The only reason they let these guys get empires...
Reasoning implies against others; empirical implies through one...being implies one (partial) among other ones (partials) within oneness (whole).
Sleight of hand: "there can be only one" aka "all for one and one for all".
put a stick in their spokes
a) Bike (life) within road (inception towards death)...the road goes on no matter how often a bike falls.
b) suggested BI (two) CYCLE (circle) tempts one to ignore being UNI (one) WAVE (inequality of surface aka choice set free within balance).
c) A kike (kikel; circle) utilizes suggestion to spin one around..."Like a record, baby, right 'round, 'round, 'round"...
Check out origin of Dreidel aka Teetotum, a four-sided spinning top labeled with A (aufer; take) D (depone; put down) N (nihil; nothing) T (totum, all)...offer (need) or decline (want); all (perceivable) or nothing (suggested).
This is all one needs to comprehend to survive others. Good luck; one doesn't need it.
a) Consider being vessel (matter) within well (momentum) or water (motion)
b) Consider BUCK'ET, noun - "vessel in which water is drawn out of a well"
What if others entice one to fly with suggested wings to lure one into a bucket? What if collecting (COL) ones (ONEL) within buckets dries (SANDERS) them out? What's the key (K) to effuse (F) seeing (C)?
use mirrors in witchcraft
Suggestion mirrors perception. Ones consent to suggested, while ignoring being within perceivable, implies an inverse reflection.
Words are an inverse reflection of sound from the perspective of an ignorant observer; a mirage (to be reflected).
Warn people...for 20 years
One suggesting notice about approaching danger to many consenting followers...how could a follower ever heed approaching danger while progressing towards it?
What if following others destroys self?
controlled opposition
What if control (inception towards death) generates opposition (life)? What if opposition (temporary growth) needs to resist control (ongoing loss)?
- Suggested by jew...meeting online
- Perceivable through gentile...being (life) inline (inception towards death).
a) To meet implies "coming together"; to be implies "set apart" aka DISPERSE - "to cause (inception towards death) to separate into different parts (life)". Intercourse inserts; birth disperses off-spring.
b) Notice the horizontal baseline (1950-2020)...it implies ongoing, hence already contradicting the suggested dates. Dating implies "affixing transaction", which tempts one to ignore that action (motion) transforms (matter) without affixing.
c) Notice the perpendicular scale starting at 0% (implying out of nothing creationism). Meanwhile, the study implies that suggesting "online" to "social life" imbalances growth potential. Therefore...growth potential can be corrupted way before suggested 0. Why? Because perceivable 1 goes on, and on, and on...
d) PA'RENT, noun (Latin parens, from pario; to produce or bring forth) + CHILD; noun - "descendant".
Parent (inception towards death) bringing forth children (life) aka momentum of motion bringing forth matter....suggested coupling; meeting; scaling; dating, marriage pact etc. tempts one to ignore that.
What's up with that whole thing?
Tikkun Olam (healing the world by bringing together).
In movies...this is not how the real world is.
a) No shit. The former is suggested; the latter perceivable.
b) It's called "movie" because it tricks those watching to ignore being (life) within motion (inception towards death). That ain't just about sitting on your ass watching; but mentally holding onto all the suggested propaganda tempting one to follow along, while ignoring that perceivable propagation (from inception towards death) inspires life to resist.
relative...assumptions
To relate implies towards others; while assuming implies onto self. Being implies at center (perception) of surrounding (perceivable)...relating to others (suggestion) and assuming for self (consent) tempts one to ignore that.
facts and circumstances
As perception within perceivable ones position (stance) isn't within circumference (circum), but center of surrounding. Others tempt one into circumference. Why? To erect self at center, while cutting others off circumference aka circumcision.
How to tempt others into circumference? Suggested fact (facio; action) tempts one to ignore being reaction (life) within action (inception towards death)...holding onto action (loss) reduces reactions (growth).
preserve...wow look
Instead of pointing out darkness within others...be bright and shine. Notice further that darkness consumes brightness, hence making it harder for brightness to shine and make darkness retreat.
white
a) Both white (pure light) and black (absence of light) cannot exist within visible spectrum of light...only brighter and darker than other specs.
The suggested labels "white" and "black" are tricking hue(color) men within visible spectrum of light to hold onto a side within a conflict of reason (white vs black), which in return tarnishes spectrum by mixing colors into brown; dusky.
The root of brown aka bher- implies "bright" too. Why? Because only within light can one mix colors together. Light remains no matter how dark it gets within. In other words...few tempt many to besmirch each other with shit aka equality (same) through diversity (difference) all under the sign of a rainbow aka spectrum of color.
b) white and black aka masonic checkerboard implies to check "an exposure of the king (bright) to a direct attack from an opposing piece (dark)".
The sleight of hand for those with eyes to see..."checkmate" aka expose (check) equal (mate). How? By expressing unique (life) within equal (inception towards death).
a) Sneering the name of deceased man, while calling him antisemitic, a mere 18 seconds into a debunking video...
b) Loans (suggested by another) and debts (consented to by oneself) implies a mercantile foundation (selling towards buyer) before religion (Latin religio; to bind anew aka buying into sold).
Religion implies refinement of and distraction from mercantile, hence protecting the happy merchant by making suggestions in the name of (in nomine) others.
Popes were always politically superior to the Rothschilds
- Pope...Bishop of Rome; Pontifex maximus
- Nathaniel Charles Jacob Rothschild...The Right Honourable; The Lord Rothschild; Order of Merit; Order of the British Empire; Royal Victorian Order etc.
a) So much for acknowledged superiority in public affairs...now add that one has to play a role for the inferior public, while the other plays with the public and their superiors from a position of an open secret.
b) Next the obvious...Rothschild carries himself; while the pope looks like misery dragged around a public circus. One draws respect from others; the other oozes disrespect onto others.
c) PONTI (bridge) FEX (maker) and ROTH (red) SCHILD (shield)...the former implies reaching others; the latter implies sustaining self. A host needs to sustain self from parasitic bridge makers...
vatican paying expenses
a) To whom?
b) Paying expenses implies being expendable.
accelerationist
a) No matter how much resistance (life) accelerates; it cannot outperform velocity (inception towards death).
b) -ist (acceleration) implies consent to follow suggested -ism (accelerationism), hence trailing behind others.
c) Consider "shlomo" aka slo-mo (slow motion)...being implies slow reactions (life) within fast action (inception towards death).
a) https://img.gvid.tv/i/3ad1gop5.jpg
b) Clown aka habitual jester aka habit (frequent) jest (deed; action) aka habit (life) jest (inception towards death).
My point is that if the force of this tiny group went away, everything would return back to normal.
a) What if push (inception towards death) shoves (life)? What if push cannot go away; only tempt shove to ignore itself? What if others exploit ones ignorance to utilize pushing force (velocity) against shoving force (resistance)?
b) Point implies end of sentence; being implies life-sentence. Went away implies out of way; being implies within (life) way (inception towards death). Return back implies back to origin; being (life) implies in (inception) and out (death) of origin. Normal implies common; being implies unique.
All of these tempt shove (growth) to go with push (loss) instead of resisting.
number of people is very small
a) People implies mass of persons aka plural of singular...singular is smaller than plural.
b) Number implies designation of unit aka Latin unitas; unus; one...what could be smaller than one?
society would steadily improve
a) Does life being moved from inception towards death steadily improve or decline?
b) Society; from root SEKW (to follow). If life follows from inception towards death instead of resisting, then...?
c) What if steady (inception towards death) sets loose (life)? Again...what if steady (balance) sets loose (free will of choice)?
d) Who suggests the many to "go steady" or "ready; steady; go" or "rocksteady"?
a) Wanting to win tempts one to ignore power of being resistance (life) within temptation (inception towards death).
b) A world/vault implies a repository for putting into (inception) and taking out of (death) valuables (life). The world/vault ain't gonna go anywhere...it's the values within which tempt each other to sell out.
Do elected officials even exist?
a) Office; noun - "secular position of responsibility; divine service"...ones response-ability (free will of choice) implies a secular (Latin seco; to divide) position aka choice (reaction) divided within balance (action).
Being implies as reaction (life) within divine/divided service to action (inception towards death) aka as odds (growth) within even (loss).
b) Others suggest elections to tempt ones free will of choice to "select" the choice of others, which establishes others through ones permission as "chosen ones" aka ELITE (French élite) - "selection, choice".
c) Ones consent to anything suggested by another implies a transfer of office based on license (formal authorization, official permission, permit). Those authorized for office will then utilize that position to revoke ones license to participate in government (control of mind).
actual government
- Actual control of mind...ones perception adapting to all perceivable.
- Fictional control of mind...ones consent to suggestions by another.
a) Is life being moved forwards from inception towards death?
b) Does inception imply life being drawn out through forwards motion?
c) https://www.etymonline.com/search?q=protagonist
d) Pro, from prōtos (first); from root -per (forward), hence first forwards motion (inception towards death), then life within...
e) Agon (contest); from root ag- (to drive, draw out or forth, move), hence the living struggle within the process of dying to sustain self.
f) All -isms are suggested by others; each -ist implies ones consent to the suggestions by others. Nature doesn't make suggestions, it offer perceivable to each ones perception.
Suggestion (fiction) tempts one to ignore perception (reality).
d) none aka no; not; nothing; nothingness and negation of one...how could one sense nothing? https://www.etymonline.com/search?q=none
What if others suggest nihilism (Latin nihilo; nothing) to tempt one to deny perceivable for suggested? Hence ignoring one-self for what others ones (chosen ones) are suggesting?
How to invert being one? Suggesting not being one aka "none" (nihilism) which tricks other ones to consent to it (nihilist).
Wouldn't this be the same thing as us?
Look into a mirror...that image exists at a different position than oneself looking at it. How could one perceive sameness if everything one looks at implies a different position?
What is ones (singular) position within us (plural)? A contradiction of self!
nobody will save you but yourself
a) So then why suggest pluralism (us) to speak in the name of others?
b) Why do chosen ones utilize US (United States) to brand many under the motto "e pluribus unum" (out of many; one)?
a) PRO (forward) AG (to drive, draw out or forth, move) aka being AG (life) within PRO (inception towards death).
b) -ist (protagonist) implies ones consent to follow suggested -ism (protagonism) by another, which tempts one to antagonize self.
a) Normie; normal; norm implies holding onto something.
b) Current implies motion and moment implies momentum of motion.
Those who ignore momentum of motion are holding onto norms, hence going through life on monkey-bars...grabbing one norm, while letting go of another.
a) Technology; tekhno; tekhnē - "art; artifice".
b) Others suggest artifice to tempt one to ignore being (life) driven (inception towards death) within natural.
c) Being implies transmission aka trans (across) mittere (to release, let go; send; driven) within motor (motion).
- Making
- Ashke-nazi
- Great
- Again
interdependent
- As perceived...internal (life) dependence (inception towards death).
- As suggested...internal (jew) dependent (gentiles).
For example...suggested center of value (central bank) and consenting dependence surrounding it, while drowning in debt.
There's so much room (inception towards death) to fail (life) that even success has its place...
Trafalgar Law: "ROOM (inception towards death) SHAMBLES (life)"... https://i.ytimg.com/vi/6AFv1b1oqJM/maxresdefault.jpg
a) BBB - bbb - 666
b) Crossroad aka vertical (growth and loss of life) within horizontal (inception towards death) aka the only road each anointed one within carries a cross before resurrection.
c) Add motion to crossroad and perpendicular angles/angels comes to be a waveform...like a snake; caduceus; serpentine; sinus (life) within base-line (inception towards death).
Be aware though...tongue (organ of speech) of serpent is split (suggested words or perceivable sound)...
helping of non-sequitors
a) Can one follow (sequi) nothing (non)?
b) If being (life) within (inception towards death) follows along, then...less of being.
c) What if suggested past; present; future isn't a sequence to follow, but ones presence as resistance within velocity?
d) What if the path of least resistance implies being (life) ignoring to resist path (inception towards death)?
e) What if seeking help from others distracts one from being (life) within delivery (inception towards death)? What if there's a difference between natural assistance (perceivable inspiration) and artificial assurance of assistance (suggested information)?
helping of NON-sequitors...my statement has NOTHING to do...which is NOT something...
a) Three sentences; each utilizing "nothing" as the foundation to argue from. Why?
b) What if nothing (Latin nihilo) implies suggested nihilism by others and ones consent to denial perceivable when consenting?
c) If one denies; would one be aware thereof?
my statement; your assessment
a) yours vs mine implies a conflict of reason over ownership.
b) what if suggested state (to fix) and assess (to fix amount) tempt one to ignore that MENT (mind/memory) implies momentum of ongoing motion, hence a tool to process flow-state input (perceivable inspiration)?
c) Notice memory loss within elderly? Can memories be yours or mine if outside (inception towards death) dissolves inside (life)? What if one is being tempted to want to hold onto memories (information); while ignoring the need to let go of continuous input (inspiration)?
Notice the child-like relieve among elderly when the burden of holding onto memories is being lifted from them, then notice the industrialized burdening of youth with suggested information to memorize (education)...
relationship
What's the relation (connection) between ships (solid vessels apart from one another)? Its water aka fluid (inception towards death) outside solid (life) vessels.
etymological
ETYMOS (actual aka perceivable) + LOGIC (fictional aka suggested)...the former is being utilized to contradict the latter.
I am asking...
a) ...to seek answers (suggested), which ignores solution (perceivable) to problems (perception).
b) "ask and you'll shall receive" tempts one to want to receive answers from others, yet without asking one (perception) already receives all (perceivable), so the rhetoric is simply used to distract from that.
Mankind permits itself to be tricked to seek from one another (suggested information), more than reality offers (perceivable inspiration).
c) What if ones claim to hold onto self (me; myself and I) tempts one to view other ones as "YOU"? What if this behavior results into a mine vs yours conflict of reason?
I am asking about a hypothetical future
HYPO (beneath; under) THESIS (proposition aka suggestion)...consenting to any suggestion places oneself under another. Asking for hypothesis tempts others to answer a pyramid scheme by consenting to a place themselves under a chain of command. The more are consenting to submit under; the higher those suggesting are permitted to rise above them.
Meanwhile in reality...being implies presence (life) within absence (inception towards death). Consenting to hold onto past memories or shape hypothetical futures within ones mind/memory, permits others to shape present, while oneself ignores to express presence.
a bot like you
a) YOU aka ye - "second person" represents suggested spell-craft tempting the only one to ignore self for others instead of discerning self as PERSON (per sonos; by sound), which implies SEC (seco; to divide) aka a division of sound (entire) and each one instrument (partial) by sound.
b) two does not exist within nature. Each one partial implies whole "too", because only within whole can there be partials.
Sleight of hand for those with eyes to see...U2 aka YOU (divided by sound) TOO (in addition).
Being one implies addition (inception); subtraction (death); multiplication (intercourse for offspring) and division (being partial within whole).
c) If bot; then why address as second person (you)? If person; then why address as bot...unless wanting to dehumanize another?
tl; dr: Thanks for inspiring with your presence, and may you resist that which is yet to be (future) for being within that which is.
a) Be aware that you're looking into a black mirror (monitor) when asking artifice (ai) for answers...
b) Others suggest that minerals (Latin minera, a matrix) have no organs. Why? To distract one from being organ (choice) within matrix (balance).
Now try to consider the above in regard to CRYSTAL (inorganic body, shaped into solid through affinity)...stay clear of BA'AL tho.