Sign into an existing account

Reasoning keeps one oblivious to implication (if/then). Why? Because reasoning tempts one to choose a side and then fight against the other, like in your example...mainstream narrative vs alternative history.

A jew doesn't care which side a gentile chooses, only that gentiles keep fighting each other within conflicts of reason.


Information implies as suggested by another; inspiration implies as perceived by oneself. That's the trick. The former tempts one to consent to another, while the latter inspires one to discern self.


a) Wanting to teach tempts not wanting to learn...a conflict of reason.

b) If one teaches self, then one learns and vice versa.


Off-spring implies a setting apart from one another...not a possession gained. A jew suggests gentiles to come together, hence "public" schools, which in return permits a jew to remain "private" when learning to teach self, and teaching oneself to learn.


Understanding implies "standing under", which curtails ones growth, hence many students under few teachers aka many slaves under few masters aka many gentiles under few jews.

Understanding suggested information tempts one to ignore knowledge aka ones perception of all perceivable. In nature one doesn't stand under another...one grows (life) within all loss (inception towards death).


Common implies "moving together"...being implies moving apart from one another, hence having the free will of choice to express growth among others.

A jew suggests common-ism to tempt gentiles together by consenting to follow along the narrated jewish suggestion.


Being implies within (life) motion (inception towards death)...to instill implies to affix suggested information within the consenting minds of your children, which in return tempts them to ignore perceivable inspiration...which flows through one.


Because whatever you suggest is wrong will tempt your children to perpetuate a conflict of reason (right vs wrong)...a conflict a jew doesn't participate within, but stokes from outside, while feeding off its energy.


Value (all perceivable) generates evaluation (ones perception)...a jew tempts gentiles to "take" suggested instead by holding information in front of their faces, which gentiles physically consent to focus on, while mentally holding onto it within conflicts of reason.


Arrival implies inception of life; conclusion implies death of life...a jew suggests progressivism to tempt gentiles to seek conclusions and arrival of new information until reaching it.


Reason implies "circular" logic within self aka one side vs another perpetually. Ones consent to suggested information tempts one into a perpetual conflict of reason, hence "kikery all around" aka kike/kikel - "circle".

Nature directs (all perceivable) inspiration through (ones perception) and cannot be held onto, so no conflict, only implication (if/then)...if one chooses to draw from it.


Nature moves life from inception towards death...any narrative tempts one to ignore that reality; while one follows suggested leads towards a fictitious outcome. A jew doesn't drive a narrative...passing gentiles are tempted to follow jewish road-signs towards death.

tl;dr...one learning to teach self, while teaching oneself to learn corrupts ones off-spring less than others. Let the children see how you grow yourself and the fruits of your labor nourishes them as well.

Concern tempts one to ignore to discern...working on that inspires ones children.


All (perceivable) neither lies nor tells truth to one (perception)...others ones (suggested) do.

Have them do the math on fuel.

How much fuel could Germany manufacture.

How much was needed for tanks, planes and automobiles and so on.

How much fuel is required to incinerate a body.

Don't tell them you are right and they are wrong. Give them presentations of both sides.

One of the worst things about modern people is their inability to use their own judgment, which is the absolute goal of jews under their communist cult, their Manson cult, their jim jones cult, their heaven's gate and their scientology. It's their method, don't duplicate it. If they doubt you, which kids do, they'll go 100% to the other side.

Make sure they read the holy gospels and let them cogitate on that.

My kids are in public school, the oldest in middle school; taking history. Any subject they talk about, I let my kids know that there are other opinions about what happened. I also mention that the history books are written by the winners. 9/11 just happened and of course they talked about it in school. I told my kid to ask his teacher how many towers fell that day, but he didn't want to.
Most of the kids their age don't care anyway. I'm just trying to build him up until he's 18 and then I'm goind to unleash my full opinions on him.

Debate is good fun, logical, or not, and teaches how to argue and spot the tactics of jewish arguments.

Math is good for just spotting inconsistencies, even ones that don't directly use math.

Basic logic, reasoning, and writing help with formatting thought, spotting poorly reasoned arguments, and makes logical thinking easier.

All require practice, of course. From you as well because you're gonna have a bunch of cheeky little shits trying to argue with you using these new(to them) thinking tools. Which should be encouraged if they use them correctly.

Also consider the study of philosophy once these other skills are mastered. The books are old, everywhere, and cheap.

Edit: and I'm not talking about the generalized idea of the thing. I'm talking about the class names. Basic logic for example isn't some random thing, it's an actual study and introductory class to more formalized logic. Same thing with reasoning and the others. These are all classes I've taken for example.