moves through one aka in (inhale) and out (exhale) aka spirit without a conflict.
b) A point implies end of sentence...nature moves ones life sentence towards point of death. Reaching towards point (death) established a conflict of reason among sentence (life), which corrupts spirit (breathing).
I want to believe in god
To believe (anything suggested) establishes a conflict of reason (want vs not want), while ignoring that "God" generates all perceivable for each ones perception.
Consenting to a suggestion by another aka "believing" contradicts the first commandment.
I cant believe in something I have never seen
One cannot see ones inception or death...nor does life require to hold onto any belief to be able to discern self in-between inception and death.
Letting go of the belief one holds onto implicates motion...hence being (life) moved (inception towards death). Holding onto ignores motion, hence corrupting discernment.
if god did exist
Reason (did vs didn't) tempts one to ignore implication (if/then)...the former only exists in nature if oneself uses free will of choice to hold onto a side.
he wouldn't want us relying on faith
It's your faith that establishes the would vs wouldn't and want vs not want conflicts of reason against others and the circular logic within your mind/memory.
You think in wouldn't and want because you already gave faith to a suggestion by another. Your mind is now running in logic circles until you let go.
its man that creates
Creationism was suggested by other man and implies something out of nothing aka creatio ex nihilo... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creatio_ex_nihilo
It's jewish... "The Tree of Life, or Etz haChayim (עץ החיים) in Hebrew, is a mystical symbol used in the Kabbalah of esoteric judaism to describe the path to HaShem and the manner in which he created the world ex nihilo (out of nothing)."
more than just the material
Material implies odd; momentum of motion implies even. Nature evens (inception towards death) odds (life).
More vs less implies you stuck within circular logic. More vs less implies an artificial conflict tempting you to ignore that nature offers all perceivable to each ones perception at this moment.
we are born behind a mask
a) Being born implies a natural expression aka a revelation...not a concealment. Choosing to ignore revelation conceals ones mind.
b) Being born implies off-spring aka a setting apart from one another...others suggest pluralism (we) to tempt singular (one) to ignore self.
perceive with our limited systems
Only balance limits ones FREE will of choice...choosing to limit self further by consenting to suggested systems implies ignorance and denial of nature.
struggling financially
The FIN in finance implies "end"...being alive implies in-between beginning (inception) and end (death), hence ones struggle to grow self during loss.
A jew suggests finance to tempt gentiles to burden self with debt, while paying towards end of life...neither of which supports growth.
a) Positive vs negative aka want vs not want implies circular logic (reason) aka the cycle few draw around many.
b) Many willingly GIVE consent to, while TAKING into possession the suggestions by few...like voting representatives.
Represent implies "show, display, bring to mind by description"... https://www.etymonline.com/search?q=represent That's what many are taking into possession, for granted, while mentally holding onto it.
That's what one votes for...an artificial show; a divisive play; a dividing script to follow aka a distraction from shirking ones response-ability (choice) by voting for another.
consider themselves white
Con-sider (siding together) can only happen after white (pure) sets itself apart (impure).
genocide of white
White implies generator of any matter within...ignoring this kills self.
white
From within the visible spectrum of light...one cannot see white (pure light) or black (absence of light).
Few suggest black and white together (checkerboard; panda; yin/yang etc.) to tempt many into admixture, hence disturbing the visible spectrum of light by equalizing differences.
what is more important, intention or result?"
IN implies being within. RE implies responding to...both imply a perceivable origin, which one ignores when reasoning (more vs less) about suggested importance.
I would agree that searching for meaning
Agree vs disagree implies reasoning about a suggested meaning one already consented to.
searching for meaning comes before whether something matters.
Only matter can search FORwards...doing so tempts matter (life) to ignore motion (inception towards death) aka the forwarding origin of coming into being.
Want implies suggestion; need implies perception. The latter allows one to draw from; while the former permits others to draw one behind. The chosen ones suggesting imply "entrepreneurs", while the consenting gentiles drawn along imply the "success".
Here's what an entrepreneur had to say about success:
https://genius.com/Jay-z-success-lyrics