The "betrayal" of Israel could go on and on for years:
A row over the new Palestinian government is driving yet another wedge into already shaky ties between Israel and the U.S. as the once sacrosanct relationship comes under severe strain, analysts say.
Barely had the State Department said it would work with the new "interim technocratic government," just hours after it was sworn in Monday by Palestinian president Mahmud Abbas, when Israeli rage roared across from the Levant.
...Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was feeling "betrayed and deceived," Israeli public radio said, as Secretary of State John Kerry had promised him Washington would not recognize the new Palestinian government right away.
Another Israeli official was quoted by the Israel Hayom freesheet as saying it was "like a knife in the back."
...Ties between the two countries have frayed under the administration of President Barack Obama. He and Netanyahu have had a notably frosty personal rapport despite a fence-mending visit to Israel by the U.S. president last year.
The collapse of the latest U.S. bid to broker peace between Israel and the Palestinians left Washington bloodied and frustrated, and even warier of wading back into the Middle East quagmire.
For their part, Israelis were deeply angered when media reports quoting an unnamed U.S. official -- widely believed to be chief U.S. negotiator Martin Indyk -- laid the blame for the failure of Kerry's peace quest squarely at Israel's door.
...In a sign of a possible new fight with lawmakers, Republican Senator Marco Rubio told AFP [June 4]: "They're making a mistake... I'm very disappointed with the administration's position on this."
"I think we should follow the law and cut off aid. The law is pretty clear: they don't recognize Israel's right to exist, they shouldn't be receiving U.S. aid."
Democratic Representative Eliot Engel agreed, saying: "The United States is under no obligation to give a dime to the PA as it reconciles with a known terrorist group."
...[John Kerry] was forced to backtrack in April when he was caught warning that Israel could become "an apartheid state with second-class citizens." Tellingly while he admitted he had used a poor choice of words, he did not publicly apologize for what he said.
Obama would have done this long ago had it not been for political threats back at home. Obama does not like Israel, and largely favors Palestinians. Period. He could be starting a trend to be carried forward by future administrations. All that Kerry and others offer Israel at this time is lip service, and I think they are having fun doing it. Obama is another reason that it appeared (back in 2008) that the tribulation period of Israel was upon us, but it proved not to be. There is still time for the 70th Week to begin under Obama, but I am not holding the position that the midway point will arrive under him.
This decision by the Obama-Kerry team follows closely behind a formation of a so-called "unity government" by the Palestinian Authority and Hamas-potential elements. This is what has infuriated the Israelis, that while Hamas is a terrorist organization, the U.S. is now funding the unity government. Something tells me that, in secret all along, the Kerry team has been working to promote the unity government. Here's John Kerry's spokeswoman:
"It is not a government backed by Hamas. There are no members of Hamas in the government," Harf told reporters.
She added that the new unity government is a transitional one that is made up of individuals who are not politically associated with any party.
"Hamas is a designated terror organization in the U.S. and we will not provide it with any assistance. We don't have any contacts with Hamas," declared Harf, who added that Washington would judge the government by its actions.
Israel is saying that, until this unity government is tested over a substantial period, the U.S. should not go forward to fund it. Possibly, the O-dministration used this funding, and other secret monies, to get the Gaza side into the government. It is shortsighted for Harf to say that no Hamas members are part of the government, for sentiments in Gaza are typically pro-Hamas. They may not have official / known membership with Hamas, but that doesn't mean that they cannot collaborate with Hamas, or do its bidding. Netanyahu: "I'm deeply troubled by the announcement that the United States will work with the Palestinian government backed by Hamas. All those who genuinely seek peace must reject President Abbas' embrace of Hamas, and most especially, I think the United States must make it absolutely clear to the Palestinian president that his pact with Hamas, a terrorist organization that seeks Israel's liquidation, is simply unacceptable." But Obama has never wanted peace in Israel. He has always wanted to empower the Palestinians, and the worst of it could arrive after the mid-term American elections later this year. It's been my opinion that Obama has been restricted from acting worse against Israel due to the backlash that Democrats could encounter at election times, but the next elections are the last under Obama, wherefore he might take his desire against Israel to the max.
The position of the EU has not changed since Obama became "king." The EU likewise accepts the unity government and still wishes to see a Palestinian country at East Jerusalem. The UN also favors this government. We will now wait to see whether president Sisi of Egypt, who just won the election there by a landslide, will stay the course of the Israeli-Egypt peace treaty. Had the Morsi government still been in power in Egypt, it would have sealed the Obama plot against Israel. Sisi's destruction of the Morsi government may signal that God is not yet allowing Israel's tribulation. The war against Israel cannot come from the south so long as Sisi upholds the peace treaty, and, besides, prophecy indicates that the fatal ambush on Israel will come from its north...after the anti-Christ has taken Syria.
With the Syrian president about to win the election there, and with Sisi winning at the same time, it represents a painful setback for Obama. He could decide to lash out in a powerful way in an attempt to turn the tables. However, he has been crying "democracy" for Egypt and Syria and must therefore act in what appears to be a democratic fashion. At the fall of the Morsi government, there was evidence that Obama was secretly funding Hamas against Sisi. That is, if Obama wishes to act in a non-democratic way, he may secretly use the military goons of the Arab world to accomplish his goals. It is predictable that, should the West fail to nail down its program by diplomatic efforts, to the point of utter frustration, it will seek to purchase the Muslim goons for to win the day. NATO's chief (Rasmussen) has condemned the elections in Syria that is allowing Assad to continue. On June 5, it was announced that Assad won in a landslide (89 %).
Just as prophecy predicts, the world of nations will oppose Israel is such a way as to poke the apple of God's eye. As yet another example, there is the Temple-Mount issue. Jordan is crying the blues this week because Israelis actually went to the Mount:
The Temple Mount became Jewish again on [June 4], and Jordan didn't like it.
Temple organizations reported Tuesday morning that about 400 Jews had ascended to the Mount in the morning hours, and that police allowed them in without undue delays.
Muslim worshippers, who often harass Jews on the Mount, were not allowed in because police and the Israel Security Agency (Shin Bet) had received intelligence about "malicious intentions" and Islamist incitement calling on Arabs to riot and prevent the Jews from entering.
Jordan chose to condemn Israel's deployment of large number of troops and police inside the Al-Aqsa Mosque.
According to the official Petra news agency, Amman said Israel's move is tantamount to "a flagrant violation of international law."
If it's INTERNATIONAL law that forbids the Jews from the Temple area, then it will be God against the internationals. He will arrange "all nations" to enter Israel militarily in order to take care of them there. Everything has been moving well toward prophetic fulfillment, with even the EU willing to give the sole ownership of the Temple Mount (in East Jerusalem) to the Palestinians.
Here's some lip service: "US said it looked forward to working with Sisi as Egypt's president but expressed concerns about the 'restrictive political environment' in which he was elected." This is the same Obama who sicked the IRS on tea-party groups in efforts to win elections on behalf of Democrats, what can be defined as "restrictive political environment." And there is much more that American Democrats are guilty of, election season after election season, in the way of sinister manipulation of votes and voters. They are very proud of it.
Sisi has signaled to Iran that it wants friendship. For practicality's sake, the fact that Sisi won 97 percent of the vote doesn't allow the West to accuse of a rigged election. The UN reports that 7.2 percent of Syria's chemical weapons is all that's left to destroy, meaning that, if the West wishes to intrude on Assad's kingdom now, it doesn't have an excuse. So, with Obama signalling to Iran that he's willing to talk things through on the nuclear issue, it looks like deep Western intrusions into the Middle East affairs are coming to an end. That's a good reason to half-expect some unexpected turmoil blown out of proportion by the West.
Recently, Israel announced the building of a small development in the West Bank, but here's an issue on a large one:
The Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO)...is to appeal to the UN Security Council over Israel's announcement that it would build 1,500 new Jewish homes in Judea, Samaria, and Jerusalem, a senior official said Thursday.
..."It is time for the American administration to take serious steps against what the government of Israel is doing," Nimr Hammad, an adviser to PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas, told AFP. "We strongly condemn this decision which affirms that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is a liar and is not interested in the two-state solution."
This is Israel making it very apparent that it does not wish to see a Palestinian state in the West Bank. I wonder how Israel is coaxing Israelis to purchase these homes under the world threat of forming a new, hostile country around them. The situation is definitely cause for someone to intrude into Jerusalem with a military. With the world signalling repeatedly that a Palestinian state must be formed as a measure to end Arab-Israeli hostilities (fat chance), the Arabs are egged on all the more. It is becoming clear that the world has started to favor the Arabs over Israelis.
It is so short-sighted to think that a Palestinian state will end Arab-Israeli hostilities. It's obvious that the world leaders are blind, and frankly quite stupid. It seems more likely that a satanic spirit leads them to conclude the very act that will bring on Armageddon. I don't pretend to understand the West in this regard because I can't. It's simply moronic. A country of Palestine between Israel and Jordan will give the Arabs an advantage in destroying Israel. It will allow them to move weapons through Palestine more-directly from al-Qaeda in Iraq. It will cause al-Qaeda to seek an overthrow of Jordan on behalf of that effort.
With Israel acting unilaterally on the West-Bank issue, it could cause the West to remain neutral in an invasion of Israel. On the other hand, I can't conceive of such a thing so long as pro-Israeli Rothschild factors control Western strings. I cannot predict a viable invasion of Israel at this time, yet Obama comes very close to the type who would stand aside and do nothing should it take place. I'm not suggesting that it's going to happen under Obama, but that the spirit of the West has been moving in the O-direction so that such a thing is possible in the near future.
Believe it or not:
The US has been secretly holding talks with Hamas for months Buzzfeed reported [June 5], despite its official stance that it would negotiate with the terrorist organization.
"Our administration needed to hear from [Hamas] that this unity government would move toward democratic elections, and toward a more peaceful resolution with the entire region," a US official stated to the "social news" site, on condition of anonymity. "It was important to have that line of communication."
US officials have publicly denied the charges, however, leading to confusion over the report's veracity.
...it is important to note that Hamas recently announced that any "unity" government would be unequivocally subject to their approval before being established - providing a de facto influence in the new government despite the lack of "official" Hamas representatives in the new "parliament."
The story above sounds very credible. If Hamas were not permitted to have word for the Gaza side in such a unity government, we would be hearing Hamas' disapproval on its formation. On the 1500-homes announcement: "The Housing Ministry and the Israel Lands Administration on Wednesday night [June 4] issued tenders for 1,500 new homes in Judea and Samaria, and in Jerusalem. The tenders were issued as part of Israel's response to the establishment of the Hamas-Fatah Palestinian Authority government." This will be reckoned as Israel's brazen rebellion against Western will. This is clear Western intrusion into Israeli affairs. The article adds: "Kerry said Abbas had 'made clear that this new technocratic government is committed to the principles of non-violence, negotiations, recognizing the State of Israel, acceptance of the previous agreements'." Poor, poor, stupid Kerry. But there can be none so poor and obstinate as the Israel formed by Rothschilds. The land will be taken from them and given to the poor of the Israeli nation.
The article below says that there are actually 3,200 homes announced for the Arab area of Israel slated to become the Palestinian state. And look at the audacity of the UN chief: "'As the United Nations has reiterated on many occasions, the building of settlements on occupied territory is illegal under international law,' he said in a statement." It's to be despised when the UN takes for granted that nations must abide by "international law." Who does the UN think it is that it should have power over nations to dictate their splitting into two nations? Why doesn't the UN try that on the US, telling Obama to split Texas in two, partly for the Mexicans? It's not just the UN, but the EU has the same mentality.
To put this another way, globalist organizations are creating the precedent that, if a certain ethnic group fights strongly enough, to the point of conducting terror acts within a nation, that nation must split into two to appease the terrorists. Therefore, as Mexicans in Texas are not fighting for separation, there is no demand from globalists to split Texas in two, but if Mexicans started using terror acts for the next few decades, it would justify the global body of in-your-face delinquents to demand that Texas be split in two. That's exactly what's going on in Israel right now. And the delinquents, Moon included, are pouring fuel to the terrorist fire by taking this position. This is why they are delinquents, because they are supporting terrorist organizations that merely promise to refrain from using terrorist acts. The delinquents refuse to believe that the terrorist organizations are making false promises in order to get the "candy" from the international bodies. The delinquents refuse to see the reality because they really think they are the cause for the terrorists becoming non-terrorists. The delinquents are self-deceived for the purpose of ballooning their reputation as peace makers. They truly believe that they are on the precipice of creating peace in Israel, even while monster Arabs terrorize all around.
The way to solve the Israeli problem is to quash Hamas and the PLO. There has been justification to this day to quash Hamas. How long would Americans tolerate Mexicans firing missiles into San Antonio? Hamas has been trying to murder people the best it can, and yet the international delinquents have not called for their quashing. When Israel went it to quash Hamas a few years ago, the delinquents opposed Israel vehemently, portraying it as the aggressor. They are utterly devoid of good sense because they have a cause that requires doing favors to Arabs. They wish to have an international "community" that includes Arabs under their thumb...that's why they dish out candy to Arabs too. They dream of all nations in the world behaving perfectly under their rule, which is so utterly impossible that it testifies to how demented the globalists are. There is a reason as to why war has been continuous from the day that Cain killed Abel. There is only one way to control the world when attempted by mankind: by hard-fisted dictatorship. That's where the international bodies will need to go, eventually...when they show their true colors.
To perform globalism, the first stage is a public-relations campaign, to make the world think highly of the global order. There is no other way. First, make the people believe that you are good for them. Use words like "peace" to make them believe that you are a lamb. Take their money. That's the second phase. Use their money to become solid. Control all the necessary avenues for to control the people you've just robbed by international taxes and other methods. The third stage is hard-fisted control. There is no other way to control the world, because even brother fights against brother as a natural ailment of mankind. The people within the global government will be its worst enemies due to the natural ailment that besets mankind. Phase one has passed; stage two is now in the works.
The Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant has become the Insurgent boss. Zawahiri, it should be said, is like a phantom figure much like the Osama bin Laden that used to appear now-and-then in videos, like one dangled by the West to create a monster for to justify Western force in Iraq. On the other hand, the leader of Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (reportedly killed several years ago) is supposedly a real person with a real presence:
The shadowy leader of thousands of Islamist fighters in Syria and Iraq, many of them Westerners, appears to be surpassing al-Qaida chief Ayman al-Zawahiri as the world's most influential jihadist.
Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi's Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant -- known for its ruthless tactics and suicide bombers -- is arguably the most capable force fighting Syrian President Bashar Assad, and has even held control of a major Iraqi city for the past five months, in tandem with other groups.
..."For the last 10 years or more, (Zawahiri) has been holed up in the Afghanistan-Pakistan border area and hasn't really done very much more than issue a few statements and videos," said Richard Barrett, a former counter-terrorism chief at MI6, Britain's foreign intelligence service.
"Whereas Baghdadi has done an amazing amount -- he has captured cities, he has mobilized huge amounts of people, he is killing ruthlessly throughout Iraq and Syria.
"If you were a guy who wanted action, you would go with Baghdadi," Barrett told Agence France Presse, noting the ISIL leader's challenge to Zawahiri was "a really interesting development".
...ISIL appears to hold the greatest appeal, with King's College London Professor Peter Neumann estimating around 80 percent of Western fighters in Syria have joined the group.
...ISIL claims to have had fighters from the Britain, France, Germany and other European countries, as well as the United States, and from the Arab world and the Caucasus.
..."If you are a Brit or a French guy who has no family connection to Syria, you're not wanting to fight for the Syrian people... The reason you're going there is because you see Syria as essentially the center of gravity or the potential birthplace for that Islamic state that you're hoping to create." Much of the appeal also stems from Baghdadi himself -- the ISIL leader is touted as a battlefield commander and tactician, a crucial distinction compared with Zawahiri.
...Baghdadi sought to merge with al-Nusra, which rejected the deal, and the two groups have operated separately [in Syria] since.
Zawahiri has urged ISIL to focus on Iraq and leave Syria to al-Nusra, but Baghdadi and his fighters have openly defied the al-Qaida chief and, indeed, have fought not only Assad, but also al-Nusra and other rebel groups.
Immediately after the West failed to enter Syria militarily by blaming Assad for a chemical-weapons attack, articles appeared claiming that the fighters in Syria could strike out in the West, but reports like this raise my suspicions; staged events are possibly in the works right now to justify further Middle-East intrusions. The West can, at any time, start clamoring about his threats to the West, and then stage terror acts blamed on him. The West can thus justify going into Syria to get him, and from there the West can manipulate events in Iraq too. Entry into Syria would have occurred by now had Putin not been vehemently opposed in the past two years.
Iraq is still a slaughter zone. Headlines this week include, "80 killed, about 90 injured in Iraq attacks". The battle is clearly against the Iraqi government, but, for now, Iraq is winning the war. The determination of the Sunni (rats, murderers) predicts the ultimate fate of Iraq.
...Iraqi security forces re-established their control of Samarra city in Salahudin province which was seized by Sunni insurgents in the morning, the sources added.
...These areas had been seized by groups believed to be linked to the Islamic State in Iraq and Levant (ISIL), an Al Qaeda breakaway group in Iraq, a source said.
At least nine policemen were killed and 45 people injured in the city when insurgents launched attacks on security checkpoints and police stations in the early hours.
It is notable that Iraqi violence is not much different since the American military left Iraq a few years ago, meaning that the Americans in Iraq were doing nothing to curb it. That picture harmonizes with the accusation of many, that the Americans were using the violence as a means to remain in Iraq. If they stopped the violence, the Americans would have needed to leave earlier. But they were in Iraq, using American tax dollars and the blood of American youths, to secure business / globalist interests. The American military acted very demonically, didn't it? It's time to oil the fan that brightens the coal beds of Hell upon which the guilty will lie.
With the anti-Christ predicted to have headquarters in Mosul, the following seems meaningful:
...A curfew was imposed on Mosul Thursday, when Sunni Islamist insurgents moved into parts of the city of Samarra...
The Iraqi army regained control in Samarra later the same day after bombing the city, but violence then spread to neighboring Nineveh province and its capital Mosul, where more than 30 people were killed in attacks [June 7].
...In west Mosul, four police, three soldiers and 16 militants were killed in clashes, while a mortar round killed a civilian, officials said.
Three more soldiers were killed fighting militants in east Mosul, while security forces shot dead five would-be suicide bombers in the Hammam al-Alil area, south of the city.
It sounds like the Bush years. The Americans even had their forces stationed in the Mosul area -- tens of thousands -- yet what we are seeing today took place there then too. What's the difference? The question has always been whether the Americans were secretly funding / arming the Sunni rebel groups, or even giving them their agenda. Now we hear this:
President Barack Obama's National Security Adviser, Susan Rice, hinted on [June 6] that the United States was sending weapons to the Syrian rebels...
The comments were made in an interview Rice gave to CNN.
"...That's why the United States has ramped up its support for the moderate vetted opposition, providing lethal and nonlethal support where we can to support both the civilian opposition and the military opposition," added Rice.
The comments appear to confirm recent speculations that Washington was ready to arm the Syrian rebels fighting to oust President Bashar Al-Assad.
Why has the O-dministration decided to make this news at this time? Is this a trial balloon to see how the American people and the world would react to Obama's arming the Arab rebels openly? It continues: "A leading Syrian opposition figure recently said that western states could send desperately-needed arms to rebel groups in Syria "within weeks" and, last week it was reported that Obama is close to authorizing a military-led mission to train moderate Syrian rebels to fight the regime and Al-Qaeda-linked groups." CNN noted that in a speech last week at West Point, Obama said he wanted to increase support to rebels "who offer the best alternative to terrorists and brutal dictators." I see. The al-Qaeda-like rebels are better than a dictator, and so it's now okay to arm terrorists types. The good bet is: the American military was arming the terrorists even before Obama.
It appears that the Americans were waiting to see the outcome of the Syrian election before acting in this way. For a moment, we may have thought that the O-mericans were about finished in Syria, but suddenly we discover that the war was always still on, slated to become hotter. More people now get to be killed for the globalist cause. But before rushing to conclusions, we need to see what the courage level of the O-military is, with Putin standing guard over Assad.
In a related article: "Former U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton favored arming Syria's rebels early in that country's civil war but was overruled by President Barack Obama, she says in her new memoir, obtained by CBS News." But wait. Obama had a reputation to protect of not being a war president. He was already on the wire for acting in Libya; an escalation in Syria by American-made weaponry, by his personal order, would have looked bad coming back-to-back with Libya. And so, I believe, instead of sending American weapons to the rebels, he sent Libyan ones. That was his decision, but, of course, Hillary won't tell us that part.
Here's a surprise from June 5: "Turkey and the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) in Iraq on Wednesday announced the signing of a 50-year deal to export Kurdish oil to the north." A 50-year pact apart from the blessings of the Iraqi government! The Americans don't like this, apparently: "Washington has repeatedly voiced criticism of Ankara's direct dealings with Irbil, warning it could threaten Iraq's territorial integrity, a position rejected by both Irbil and Ankara."
The impression is that Washington does not wish to see a deep rift between Iraq and its Kurdistan province for the sake of unity. But Washington is a fake, having sinister plots while acting angelic. Washington is the very epitome of a wolf in sheep's clothing. I therefore ask: what is the real reason that Washington claims to disapprove of Turkey's deal with the Kurds? Is much of the oil in the deal not going to U.S. businesses? Does Washington wish to remain on good terms with Iraq for the sake of other business ventures already secured by Americans (during the Bush years, for example)? Exxon moved, to Iraq's disappointment, from oil fields in southern Iraq into the Kurd zone. I wonder what Exxon is up to in Kurdistan.
You'll understand this section better if you first read from the first instance of "Rothschild" in the last update.
After catching wind, from Wikipedia, that a certain Quintus Caepio had stolen some 50,000 gold bars during a war of the Romans in southern France, I kept them in mind, developing theories as to whom they would have been passed along to, and where they might have gone geographically. I do not think that they would all be kept together, and a few would go to choice / trusted family members along the course of history. One of the theories was a natural one, that some ended up with those who operated Rennes le Chateau's Magdalene church.
The reason for writing this is to show why the bars ended up in the Rothschild family in the mid-1700's or earlier. But long before, it is to be assumed that the Templars had control of them. The Templars can be broken down into two main groups, the Sinclair vikings who conquered England in 1066 (just 30 years before their first invasion of Jerusalem), and the Flemings from Flanders, some of whom settled Scotland's Lothian, where the ultra-wealthy Henry Sinclair operated, the one who build the extraordinary Rosslyn Chapel. I was able to show to my satisfaction that Templars (used blue lions as symbols) had been of bloodlines from Israel's chief priests and Maccabees in the days of Jesus, but then it became apparent, through my personal understanding of heraldry and surname origins, that Joseph Caiaphas was a descendant of Quintus Caepio as well as of Julius Caesar. That is, Caiaphas was assumed to be a son of Junia Caepio(nis) Secunda, or of her mother, the latter (Servilia Caepionis) being one who had an affair with Julius Caesar. Although I may be wrong on the specifics, the point here is that some of the Quintus gold bars are expected to go to Caiaphas, thus catapulting him to the high priesthood of Israel...due to the influence of his parents through wealth.
The understood leader of the first invasion of Jerusalem (1096-1099) was a Godfrey de Bouillon (Flemish), whose surname smacks of gold bullion. In heraldry, metal bars are called "billets," a symbol used in the Arms of Roquefeuil, a location beside Rennes le Chateau. These are apparent indicators as to where the Caepio gold bars passed to. It seems a strong case, using multiple methods, to link the Roquefeuil family (proto-Rockefellers) to the Rhodes Illuminati (i.e. Cecil Rhodes) suspect from the Herods and therefore connected to Rothschilds. The Roquefeuil location connected especially well to Pollocks, who are one of the proto-Rothschild families.
It was possible to link the Roquefeuil family directly to Fulbert "the tanner," the line that married William the Conqueror Sinclair, and to the related Moline / Moulin family. I showed that the tops of the heraldic rook symbol used by certain Rockefeller families (example, the Rooks and Rookbys) are identical to the ends of a moline cross (the latter symbol is nearly the cross type used by the Bouillons, and is used by the Moline surname).
Jacques de Molay is easily linked to the Moline / Molyneau family. He was the grand master of the Templars when the papacy decided to go into France to murder him (early 1300s). It had the effect of scattering the Templars, many of whom ended up under the protection of king Bruce of Scotland, and the Sinclairs of Rosslyn. Jacques de Molay is shown at his Wikipedia article with a black cross on his breast, the color of the Moline and Sinclair crosses. Geoffrey Plantagenet (a Fulk of the royal-Jerusalem family) is shown at his Wikipedia article with blue lions on his shield. It had come to my attention that the blue lion was of the Caepio bloodline.
One may begin to assume that, by the time of the Templars, the gold bars did not go far from where Quintus Caepio found them, in Toulouse. Having been stashed near that place near 100 BC, they ended up in the Roquefeuil family some 1,000 years later. There is heraldic evidence that the Fulks of Anjou were named after some term that named Pollocks, both families tracing to the origin of the Flecks / Fletchers (Flecks share white scallops with Rothschilds). The Pula entity (in Pollock colors for a reason) was identified (by me) with the black witchcraft (i.e. of Hecate) of the golden-fleece Colchians known to have settled the northern Adriatic (where Pula is located), and as such Pula is suspect with "Folos," a mythical entity that was tied to mythical Jason (of the Argo ship). Years before knowing of Pula (or "Pola"), I was able to trace "Folos" (a Centaur) to a real location near what seems like the original naming of CENTAURs at the KENDRon area of Greece that was also spelled, "Kedron," and therefore I traced the Folos entity further back to a horse-loving peoples in the Kidron valley at Jerusalem, where it just so happens that Solomon's stables were located...and where the first Templars operated. The Kidron valley is at the Jerusalem Temple.
The Fullos surname actually comes up with the Fullers, the latter identified (by me) as the earliest Roquefeuils / Pollocks.
Wikipedia's Pula article: "Greek pottery and a part of a statue of Apollo have been found [in Pula], attesting to the presence of the Greek culture. Greek tradition attributed the foundation of Polai to the Colchians, mentioned in the context of the story of Jason and Medea who had stolen the golden fleece [compare "fleece" with "Fleck" or "Pollux"). The Colchians, who had chased Jason into the northern Adriatic, were unable to catch him and ended up settling in a place they called Polai, signifying "city of refuge". Never mind dimwit historians who sit around trying to think up derivations of terms, as best they can, based on shot-in-the-dark word play. Never mind "city of refuge," and trace "Pola" instead to "Apollo" or "Pollux." The latter (much like "Folos") is what I call the Spartan Apollo, and it just so happens that Pollux's twin brother was given a horse symbol. Moreover, there was a Tyndaris area in Colchis (see below the term "COLCHIS" on the old map below) smack on the river where the golden fleece was located, while Pollox's mother (Leda) was given a mythical Tyndareus for a husband. Clearly, Pollux was an entity from the river (the Glaucus) of the golden fleece. http://www.tribwatch.com/mapCaucasiaOld.jpg You now know the origin of the Templars -- and the Israeli chief priests -- in the Hecate cult that formed the Hector Trojans (symbolized in myth with the Trojan horse). It became my opinion that "Pharisee" traces to whatever named "Paris," the brother of Hector.
The question is: who were the Roquefeuils before being named after that place? I don't know. I traced "Roque" to "Rika/Reka" at the north end of Istria, and "Feuil" could even be from a version of "Pula / Folos." The first that history seems to know of them is when a daughter of a Roquefeuil family married Henri IV of Rodes/Rodez (less than 100 miles from Toulouse). It was interesting to find that the English Joseph surname was founded by a Henry Joseph (of Hampshire), and that the first Sinclair kings of England were named Henry. I concluded that the Henry surname had linked to the line of Herod Archelaus, up the Rhodanus at Vienne-Isere. It can be gleaned from the Argonautica myth that Colchians had settled the Rhodanus after first settling the Pula area, and this river was named after Redones, the same that named Rodez.
It just so happens that Quintus Caepio fought a war against some Cimmerian elements at Orange, beside Vienne-Isere. The Henry surname shares the spread eagle of the Vienne surname, but in the colors of the Lyon and Lannoy lions. I can be confident that these colors correspond to a set of families from Herod Archelaus because he had coins minted with feathers issuing from a military helmet, the symbol in the English Lannoy Crest, and because Lyon is essentially beside Vienne-Isere. The point here is that while the gold bars were stolen (by Caepio) from an area that Herod Antipas would be banished to about a century later, there is evidence, in the Caepio war against the Cimmerians, that some bars worked their way up to where Herod Archelaus would be about a century later, at the Vienne-Isere theater.
To put this another way, when both Herod brothers were exiled (banished by the Roman caesar), they chose the locations of their exile, where they knew the gold-bar-potential families were living. Who tipped the Herods off? It just so happens that, before knowing of the Caepio bars, I had reasons (not yet proven) for suspecting Herod ancestry in the same family that brought about Joseph Caiaphas. It therefore seemed possible / logical to me that Joseph Caiaphas, named after a version of "Caepio," tipped the Herods off.
The Dutch Ruther/Ruiter surname was treated in the last update, and connected to "Rothschild / Rothchild." I asserted that the Ruthers were a branch of Herods because they use a horse and rider (Templar symbol too), but I didn't tell why that symbol is a Herod one. It's the feathers in the helmet of the rider that gives it away. The horse and rider is used by the McCAFFery/Cafferty, a surname smacking of surname variations expected from "CAIAPHas." The horse and rider (still with the feathered helmet) is also used by the Craig surname, which is said to be ancestral to the Carricks...which is one reason that I traced the Quintus bars to emperor Caracalla (about 200 AD), whose family (included Julius Maesa) operated out of the eastern Adriatic coast, i.e. where Colchians had settled.
Mythology is a complex system of secret and not-so-secret codes used fancifully by satanic cults. The fleece symbol was chosen for a special reason, but the gold part probably had to do with a massive amount of Phrygian gold possessed by the Colchians, and by the Phrygian entity, Phryxus, the rider of the fleece (when it was still alive as a flying ram). The fleece was gleaned by me to be code for the same cult that brought about the Centaur-related Satyrs, the latter suspect with the namers of Istria. The Ishtar cult, that is, after passing through Cybele, the mother goddess of Phrygia, the wife of Attis (sun god of Phrygia), who was none other than the same people group (the Hatti) that named Aeetes, Colchian owner of the golden fleece.
Having said all that, let's go back to the Cimmerians that warred with Caepio at Orange. They won the war, and so one may conjecture that they found and took some of Caepio's bars. The bars are expected, by me, to have found their way to what would later be Denmark, where the Cimmerians are known to have named a country after themselves. Denmark just happens to be the root of the Sinclair vikings, if the online claims are correct in pegging Rollo as a Dane Rus. They can be traced to Danaans on Rhodes, you see, root of the Redones (= proto-Rus). The name of the Cimmerians is roughly the same by which the Welsh went by -- Cymbri or similar spellings -- which can explain why a shoot of Rollo's family ended up on the Welsh border, to defeat them in war. I'm suggesting that the Sinclair line under William the Conqueror went into England, and parked its most trusted families (D'Avranches especially) on the Welsh border seeking some of the gold bars taken at the war with Caepio.
Rollo was the nephew of Malahule of More. The latter's line founded the family of Ranulph le Meschin...ruling on the Welsh border in the seat of the D'Avrances'. That's what I'm talking about. I can't repeat all the reasoning for suspecting that the Meschins had hold of some of the gold bars. This section here is included as per the mention of Meschins in the last update. They and related Masseys/Maceys were important Sinclair liners that I place into the proto-Rothschild camp. Meschins and Pollocks had been from noble Poles whose ancestry went partially back to Khazars on the Mures river (Romania). It therefore started to make sense that Khazars were named after "Caesar," and that they too had the gold bars. The Cathars of the Roquefeuil theater, often lumped in by many with the de-Molay Templars, thus became suspect as Caesar liners.
The Cathars have a place (Cazeres) named after themselves smack at Comminges, where Herod Antipas was banished. The naming of Comminges can be traced to "Comyn," the entity ruled by the Conteville family that birthed the ruling D'Avrances of the Welsh border area. Coincidence? I think not. Previous to being called Comminges, the area was Lugdunum, the same name as Lyon (the one beside Vienne-Isere) was called at one time.
Let me put it this way: Julius Caesar came to power very shortly after Quintus Caepio, wherefore it can be assumed that Mr. Caesar became fabulously successful in world conquest due to finding some of the gold bars. It may also be assumed that Caesar went searching into Britain for the gold bars stashed by the Cimmerians (i.e. that's why he invaded Britain). Joseph Caiaphas got some bars simply because he was a descendant of Julius Caesar. I did NOT trace Caiaphas to Julius Caesar merely for creating this possibility; rather, it just so happens that Caiaphas traced to Servilia Caepio whom Caesar was having an affair with.
It was BEFORE knowing of the gold bars that I concluded the Casey surname to be that of the proto-Khazars. I did not at that time figure "Caesar" into the Casey theme, but rather found that Caseys had been Cassels. It just so happens that Caseys use eagles, the Roman symbol, and that they use the eagle in red, the color of the Hohenstaufen / Hohenzollern eagle, the latter families being Khazars. One can prove that Hohens (definite branch of Cohens) are Khazars because the Jewish Cohen surname comes up as "Kagan." Moreover, the Jewish Cohen/Kagan surname even uses stars in the colors of the Moray stars, thus tracing them to "Mures," the Khazar origin of "Moray" and of "More." The Sinclair Rus had ruled at a More location of Khazars in Norway. There is even a Reghin location on the Mures expected to be related to "Ragn," for Rollo's father was Ragnvald.
By what coincidence do the Regan and Cather/Cater surnames both use an ermined white chevron surrounded by fish? It just so happens that Regans use dolphins, the Caesar-surname symbol. The Cather/Cater fish were traced to the eastern-Adriatic coast, namely to Kotor and Butua. If this is all correct, and I think it is, the Caesar family was named after Keturah, the other wife (Genesis 25) of Biblical Abraham. It makes a lot of sense to me in the grand scheme of the Biblical dragon...that has come to rule the earth.
Moreover, the Casey and Cassel Coats both use red-on-white chevrons, tending to identify them as kin from the same stock. This discovery was made before any gold-bar or Caesar considerations. Afterward, it was found that the dolphin in the Cassel Crest is the one in the Caesar-surname Crest...which for me indicates that the namers of Cassel / Kassel (Germany) were Julius-Caesar liners. And that's how the gold bars, I now think, got from prince William of Hesse-Cassel, to the first Rothschild. There is agreement online that the first Rothschild got his fortune from a large sum of money from this prince, and yet the reported details may not be correct.
One can see that both red chevrons above may be versions of the Quint chevron, for Quints and Cassels both share the so-called fitchee cross (to be expected where Quints are from Quintus Caepio while Cassels are from Julius Caesar). It is often a simpleton mistake to assume that terms such as "Cassel" are from dictionary terms, in this case from "castle." The Chateau surname is listed with the Castel surname, first found in Artois, the area of France where the Bouillons operated. The Chateau/Castel symbol is the Sinclair cross in red-on-gold, Quint colors, and likely a version of the red Rhodes cross, for the Rhodes family, to be traced to Henri IV of Rodez, was first found in the same place (Lincolnshire) as the Cassel surname. The Chattan/Chatow and Chatan Coats, in the colors of the Jewish Katz cat, thus appear to be using the fesse of the Scottish Casey Coat.
The Regan dolphins are in the colors of the Rollo boars probably due to a Regan trace back to Rollo's father. Heraldry is not anything that you might at first think, and is not the generality that heraldry experts claim it to be. Heraldry is nothing but a SPECIFIC tracking system kept by Templar agents as they morphed into Masons. The only surnames of importance to heraldry are those that were important to the Templars. This makes it easier to trace surnames to specific rulers and people groups.
The Rollo surname was first found in Perth, a term that I traced to mythical Perdix, whom was equated in ancient times with Daedalus of Crete. The latter had sons (i.e. people groups) that moved from Crete to Apulia, across the Adriatic from Pula. I think you get it. Daedalus is often said to be the Hephaestus cult on Crete, but then I trace Hephaestus to "Ephesus," founded mythically by a son of king Kodros of Athens, who had both a fish and a boar symbol (verifiable online). That's why I traced "KODRos" to "Kotor," but the additional point here is that the heraldic boar can be traced to Kodros too, as his particular Athenians passed through Ephesus and then to Thebes (see Pandareus and queen Aedon) in Boiotia.
Butua (likely named after Boiotians) was founded by mythical Cadmus, you may read online, but Cadmus had been the founder of Thebes, and that's where the Ares dragon was encountered that had also protected the golden fleece. It can therefore be surmised that Acte, the name of the Athens region before the Hatti (i,.e. namers of Aeetes) moved in to name Attica, was named after the same that named Hecate, or vice versa. It just so happens that while the Hecate cult moved through mythical Hector, the Hector/Ector surname (blue lion) was first found in the same general area of Scotland as the Rollo's. In Arthurian myth, this people group is styled, Hector de Maris, the latter term being likely from "Maros," the alternative name of the Mures.
The Hackets (Roman double-headed eagle) even share fish with the Cathers/Caters, suggesting strongly that Hackets are from the ancient namers of Acte (whom I traced to king Og in Jerusalem's Hinnom valley, next to the Kidron). The treFOILs (see Feller and Falaise-suspect Fallis trefoils) in the Hacket Chief are code for RoqueFEUILS; the Hacket trefoils and gold Chief looks related to the same of the Rods surname, the latter is obviously from Henry IV of Rodez. The Henry eagle is even in the colors of the Rods trefoils. The Rods' were first found in the same place (Herefordshire) as Fullers, expected where Fullers were the namers of the Feuils. Pollocks even use a Hacket-like motto code in "AudACTER," which is part code for Aude, the area surrounding Roquefeuil. Now you know where the Pollock boar traced, to Kodros of Acte.
You will not find any of these realities spoken by heraldry "experts," who are usually a darkened comedy routine (i.e. a sick joke) telling lies deliberately to hide the realities.
There is much more that I have said in the past to prove every point made thus far in this update, but my purpose is only to establish a Rothschild link back to the Caiaphas bloodline...that killed the Son of God. It was this same bloodline that sought to take Jerusalem from the Muslims starting in 1096, finally succeeding in the Rothschilds of the 20th century. This is the reason for the coming Armageddon. The Caiaphas family has destined the world to Armageddon by its Middle-East intrusions.
In other news, Western families of passengers on Flight 370 are setting up a whistleblower-reward fund because they are convinced that the cause of the flight's disappearance has been suppressed by authorities.
On this page, you will find evidence enough that NASA did not put men on the moon.
Starting at this paragraph, there is a single piece of evidence
-- the almost-invisible dot that no one on the outside was supposed to find --
that is enough in itself to prove the hoax.
End-times false signs and wonders may have to do with staged productions like the lunar landing.
The rest of the Gog-in-Iraq story is in PART 2 of the
Table of Contents