One dude on Twitter (7500 employees in 2021). How many are employed to sustain the world wide web so that one dude can make a tweet in it?
Understanding Jewish Supremacy
If a gentile chooses to stand under (understand) a jewish suggestion, then a jew was chosen to be supreme.
To understand the current...
...implies ignoring to resist (life) current (inception towards death).
need to understand
One needs to resist the wanted temptation to stand under another...otherwise one cannot sustain self.
debate
Aka reasoning over suggested information; while ignoring the implication of perceivable inspiration.
jews get to define antisemitism
Gentiles consenting to suggested -isms permits a jew to define (idolatry); redefine (revisionism) and contradict (talmudic reasoning) the suggested at will.
definition changes overtime
a) A jew suggests definition and time to tempt gentiles to ignore being solid (life) within fluid (inception towards death) aka constantly changing. Holding onto suggested definitions; while contemplating affixed states (past; present; future) tempts one to ignore being moved.
b) A jew suggests words to tempt gentiles to ignore perceivable sound, hence suggested "definition" tempting one to ignore perceivable "DEAF PHONETICIAN" aka being deaf to perceivable phonics (sound).
Another example: suggested "insane person" tempts one to ignore perceivable....being in sanus (within sound) and per sonos (by sound).
Suggesting words (information) over sound (inspiration) implies spell-craft.
they are in the sole position to define
a) Sole (all perceivable) generates positions (ones perception) by separating itself from whole into partial.
b) Whole/sole/soul aka "one for all and all for one" aka "there can be only one" aka "alone - ALL(in)ONE"
c) Consenting to suggested definition implies ONES CHOICE establishing CHOSEN ONES position over self by submitting of self to another.
d) Suggested pluralism (they) tempts perceiving singular (one) to ignore self for others.
There is no rational or objective definition that lies outside jewish control
a) Rational implies reasoning over suggested definitions. A jew suggests to tempt gentiles to reason against one another over suggested; which permits a jew control over both sides of every conflict of reason.
Nature operates on implication (if/then)...not on reason (want vs not want; true vs false; yes vs no; agree vs disagree; believe vs denial; good vs bad etc.)
Being implies choice within balance, hence if balance; then choice...reasoning against other choices implies imbalance.
b) Objective implies as perceived by self; consenting to anything suggested by another tempts one to subject self.
c) Being (life) implies in (inception) and out (death) of sides (inception/death balance aka momentum of motion for matter within).
d) jews suggest sides to tempt gentiles off-center and into circumference, which permits jews to erect self at center, while cutting off circumference. This implies circumcision.
Being implies center (perception) within circumference (perceivable)...
First...
...what one perceives; then what another suggests.
they
What if pluralism (they) was suggested by another to corrupt singular (ones) perception?
interchangeable
Change (inception towards death) enables internal being (life)...following each other in alternate succession (interchangeable) disables being.
looks like
To look implies to seek for, which others exploit by tempting ones sight to look/lock onto suggested....the more consent to suggestions by few; the more look alike.
Meanwhile in reality...sameness (all perceivable) generates differences (ones perception) by setting ones apart from one another.
Dream implies towards an outcome (want); being implies within origin (need)...choosing want ignores need. Nobody else can make that choice for you.
racist
a) -ist (racist) implies ones consent to suggested -ism (racism) by another aka a coming together, while ignoring to remain apart.
b) Race (Latin raddix; radius; ray) implies from center into circumference aka ones growth outwards...not ones belonging to others.
a) E pluribus unum (out of many; one) aka United States...its consenting to that suggestion which divides each one within against one another.
b) Notice that the enemy of many implies a few, then notice that many implies an aggregation aka a united living of many under control by few.
c) Why does a chosen one (singular) suggests "we the people" (plural) to others?
a) Is implies es; essence - "to be" aka being (life) within towards (inception towards death).
b) Door implies "movable barrier" aka movable line (inception towards death) for separation (life).
c) Instead of suggesting what outcome IS; try discerning self within what perceivable origin WAS, before one came to be within it.
A suggested door tempts one to view it as something one can open or close, a separation of inside from outside. Consenting to aka narrowing ones sight on that, distracts one from perceivable...open (inception) close (death) aka inside (life) outside (inception towards death).
d) Fluid to solid (inception); solid within fluid (life); solid to fluid (death)...transmutation of ingredients out of base. Basic alchemy.
a) EXACT', adjective (Latin exactus, exigo) - "to drive, urge or press"
b) Exact (inception towards death) generates erroneous (life) aka impressing whole for expressing partials within.
c) Putting a point (end of sentence) behind exact (to drive) tempts temporary life sentence to ignore being driven within ongoing motion.
d) If life is "merely a conduit", then can life conduct/lead/command/guide inception towards death?
1893 "zeitgemäß überarbeitet" das heißt: ⦁Weggelassen des hebräischen Originaltextes ⦁Vereinfachung der "umständlichen Darstellung" ⦁moderneres Deutsch ⦁Weglassen "weniger interessanter Kapitel" ⦁Milderung "obszöner Stellen" ⦁dadurch Kürzung von 2.127 auf 591 Seiten
It's the heavily censored/rewritten version.
a) CON (together; with) TEXT (to weave, to join, fit together; interweave)...a suggested inversion of being apart from one another within perceivable.
b) Being implies particle (life) within solution (inception towards death)...few suggest composition (context) to gain mass consent for the composition of particles aka mass dissolution.
c) Self discernment implies learning to teach self/teaching to learn self.
d) Suggested ABOUT-ism (Greek butan; without; outside) tempts one to ignore being (life) within (inception towards death), hence in-between sides.
e) Can others give one context without ones consent to hold onto it? Consider the world wide web as context for few to weave consenting many together, while natural order forces them apart.
f) What context can you offer? Notice that I take text apart...
- https://archive.org/details/talmudbavliseder01gold
- https://archive.org/details/talmudbavliseder02gold
~Lazarus Goldschmidt - "Der Babylonische Talmud" (Hebrew/German) in two volumes from 1897.
shortsighted in every sense
Sight implies center (perception) within circumference (perceivable)...others suggest sides (short vs long) to distract ones sight.
Try applying theses sides to "life"...it can be cut short or prolonged, but being alive came first; so both "short" or "long" implies a suggested adjective aka a fictitious addition to real being.
adjective meaning
Nature doesn't add (adjective) to mind (meaning)...all of nature separates into each ones mind/memory, hence all perceivable input going through each ones perception.
The trick...tempting many to hold onto suggested (information) as "meaning", while ignoring perceivable (inspiration).
you need
"You" implies one claiming self as "me; myself or I"; which in return labels everyone else as "you". This claim upon self implies wanting to ignore need.
In short...me vs you (want vs not want) ignores being one (want) within oneness (need). Other words for want...will; wish; desire aka temptation, which is what one NEEDS to resist.
new
New, néwos, now...perceivable moment(um) within everything implies now; suggested creationism (out of nothing) implies new...it's ones free will of choice to discern this for self or permit others to define, redefine and contradict it at will.
Sleight of hand: "nothing new under the sun/son/one"
myopic
a) Does being an infant imply short-sight? Does being an elder imply far-sight?
b) If sight implies from oneself outwards, then how could others measure the length of it?
c) If one cannot see what another suggests; yet perceives what goes on around another; then is one short or far-sighted?
d) Myopia aka MYEIN (to shut) OPS (eye)...what if one exists in-between (life) open (inception) and shut (death) without being able to obstruct the process? Do those "without eyes to see" have sight?
Notice MY (a claim over self) EIN (one; state of being) and EYE (I; ones claimed self)...could those who suggest "myopia" have weaved contradiction; inversion; dualism; phonetics; numerology etc. into its "meaning/definition/truth"?
attitude
Let's go over the suggested meanings and perceivable implications...
a) Disposition...aka divided position within action; an inversion of ones position as separated reaction within action. Division implies against another; separation implies as partial (one) within whole (oneness).
b) Posture...aka situation of a figure with regard to the eye. REG'ARD, verb - "to look towards; to point or be directed" tempts one to ignore being a sentence (life) within direction (inception towards death) hence pointed towards end of sentence.
Ones situation implies within perceivable origin...not in regard towards whatever outcomes others are suggesting aka "pointing out".
c) Aptness...aka inclined (leaning one side or the other). Doing that tempts one to ignore being in-between (choice) sides (balance). It's ones consent to hold onto suggested sides; which imbalances ones choice off-center, hence inclined towards side.
Free will of choice cannot be apt/inclined without ignoring to be "free".
d) Promptitude...aka obedience or compliance to the suggestions by others, while ignoring that perceivable (inception towards death) forces adaptation from each one (life) within, while inspiring resistance...not obedience/compliance.
e) Instead of judging the "attitude" of others; consider why a jew suggests gentiles to behave like "Niggaz wit Attitudes (NWA)" or a fixed point of time (era)... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attitude_Era
tl; dr...Can you expand my sight? What glasses would you suggest to fix shortsightedness?
Bill and Hillary
A distraction from Chelsea; Charlotte, Aidan; Jasper and their Goldman Sachs handler Marc Mezvinsky.
bet they hate
Gamblers love loosing...
at the DMV
- DEPARTMENT (a mind departed within whole)
- MOTOR (Latin moveo, to move)
- VEHICLE (Latin veho, to carry)
Vehicle (life) within motor (inception towards death) implies ones mind (memory aka momentum) departed (matter) within whole (motion).
Others suggest AT (Heb to come, to approach) to invert IN (coming to be within). Suggested "at" tempts being to advance; nature inspires being to resist advancement.
Meanwhile FBI on Twitter... https://img.gvid.tv/i/2F8FWWDA.jpg
Zion supports hasidim. The former implies jewish self emancipation aka being set free, while the latter aka hasidhim (pious ones; pure; purification) can only remain pure if the free ones go balls to the wall corrupt.
Everything perceivable is within balance, which jews exploit by suggesting gentiles that "not" (nothing) exists, which tempts gentiles into imbalance aka reasoning (do vs don't).
A remake of "but not all jews" using a jew vs jew narrative to curtail one racket (zionism), while sustaining another (holocaust).
Is it all connected?
All sets itself apart; few (jew) within connect/aggregate many (gentiles) together to make it easier for few to remain apart... https://www.amazon.com/People-Apart-Political-History-1789-1939/dp/0199246815
- PUR'POSE, noun - "that which a person sets before himself as an object to be reached"
Now consider how easy it is to set a suggestion before others about an object that remains out of reach... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-diB65scQU
Notice the 366M views consenting to the suggested purpose, and then notice how nature changes purpose on the fly (did "don't worry; be happy" work for Robin Williams or Christopher Reeve?)...
- pkvi: "Burn the bridge"
- Happy Merchant: "Seek, and ye shall find"
- pkvi: "But...but...you killed the entire world"
- Happy Merchant: "Everyone's a critic".
...don't work.
Nature works...otherwise those within couldn't complain to each other about what does or doesn't work.
these blocking systems don't work...I and everyone else
The former implies one complaining about others; while the latter implies one being the spokesperson for all others. Try bringing complains about others to their spokesperson and see how that works itself out...
I have blocked...
How could solid (life) within fluid (inception towards death) obstruct/block anything without establishing indigestion within self?
incredible
Aka putting oneself within (in) creed (credo) to another aka establishing creditor and debtor.
complete and utter word...
How can a word be complete without using all letters suggested to shape words?
add nothing
If nature implies everything perceivable, then how could anyone within add anything (or nothing) to it?
fuck off
Fuck/fucker/fugger implies SEAM; verb - "to bind; sew together"...off (removing/separating) contradicts that.
Sleight of hand: "Jesus fucking Christ"...Jesus implies savior (one who delivers); while Christ implies anointed (one being delivered) aka delivery (inception towards death) of delivered (life).
Others suggest "fucking" as the seam to bind together that which nature sets apart. This implies freemasonry aka a mason of free (will of choice) using "Jesus fucking Christ" aka suggested information as bricks and ones consent to it as mortar to build walls of ignorance within the mind/memory of others.
distract
DIS (away) TRAHERE (to draw)... being implies within (life) way (inception towards death), while being enabled to draw inspiration from perceivable...or ignore it for whatever others are suggesting.
The suggested word "distract" contains that which "clarifies"...if one resists suggested for perceivable.
Thanks for the inspiration and enjoy the equinox.
You’re still not understanding me.
a) STILL, adjective - "silent; uttering no sound" contradicts SOUND, adjective (Latin sanus) - "entire; unbroken". Why? Because ones being implies a fragmentation within sound aka that which can be mute; utter words or deny (Latin nihilo; nothing) sound.
b) Why would a me (one who claims self) stand willing under a you (another branded by one who claims self as me; myself or I)?
c) All was before one can be within, and before another can suggest "you are".
asking...if
If/then (implication) implies perceivable origin, while asking questions tempts others to seek suggested outcomes (answers).
pump
PUMP, verb - "to examine by artful questions for the purpose of drawing out secrets"... https://webstersdictionary1828.com/Dictionary/pump
Do you have trouble understanding
Standing under asks for trouble. Rising (life) during loss (inception towards death) calms troubles.
question
Aka seeking outcome; while ignoring that origin implies solution (inception towards death) for problems (life).
I asked...
"Ask and you shall receive" aka seek and you shall take from another. What's the opposite of seek? Find aka foundation.
a) Answers by others...needed or wanted?
b) What could one ask nature for? More than everything already perceivable?
c) How does frequency of ones choice relate to ones heart/herz/hertz/hz/frequency?
Reason implies agreeing vs disagreeing about what others are suggesting...that ain't voice; that's perpetual noise, hence always a conflict.
VOICE, noun (Latin vox; voco) - "to drive out sound; and voice is that which is driven out"...only nature drives sound, and each one within is being driven out.
Only while drowning (inception towards death) can there be stayin' alive, and only within consumption (loss) can being (growth) prolong.