Previous Update

Updates Index

(if there are any to speak of)

July 24 - 30, 2018

Is the Revelation Scorpion Symbol for End-Time Rephaites?
Quoting Several Armageddon Prophecies To Learn Sequence and Events
Meat on T-Rex Bones

For best results, take the time to load the Coats to see them for yourself. Load the first-Coat link I offer (or open one here) to get a tab open, and then open more if needed. To check a description in the Coat of Arms, type the surname at this page:

Ha, first thing this week, two days after the FISA applications came out to everyone's surprise, Trump's people refused to reveal the many redacted parts:

President Trump will not immediately grant House Republicans' request to declassify and publicize currently redacted sections of the recently released FISA application used by the FBI to justify the surveillance of an ex-Trump aide, the White House said Monday.

Note that it says, "not immediately," as in stringing the House Republicans along further. The House is continually strung along by the Trump administration, but in this case this decision is from the Trump fink himself. No one at Fox has made a case as to why Trump should not reveal most of the applications.

The WH statement above gives NO REASON for the refusal, meaning that there is no good reason, meaning, likely, that Trump is protecting self from an enemy backlash if he should do the right thing: declassify. It is a disgrace for a president to refuse to do the right thing because he's afraid of blackmail, or something similar. That's identical with giving an abductor the ransom he's asking for. Trump thus supports obstruction in order to serve his own reputation. That's illegal. One is not permitted to obstruct justice for that reason. Challenge him on why he refuses to declassify. He has not given THE REASON.

He has just said that he will remain "uninvolved." But that's exactly the thing he publicly bad-mouthed Sessions for. Now that the ball has come round to his court, what does Trump do? Remains uninvolved! Unacceptable. The president is obstructing justice.

Why does Fox continue to protect him using the FISA warrants when Trump himself refuses to use them? What a stinking louse. No matter how he cuts his excuse, it amounts to concern for his reputation. That is far-far less important than exposing these massive crimes evident in the FISA warrants. Trump has no ledge to stand on; he must fall down the cliff. He's a bad apple. He doesn't deserve his job. He's as bad as Sessions and Wray. Guaranteed. It wasn't me who asked him. It was the House of Representatives, the people. Trump has no valid excuse for not letting the people know what their FBI did. It is their FBI; they own it. They want to know. So put it out there already, you IMPOSTER!

Come out, come out, wherever you are, fink, and tell the people yourself rather than through Mrs. Sanders:

"The president has purposefully remained uninvolved in this process," White House press secretary Sarah Sanders said Monday. "He has said repeatedly that he wants the Department of Justice to be fully transparent with these requests from Congress, and he's going to continue at this point to remain uninvolved.

But where is the REASON? What's his excuse? I want to know so that I can reveal him for what he really is, the backside of a skunk. He wants the DoJ to be fully transparent??? Farce! He is the DoJ. He is the governor of the DoJ. The DoJ is compelled to do whatever he commands. The people elected him to use the DoJ to cleanse Obama-era corruption, and this FISA scandal is a prime example of that corruption. At every step Nunes has taken, this rodent in the White House has evaded, remained uninvolved. We have it from his own lips, that he has remained uninvolved. He's a do-nothing stinker, a traitor to his voters, a big, fat zero. He has admitted it himself, that he WANTS to remain uninvolved. He didn't say that someone forced him to remain a zero; he admitted that he deliberately has been a zero. There you have his admission of guilt. Jump off the cliff, you despicable skunk. Stop smelling up the Republican party. Commit suicide, traitor.

And don't ask Sarah to go out and lie for you, for that turns her faith hypocritical. You don't want that on your head. Woe to those who cause people to sin.

The scum of the earth accused the president falsely, and seek to shut him up using the same false charges, which gives the president the full right to use government documents to protect himself from the false charges. And here he sees an excellent set of government documents which clear his name and simultaneously catch the scum of the earth in their own corrupt scheme, but he refuses to unveil the set of documents more than it's already unveiled. Others can unveil, he says, but he himself will not unveil. He's leaving it up to Rosenstein, his arch enemy, the scum of the earth, to unveil it, he says. He's handing Rosenstein his dish rather than his punishment. Trump is thus complicit with the scum of the earth, the Intelligence rats. Both are nasty rodents, night creatures.

Sarah Sanders, do not support this fink. Get out while you can. Let Stormy Daniels save him, whom he trusted to keep quiet. The traitor is betrayed, we are seeing this in progress. The traitor is in trouble just as he's in the throes of deceiving God's people. He thought he might get away with it, but it's not to be. Anyone with eyes can this week see his complicity with the gangsters. No, no, he says, I will not help my fellow Republicans to jail the corrupt in high-government positions. No, no, I deliberately chose not to in the past, and still deliberately choose not to. I deliberately help Rosenstein, and grant him his wishes, along with Comey, Mueller, Wray and the devil himself. I deliberately deny my fellow Republicans who are on the good side of the tracks, who love justice and fair play. I deliberately leave this situation to the corrupt Rosenstein; he will choose, not me. Get out, Sarah, if you know what's good for you. Be thankful, Mr. Spicer, that you are not there in her place.

These scandals are not to be about Trump. They are to be about the good Republicans who want a normal country, a decent society. Never mind make America great again. Instead, just make it normal, and safe from these rats who think they ought to control the nation. The people hired them merely to spy out the potential enemies, yet they wish to rule, to set the agendas, to decide how much money should be used for THEIR agendas. They defy the president if need be, and seek to replace him via illegal schemes with a man of their own kind. The sky is falling on America because of this, and Trump hands power over to Rosenstein. You cannot get a more deplorable piece of stool than that. Can you agree? Am I framing this charge against him correctly? Yes, I am.

Let his own lawyer betray him, for he's betraying the people of Christ. Here she comes, the porn witch that he slept with the year after his marriage. Here she comes to reveal his true colors. If he can't be true to his own wife, he won't be true to you. We learned this from Bill Clinton, that a cheater is also a greedy lawbreaker. And we learned from Hillary that a greedy lawbreaker is also a cheater. She cheated on Trump, and Trump cheated on my brothers and sisters. How dare you, you fink. She cheated on Trump, and president Trump lets her get away with it, because he doesn't want her fake media to reveal his sins. He wants only to promote himself as a great guy. Cheaters use imagery. One cannot deceive apart from using a facade of good-guy. It's the first rule of being a con nor a rapist: act like a super, honest guy. The Intelligence rats know all about it.

The American military is the angel of the globe, right? Says who? Says the military. But of course. I hang my head in shame for the patriots. They are bewitched. For them, it is America first, Jesus second, or maybe third, or maybe not at all. The evolving patriot now gets on a knee to offer adoration to Donald. If he says, attack Iran, the patriot will jump. What are we coming to? Trust in Donald? Do you think he can win a war from over on a desk in Washington? Do you think he can steer a war against Iran? No, he cannot, which is why he'd rather just send in some air bombs, or space bombs. He wants a space force with space bombs. Our worshipful Trump, the hardball guy whose afraid of snotty Rosenstein and skinny Mueller. No matter that the duo have the big bazookas on Stormy's chest as their biggest weapon, Trump quivers in fear. Let's not make Rosenstein mad. Let's not cause waves at Rosenstein's feet. Just move on, troops, let's go fight Iran instead. It's safer than old-man Mueller, and bonus, if we lose against Iran, the world goes to pot instead of me.

So what can Nunes do now? He wants the president to unveil the FISA scandal, and he told this thing before the American people. The president wasted no time in slashing Nunes' hopes. Nope, sorry, there are a couple of bazookas I've got to deal with first. If I survive, maybe then.

But, Mr. president, if you don't unveil this scandal, and deal harshly with its cohorts, the scandal makers will never cease to expose your dark side. The spies will be under your skin looking at all your bones. They have no shame.

Sorry Nunes, my mind is made up. I've been a jerk all my life, why change now? My staff is filled with jerks too, I know, but please don't remind me. I don't tend to attract anything respectable. The reason that I make myself look great is because I know how low I am. If I threw in another $100,000, do you think Stormy would sleep with me again? I love sluts, Mr. Nunes, I just can't resist, but I've got to pass myself off as a quasi-Christian now; I can't afford to admit what I did with her. Sorry, my mind is made up.

But Mr. president, you are obstructing justice. You are allowing the corrupt to get away, and to grow together into a bigger monster. And you boast about getting things done fast and well, but here you are procrastinating for no good reason. The people are perplexed about you.

The no-no-no news:

CNN plays crappily in the video above by not supplying the transcript, and not explaining what's going on, step-by-step. The CNN video below explains the crux of the tape better, but doesn't get around to playing it until just before the 7th-minute mark:

I can't make out what Trump says before "pay with cash," and the tape does not prove that Trump was with this woman. As Cohen taped the conversation secretly, there is a question on whether he was paid by Trump's political enemies to trap him, which argues for elaborate fakery from the accusing woman too. Note that Trump is surprised when Cohen speaks to him about money. Trump says, "what financing?" Did Cohen bring it up to trap Trump? Trump then asks whether it will be in cash or check, though Democrats are saying Trump wanted it to be in cash. In Hannity's video below, Sarah Carter's view of it sounds correct to me, where she says that Cohen agreed with Trump that the payment shouldn't be in cash, which tends to make Trump look honest:

This tape and others could change my mind on the porn witch. She may have faked her accusation, and it may have been Cohen's idea to pay her off to make Trump look bad. Initially, I had no reason to assume that Cohen was trying to betray Trump. I took the position that the $130,000 payment was evidence of Trump's guilt. I also took the position that Trump's enemies spied on Cohen, and finding dirt, forced him to divulge the payment publicly. However, with the known fact now that Cohen secretly taped his client on a similar sex-hush matter, Cohen looks like the fiend, part of the false allegations. The reason I didn't take that position earlier is that Cohen has been Trump's lawyer for years, from well before he ran for the presidency. Chances were that Cohen was not a mole in Trump's life, in other words, though he could have been purchased and/or blackmailed to transform himself into one during the campaign.

The day after writing the paragraph above, news came out that Cohen recorded a conversation with he and Chris Cuomo of CNN, using his cell phone. Nobody seems to have the date of this thing except to say earlier this year. In the recording, Cohen admits to CNN that he paid $130,000 to silence the obscene bazooka porn witch. If this admission was prior to when Cohen admitted it to the world as a whole, or if this admission was what led to his admission to the world, then Cohen looks like a paid traitor to his client, or worse: an unpaid one. If he was unpaid, his motives appear to be to destroy Trump politically as per his own desires. But this is a good thing because Trump doesn't deserve to be the president. We are thankful that Hillary isn't, but Trump is obstructing justice, and merely waving at government corruption. No such man deserves to be the nation's leader. He calls it by another name, but it is aiding criminality, plain and simple, with the motive of saving his own skin. It is not permissible. He is not, apparently, abetting criminality, but he is permitting it to protect itself, and to advance, before his very own eyes.

? Probably, these very leaks on the two women are part of the criminality's advancements. So long as he does nothing, it's going to be bash-bash to his own head, perfect. It is possible that the same criminality produced the porn witch in the first place, with a false charge. If I'm not mistaken, both women accuse of acts with Trump in 2006, the most-damaging time as he was married in 2005. As late as 2016 while eyeing the White House, Trump showed verbal signs of being an adulterer. It is therefore credible that he did sleep with the porn witch.

Trump has done nothing to curb spy powers on the people, and so I am very happy to see this happening to him. As the Fox video above says, we must all write and speak, from now on, assuming that we are being recorded / watched by the government, but Trump gave the spies more power to spy on the people. Please, spies, spy more on Trump until the gets why it's wrong.

Cohen ended the recording abruptly at the no-no-no point, probably because there was nothing damaging to Trump after it, or because there was something helpful to Trump. In the same way, the government can cherry pick parts of your recordings (and ruin the parts that help your case) to put you in jail when you don't deserve it. I say that Trump should go to jail on false charges from Intelligence if he does not curb spy powers, or if he does not run a sword of justice down the throats of those abusing their spy powers at this very time. That includes those who break-and-entered to steal Cohen's materials.

If Trump has been falsely accused of adultery for the purpose of railroading his campaign, all the more reason to punish the ones responsible, for they will use this tactic for as long as it works. Trump, you moron, use you spy powers to discover who is spying on you. And if they won't spy for you, change the guard. DO SOMETHING.

Rand Paul and Nunes are treading very lightly on Trump because he's looking like the only hope of exposing the evidence against the corrupt FISA actors. This is what makes Trump's procrastinating outrageous. The rats are caught in traps and coming out of closets all over the place, and Trump's attitude is to let them get away without lifting a finger. No exaggeration. Not even lifting a finger when he's the only human left who can remedy the situation. Not even lifting a finger to correct his mistakes such as Wray and Sessions. I can agree that the president shouldn't have to do the dirty work because that's what the DoJ and FBI are for, but if the leaders of those orgs won't do the right thing, the president must.

On Tucker Carlson (2nd minute, video below), upon a date I don't know, Trump said: "As they said, 'You're winning, don't get involved,' because I don't want to have people accuse me of anything, and so I've stayed very-much uninvolved." Let's dissect this. The "they" come out of nowhere, and he doesn't identify who they are, but I glean he's referring to his advisors or Republican peers. The topic to this point is the DNC-email/server scandal, and Trump get's into what he says is his "deliberate" uninvolvment. He's trying to justify why he's taking the do-nothing tack (= typical establishment Republican), and he stupidly reveals the reason as this: his advisors don't want to take the chance that a backlash can set the president back in the polls. Your winning, stay cool, do nothing against the deep state. The video owner is a blind Trump follower, and doesn't call him out for remaining uninvolved. Go figure.

When he says, "I don't want the people to accuse me of anything," he means he doesn't want waves, doesn't want a backlash. He wants to remain clean while cleaning swamp. He doesn't want dirt thrown at him by the enemy? How did he think he would clean swamp when he promised it? Would they all fall over dead at his mere breath? He has a lot of making-up to do for his failures to date. A lot. As we can see, there is no legal thing he appeals to for remaining uninvolved.

Obama Skates, Thanks to Trump

It reminds me of the Obama dream I had, mentioned late in the last update. After my shot on his billiard table, which was God's pointing to the FBI plot to ruin Trump with the dossier, Obama was dancing in his dark suit. The very next scene was Obama skating on a skateboard, up a ramp i.e. doing a fancy maneuver. He was once again doing this in his suit, which not only represented the Suit surname, I can glean, but looks to represent his position as president. This dancing and skating, on the surface, made it appear that Obama was happily getting away with his crimes under Trump, for the dream took place about two or three weeks after Trump officially became the president. I didn't realize until last week that "skating" is a slang term used at times for criminals escaping jail sentences.

It appears that God chose the skateBOARD for more than one reason. As I said, the Board surname uses a version of the Suit Coat, tending to reveal that God gave the dream, especially as a DANCEtte is used by the Dunham surname, first found in Norfolk with the Skate surname. Obama's mother was born Miss Dunham. It is easy to link the Skate Coat to the Chads (Norfolk again), and Chadwicks along with Chaddocks use a version of the Board Coat too.

The use of the skateboard is genius on God's part for yet another reason. As I said in the past, "STRzok" is a near-impossible name to put into any known object that God may have placed in the dream. How would God get me to that surname using any item at all? This is how He did it. He placed a billiard CUE into my hands in Obama's billiard hall, code for Perkins COIE, the law firm that purchased the dossier on behalf of Hillary. As I was in Obama's billiard hall, the inference is that he was tied to Perkins Coie's objectives. God then placed a flat piece of paper on the billiard table, and had me preparing to shoot it toward a red ball beside the left corner pocket. But unable to shoot a piece of paper, I turned it into a paper plane, and fired it, missing the red ball, and going into the corner pocket without hitting any ball. A sewer. What a perfect term to denote Trump's "swamp."

By the time of this dream, I had known the Sewer surname well, that it comes up at (link above) as "SUTER" and "SUIT" too, which is why the very next scene in the dream, after the sewer, was Obama in his suit, dancing. But that's not all. I had been of the opinion that the Suter surname was a part of the Shoot/Shot/Shute surname, which shares white-on-red swords with Board-like Borders/Boarders, i.e. for yet another clue that Boards were kin of Suits/Suters/Sewers. It was not me, but God who put Obama on a skateboard with his suit.

I had known by the time of the dream that Sewers were from Siward of Northumberland, for his name is to the Sword surname which shares three white-on-red swords with Shoots/Shots/Shute's. And I SHOT the paper plane into the sewer, total genius on God's part (I had no control over the items in the dream).

In the past, God used events with a ladyfriend (Mamie) in my youth as a pointer to certain surnames and families, and in my last event with her, because I re-met her at that time while driving TAXi, God led me to the Tax/DACH surname. It happens to share crossed, white-on-red swords with Borders/Boarders. It could appear that God set me up in taxi at that time to indicate that the CIA connects to DACHau, headquarters of Hitler's concentration camps, because the Arms of Dachau uses a sling SHOT. It has become my opinion that the first president Bush, who was the director of the CIA, was a Nazi operative, and that either he, or perhaps even someone before him, stacked the CIA with like-minded villains that remain in the CIA to this day.

The Shoot/Shot surname was first found in Wiltshire, which happens to be close to the STUR river, which happens to have a source in Somerset, where Borders/Boarders were first found suspect with a version of the Tax/Dach Coat. "STRzok" was suspect with the namers of the STUR, and this is how God was able, in the Obama dream, to point to Peter Strzok, whose mistress was Lisa Page: by placing a piece of paper on Obama's billiard table and having me sewer it, as a pointer to the Stur-like SUTER bloodline. The Border/Boarder Coat even shares the same star as SUTHERlands.

The piece of paper on the billiard table was a PAGE, you see. I shot the page as a cue ball into the sewer with the cue. In my first-ever telling of this dream to readers, probably on the morning of the dream, or nearly so, while wondering whether the piece of paper was code for the paper versus Page surname, I had loaded the Page surname. Roughly ten seconds later, "I'm an empty page" was a line that sang over my speakers, in a song (Write Your Story) by Francesca BattiSTELLI. I didn't realize at that time that God chose her song for the purpose at hand because she was a pointer to Christopher STEELE, the creator of the dossier purchased by Perkins Coie (Hillary's lawyer).

You see, no one on the outside knew Mr. Steele's involvement in the dossier, or even the dossier itself, when I had this dream in February of 2016. But God knew, and he therefore had me download Battistelli's song one evening, and to put it on a song list, so that He could arrange for it to be playing in my ears at precisely the moment that I had loaded the Page Coat. That's how He pointed to Lisa Page and Peter Strzok, and he may have arranged, that of all people in the Trump camp, the FISA warrants were taken out on Carter PAGE. This tends to connect the FISA scheme to the Strzok scheme, perfect logic.

It just so happens that the Battistelli surname shares the pyramid with Fisks while Fisks can be gleaned as a branch of Feschs who in-turn share crossed, white swords with Borders/Boarders and Tax's/Dachs. These swords are shared by Brennans (look like an Abreu branch) and Dempseys while Obama chose Martin Dempsey for his Joint Chiefs of Staff. Bordens/Boardens share the axe with Battins, the latter first found in Somerset, location of two Axe rivers. Battins share the eye with Stars (beside the Battins) while both Batti's and Stelli's use eight-pointed stars.

I have made a Fisk link to Battistelli's before, but I don't recall it ever dawning on me that the FISA court, technically called, FISC (Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court), can apply. Is that not amazing? I would suggest that, for the very Purpose at hand, God caused an historical merger between the Battistelli and Fisk bloodlines so that the Steele dossier could thus be linked to the FISA scandal. Perfect. And it just so happens that the Fessy/Face Coat shares the Bath Coat, tending to reveal that "BATTistelli" is a Bath / Bat bloodline. Fessys/Face's, who smack of "Fusion GPS," are from the Fieschi of Genova. The Segni's/Segurana's of Genova are in the Fessy/Face motto, and share the blue moline with Sibalds while the latter's Crest has the red moline of Fuss'/Fuswells, probably a Fusil branch.

I'll also repeat here what was said in earlier updates, that "I'm an open page," is a line in Battistelli's song, "Write Your STORy," suggesting that Sturs, Suters and Strzoks were a branch of Storys/Sturye's. God is a genius. Storys/Sturye's were first found in Northumberland, land of Siward expected in the Sewer variation of Suters.

I almost forgot: Battistelli's share billets with English Steele's, and the Billet surname is listed with the French Billiard surname having a Hillard variation (Yorkshire). Plus, the Steele Chief-and-Shield combination (reflects the same of Roets), with the billets in Chief in the colors of the Clinton-Chief stars, is an excellent reflection of the Clinton Coat while the biological father of Bill Clinton was Mr. Blythe i.e. a Billet-like surname. It seems that God arranged numerous coincidences just so that he could reveal himself behind my writing project and/or the exposure of this shadow government.

If you want to see more leopard faces, look to the Wright Chief, noting that Write's were first found in Berwickshire with Blythe's and Arthurs, while Billiards/Hillards were first found in nearby Yorkshire with Rhodes'. WRITE Your Story! The Rhodes cross with four surrounding lions is colors reversed from the same whole of Battistelli-suspect Baths. Storys even share a six-sections Coat with WheelWRIGHTs, who in-turn share the antelope design of Singletarys. Obama's ancestor, Jonathan Singletary, changed his surname to, Dunham.

But there is more, for while the Cecil-Rhodes Illuminati to which Bill Clinton belongs had a so-called Round Table, that was the older symbol of mythical king Arthur. He was code for the Arthur surname, which shares the blue roundel with the Table surname. That's why a myth writer gave Arthur a Round Table symbol. The Rounds are thus an obvious branch of Rundels/Roundels (white sword) and Arundels. The Arundels married Alice of Saluzzo, and the Saluzzo Shield is the Clinton Shield. Arundels were the namers of Arun (or vice-versa) Sussex, where Boards were first found.

And while a blue roundel looks just like the blue ball on a billiard table, I shot the paper plane from the center area of the table, which is where the blue ball sits at the start of every billiard match. This plane at the blue-ball area was on Obama's TABLE, and Obama chose many Rhodes Scholars to be part of his administration. The Round-Table group of Cecil Rhodes is known to have been socialist, just like Obama. It is said my many (Google has buried their many articles so that they no longer come up in searches) that the British Rothschilds were a part of the Round Table at its outset, and to this it can be added that the Hitler/Hiedler surname shares the Bauer star while the first Rothschild was Mr. Bauer. Danish Bauers happen to use a blue roundel. The bottom half of the Danish Bauer Coat has two bends in colors reversed from the two bends in the Hiedler/Hitler Coat as evidence that the latter's star is closely the Bauer star.

At first, I thought that God changed the piece of paper to a paper plane to indicate Bill Clinton's meeting with Loretta Lynch on her plane, after it landed at the Phoenix airport. It's a great theory because Obama has a partner in this billiard hall which was not disclosed to me by name. I instinctively knew, while having the dream, that it was Obama's and his partner's billiard hall, even before Obama himself appeared in the dream. Near the start of the dream, I saw all billiard tables from the ceiling view, and they together formed an L-shape, which is why Loretta Lynch became suspect for being his partner in crime as per the dossier scandal.

However, a new theory, and not necessarily discluding the first, is that the paper plane was used as a pointer to a tweet from Julian Assange, which he titled, "MIA - Paper Planes." And in that tweet he offered the song, about crime, called, Paper Planes:

It would be his second-last tweet, if I recall correctly, or maybe even his last, before his contact with the Internet world was removed from him. The tweet came out on New Years day, 2018. All I can do is wait to see whether God has a message from Assange that relates to the billiard table.

There are two possibilities: 1) God gave the Obama dream merely to foretell us that the FBI is about to encounter some rough bumps; 2) God wants us to know that he is causing the rough bumps in the FBI, and now spilling over to John Brennan. Curiously, he once voted (1976) for the communist candidate (Gus Hall, leader of the Communist Party USA) for the presidency of the United States. We can now understand why Obama chose Brennan to be the CIA boss. It is my opinion, based on what looked like a Nazi symbol in a sleeping-bag dream, that Michael Morell, who preceded Brennan as CIA director, was a supporter of Nazi elements within the CIA. Whether Morell was a Nazi sympathizer, I do not have an opinion.

In the sleeping-bag dream, I resolved that an old friend, David MORLey, was on a bike with a Nazi-style helmet. Or, the whole look of his riding what appeared to be an ancient bike, from the period of WW2, gave me the impression that he represented the Nazi's. Later, I came across the Morley-like Morell surname, and noted its rare Crest, a lion looking back over its shoulder. The last scene in the Obama dream was an employee of Obama's, whom Obama was not happy with, looking back over his shoulder. If that was Mr. Morell, the dream gives us reason to assume that Obama wanted him replaced for some disagreement that the two had.

I had already pegged the rider on the bike as David Morley, before discovering that Scottish Morleys are properly, MAULs, while English Morlands, who share the Morley/Mauly leopard (gold, as with the Rhodes leopard) come up as "MAULey." In the dream, as the rider road away down the road as likely code for the Rhodes bloodline, I was crossing the same road to the PARKING lot of a MALL, and I then entered the mall, which is God's way of proving that David Morley was the rider on the bike. There is a Parking surname, and, can we believe it, it is listed with the Perkins surname while Perkins Coie got Fusion GPS to own the Steele dossier. And the split Shield of Morleys/Mauls is shared by a Dossier surname (!!), first found in Bavaria with Dachau.

I started to tell readers about the sleeping bag dream when I had it in the middle of April, 2017. I had not yet stressed the Steele dossier at that time, and was probably not familiar with it as yet. In other words, while the sleeping-bag dream seems to touch upon the dossier, it wasn't something I arranged, but God.

The Morley/Maul surname was first found in Yorkshire with the Rhodes surname as some proof that the two surnames share the same leopard, and the Rhodes cross is the Face/Fessy cross in colors reversed while Morleys/Maulys and Morlands/Mauleys use the leopard FACE as code for Fessys/Face's, the Fesch / Fisk bloodline encountered above that linked to Dachau liners. God's intention with the use of Morleys instead of something more direct such as Morells is where the Fessy/Face surname was a branch of a Fusion-like surname, for example the Fusils/Fusier's who happen to use the BAGley Coat in colors reversed. The sleeping BAG was part-code for Bags, who use the Coat of Grimaldi's, who were kin of the Fieschi. The Grimaldi and Bag Coat look very linkable to the Fisk checks. German Rhodes' use what looks like a roundel version of the Arthur Coat, and Arthurs are from the Arduinici that married Doria's of Genova.

Wikipedia's Morell article: "Morell was also Bush's [CIA] briefer during the September 11, 2001..." That attack was six days after Bush made Mueller the FBI director. It could appear that the Nazi elements in the CIA sent Morell to handle the 9-11 scam with Bush, and it could also appear that these Nazi's (for lack of a better term) employed Mueller. We might call them Americanized Nazi's, but were they really Americanized?

I've seen a lot of heraldic lions. It's interesting that, aside from Morells, the only other lion looking back over its shoulder, that I know of, is used by Scottish's Lise's/Leish's, while Mauley-like Malleys use a giant boar in the colors of the giant boar head of Less'/Luss' (Morell colors). This can round-about argue for the link of Morleys/Mauls / Mauleys to Morells. In this picture, God may have chosen the first name of Lisa Page in order to link her via the Less' to Michael Morell. In that picture, the paper plane that was at first a page on Obama's table can be a pointer to the faked planes of 9-11.

It was Mueller who brought Peter Strzok into his own Russia-collusion investigation, and so where Mueller was put in charge to oversee the faked / manipulated 9-11 investigations, the paper plane shot into the Strzok-depicting sewer is able to implicate Strzok with 9-11 in some way.

The Smalley entity in the Morley write-up looks either like a branch of "Malley," or a merger with it, especially as Smalleys (Derbyshire, same as Morleys) share the white unicorn with French Maurels. It just so happens that Italian Maurels are also Maurini's while Morinis' use a version of the Morelli Coat, tending to clinch Morells with as to help support the idea that God placed David Morley in the dream as a pointer to Morell's CIA. The beginning of the dream saw me picking up a sleeping bag in a forest, which some call a BUSH. This is the first time, that I can recall, that I've suggested the forest to be a bush, and it just so happens that the English Bush's (Yorkshire, same as Morleys/Mauls) share the fleur-de-lys of Morlands/Mauleys! Zikers.

More. German Bush's, with possibly a white version of the Maurel fleur, share tall, white wings in Crest with Morlands/Mauleys. It tends to clinch Bush's with Morley liners.

The same fleur-de-lys is shared by Banks, and the sleeping bag was on a hill, which can be considered a bank off the road. Morley came off the road, riding his bike down this hill/bank. He circled round and came back up the hill for the scene in which I walked into a PARKING lot. It just so happens that the Hill surname shares the tower of Plunketts (Brittany, same as French Maurels) while Plunkett-liner Plancia MAGNA (a Herod) was an inhabitant of Perkin-like Perga, and a relative or associate (perhaps my marriage) of a Mr. Simplex, while "Simplex" is a motto term of Parkings/Perkins (it appears that Perkins knew themselves to be from Perga). If that's not enough, a Walker surname uses a "magna" motto term while Walkers are in the direct ancestry of the Bush family that propped up the first president Bush, director of the CIA.

There are many kinds of bags if God wanted to point to the Bag bloodline. But he used a SLEEPing bag. Why? I have my theories that fit well, but I seek another meaning that can link to 9-11. I'm not satisfied with all the things I've linked the sleeping bag to. I feel that there is more. I've mentioned that Sleeps were first found in slope-like Salop with Bagleys, who named Bagley WOOD, a forest, I assume. There is a Bagh surname listed with Welsh Bachs while German Backs are also Bachs. If therefore, the Obama dream's employee with his emphasized back was Michael Morell, the sleeping bag can possibly be a pointer to something key in relation with 9-11.

I've noticed that God's genius is able to use items with multiple links. Another example never mentioned or realized before is that while sleeping bags are used in camp grounds, Dutch Camps use a giant version of the white eagle head in the Bank Crest. The sleeping bag was on a bank, right? And Banks were early/first found in Yorkshire with English Camps (Bank colors), as well as with the Bush's (and Walkers) whose fleur-de-LYS the Banks share. The Lys surname is also "Lise," and we saw two other Lise surnames above, one that shares the lion looking backward over its back with Morells.

"Morell would be a trusted advisor to President Barack Obama in the raid that killed Osama bin Laden..." There are not a few people, including myself, who can't swallow that event as told to us, and we know Obama is a liar as per his foreign affairs. I don't think they killed Osama at that time. Word has it that Osama was buddies with the Bush family, and so it makes sense that Morell, an insider with the 9-11 plot, would be shifted to Obama's people to assure that the faked death and/or burial at sea was properly handled. Or something like that.

"Morell announced his retirement from the CIA" while serving Obama. Often, retirements are in actuality kind firings.

There are not a few people who believe that the CIA used ISIS to lengthen and deepen its intrusions into the Middle-East, and that Obama used it for purposes beyond what the CIA wanted it for. Still from Morell's Wikipedia article: "In May 2015, Morell's book entitled The Great War of Our Time: The CIA's Fight Against Terrorism—From al Qa'ida to ISIS was released." I would suggest that this book is a facade. I would rather believe that its "true" claims are deliberate lies.

When Obama was on his skateboard, there were two of him. The scene was a double image of him going up the skateboard ramp. I have never been satisfied with my explanation for this. In the past, I considered the Twin surname, but do not recall whether I looked at the Double surname. It's in Singletary colors, was first found in the same place as Dunhams/DOWNhams/DOUNhams. Then, Double's use the Down/Doun stag design (both in white). Moreover, the Down/Doun stag is in the colors of the Trump stag head. What's God trying to say? First off, with a Double link to Dunham liners that I'm not even familiar with, he appears to be proving that he's the giver of the dream. But whether he intended to make a Trump link to Obama, I have no good idea. If he did intend it, I have no idea what it could mean. Is it because Obama is taking over Trump's presidency by manipulating the hapless president? I know for certain why the ramp was included.

I trace Trumps/Tromps to Val Trompia at Lake Garda, and Obama's dance, followed by his skate up the ramp, was in the backYARD of the billiard hall. Yards could be a Gard branch. Yards even use the colors and format of Exeters, and the latter share bells with Double's. Plus, Yards were first found in Down-like Devon, location of Exeter. It can reveal that Dunhams were a Devon branch somehow.

Ramps show brown lions that may be a form of gold, in which case the Ramp lions are in both colors of the Davin lion. Amazing here is that French Davins are also the Davis' while I've thought that Obama's true father was Frank Marshall Davis. Hmm. Just look at how the Double surname led us to Davis'. Was this God's intention? Frank Davis was a communist, and he's online, said to have snapped nude pictures of Obama's mother.

Welsh Davis'/Davids were first found in Cheshire with Dunham-Masci, Davenports, and Wolfleys. Obama's Wolflin ancestry is said to have changed its name to, Wolfley.

Trump Fools Self by Stay-the-Course Inaction

On July 24, Tom Fitton comes out to insist that Trump declassify whatever possible within the FISA documents. The video below is helpful for its comments section, as his voters try to assess the reason for Trump's refusal. Some say he withholding it for the perfect timing, to do the greatest damage against his enemies, which is to say that Trump is acting political with this crime, which I do not think his lawyers would advise him to do. This is a major crime we are speaking on, and compels the president to insist on criminal charges, which I don't think he wants to see.

Others not frowning on his refusal give no better possible reasons. Trump has no right to withhold these documents, which serve to deny Trump-Russia collusion, just because Mueller is trying to prove that same collusion. It seems more like Trump's responsibility to thwart Mueller because the latter is likely ignoring this FISA data. The liberal news media continues to give respectability to Mueller, which serves to harm Republicans for re-election purposes, wherefore the sooner Mueller is railroaded by the release of these documents, the better. The sooner the CNNs of the world are robbed of their collusion weaponry, the better. One could argue that it's not Trump's job description to gamble with the fortunes of other Republicans.

Congress should ask the president to report what these four sets of documents reveal, and whatever he reports is automatically declassified. That is, if he sees no reason to keep certain things a national secret, he can report on those things. He can frame his statement as transparency so that his enemies don't label it a self-serving tell-all. HOWEVER, it is imperative to point out to the fake-media world that his serving self in this case is COMPLETELY JUSTIFIED. If the president has been convinced by his lawyers / advisers that he cannot declassify because it looks like he's serving self, he needs new advocates, and moreover he looks like a moron in two ways: 1) for taking their advice; 2) for needing it.

If he has only common sense, he knows, all on his own, no legal advice needed, that a person charged with a crime, for the purpose of spoiling his public reputation, is legally permitted to defend himself in public, to regain his reputation. So defend yourself already you dunce. It's one thing to deny the charges daily, but here you have FBI document evidence to acquit yourself. The very people attempting to accuse him to death are now to be accused themselves in a massive backfire, if only the president would procure justice for the good people. He refuses.

Take a look at the depth of the crime that needs to be punished:

The Intelligence echo chamber, to create a conspiracy all around from high-level and respected voices to disrespect a presidential candidate or other political person until they are dead in the water. It is by their respectability that the delinquents have power, which is why they badly need to be disrespected. And Trump does not want them charged with crimes. He said so some months ago; it's enough if they lose their jobs, he said. If the FISA material has blatant evidence of crimes, it explains why Trump doesn't want it known. He has chosen to go soft, to let the rats live and rule again...which is what really gets my ire.

Here is the crime. The expected president-to-be was worried about the Republican underdog candidate running against her. She, knowing that it opposed the good standards of democracy, ordered dirt on Trump to be fabricated, and her accomplices arranged to give the cow patties to the FBI with a nice red cherry on top. The FBI then took a bite and loved it, using it underhandedly to find weaknesses in the underdog's campaign. But in the end, without substantial / fatal weaknesses found, the FBI director did not use the dirt to topple the underdog, but neither did he arrest the woman with whom he was colluding in this crime, even though she had other outstanding crimes before his very nose that speak of countless other possible crimes between herself and Obama. And neither did he expose any of the accomplices, allowing them to thrive for repeating the plots on others in the future.

It is this very serious matter, or sets of matters, that Trump has chosen not to prosecute. If you can't see how disgusting this president is, for this decision, you are bewitched by this Gentile dog. There is no secret plot in the works by Trump to prosecute the demons at a later time. He has chosen to be part of the theater that others have created for to make a good show of their false indignance.

It is very hard for a people to be patriotic to a country that permits these things, and so, in actuality, there is a silver lining in Trump's shortcomings. I imagine that God wants to expose the evil so that we cease with patriotism to worldly countries, and transition to patriotism, all together, for the nation of God's Israel. If the demons are allowed to live for a future sting operation, it's to persecute our brothers and sisters on behalf of the Finale. It is God's to procure a vengeful ending in his jail. God is no Trump. From the beginning of His communications with proto-Israel, He has ordered true and straight justice, sprinkled with gracious and even delightful mercy for those who repent, who are sorry for their sins, and burning-coal wrath for those who do not repent, who sin because they despise their Creator.

If this were the Kingdom of God on earth, Hillary would be in jail. Trump said, if I'm the president, Hillary will be in jail. God is good to his promise; Trump is not. God will remove the weeds that choke us and run wild over the walls of a humble, normal, Godly society; Trump is one of the weeds. Stick with him, and you too will start to look and sound like a weed. The thorns will stick to your pants, and get into your hair. They will prick your skin, and leave you ailing. The weed sucks the Living Waters from under you. They won't weep for you when you become a dry tree.

Instead of making you the humble lamb, Trump will make you the arrogant goat. He'll get you on-side his horny invasion of Iran, if that's what he ends up doing. You will grow horns yourself. He'll try to get you on-side every worldly thing he does. Lot's wife you will become. When the Disaster arrives, you will feel sympathetic for the loss of this world, the world that God calls the beast, the dragon. You may retain the look of the Lamb, but you will act the goat and speak the language of the dragon, the language of deception, the standard fare of politics. You can witness the dragon talk of Lamb-toting believers in the comments section of ever-loving Trump supporters. Instead of aligning themselves with truth on any controversy, they take the pro-Trump position by default.

Operating on truth doesn't mean that one attains truth at all times. The one who wants to stay the truth course has the problem of not knowing all truth; there's some guess work when things get tough. But blessed is the one who wants the truth, who doesn't manufacture the truth for political advancement.

If a Christian voter sees that Trump is genuinely benign to Christians, then I would say that a Christian can vote for him, if the purpose is to keep the anti-Christs out of power. This is the concern of many believers, but, my point is, there are other Christians fighting in the trenches for Trump, throughout the election interim, who show disturbing ties to Trump, almost worshipful, and veering off the truth-track. Do not touch; do not stain yourself.

This week has shown an example of what it means to veer off the truth-track. The president lied to the people when he said he misspoke in Helsinki. If you by default believe the president, and go forward fighting for this lie, you are guilty of staining yourself with it. As believers, we need to stick to the truth of a matter, regardless of the political fall-out, otherwise we become of little value. Who will take you seriously tomorrow if you cling to a lie today? Call this president out: why did you lie to the American people? We know why. It's because of the damaging political fall-out that he decided to minimize from the unpopular truth he spoke in Helsinki. He altered course from the truth-track to the politically-advantageous track. His advisers forced him onto that track as a sign to you that you too will go onto it if you follow this Gentile dog blindly. What was that spoken by Jesus about both falling into a ditch?

I understand. We cannot love our rabid-liberal enemies because they want our destruction. We want them out of power and off the planet. We prefer to see a Republican president / lawmaker who spares us the liberal lunatic whose constantly off the truth-track, always on the politics-track. The Tasmanian devil is always spinning. The dragon's natural language is the lie. Truth is not exciting for the one who goes to and fro in the earth. He's able to live on wildness, like a dumb animal of the wild having no inclination for reason, no need for an understanding of God's will, no realization that God knows better than us on how to order a civilized society.

The deep state cares nothing for a decent society, and calls itself the society. The Republican patriot is one who wants a decent society, granted, but he doesn't have a good-enough king to order it. The patriot awaits such a man, but he never arrives. The patriot thinks he has such a man in Trump, but he is deceived. The deep state, and the Gentile dogs, forbid a Jesus-like king in the United States. The patriot needs to put his trust in the Coming King with a Coming Society, where no mere animal or dog shall reside. Lamb-like horns shall not butt in Millennial Israel, and true lambs will be its judges. No American embassy shall sit in Jerusalem.

The poor will have priority over the rich, in the sense that greater care will be afforded to tend to their needs. No corporations, beloved of Trump, will gobble the treasures of the nations so that the poor are naturally produced. Money will circulate more amply through the pockets of the poorer ones, and they will not be poor. When Jesus oversees a society, no one will dare gobble the wealth with maximized prices. No one will be respected for the great degree of their financial success, for the rich will give to the poor willingly in order to protect themselves from appearing greedy. Trump has no such inclination. They say his net worth at this time is 3,000 million dollars. He could retire and live luxurious for the rest of his life with just 1 million. How many of you have 1 million in cash for your retirement?

The millennial, mortal kingdom of Israel is easily envisioned in a general way by how it's portrayed in prophecy; we can understand it because it's the extension of the world as we know it. No mortal Christian enters the mortal kingdom of Israel, but virtually all non-believers will become Christians, though their children may rebel. The Kingdom of Heaven is not comprehensible. It comes down to join the mortal kingdom, and rules over it. All Christians get new, immortal bodies, and join the Kingdom of Heaven as it comes down to earth, which is why none participate in the mortal kingdom, though that needs clarification, because it's expected that they do participate in leadership roles. They participate, but not in the mortality.

I'm going to take issue with Nunes, when he said that the FBI applied for the Fisa warrants legally. It was done legally, he said. I'm sure he meant legally as per the technicalities, but there is more to an application than paperwork procedures and other technicalities. Nunes spoke a thing one would expect from the dishonest Democrats. Is Nunes folding? It is illegal to use falsified or unproven hearsay to apply for a warrant. It is illegal for the judge to grant the warrant under the conditions that the FBI provided. When the FBI placed in the footnote that the origin of the dossier was from a hostile player to Trump, the judge was required to inquire further, as in who was this person, and does it matter?

I am sure it should be deemed illegal, in a review process, for the FBI to ask spy powers over a presidential candidate while failing to reveal that the person in the footnote is ultimately the other presidential candidate. Democrats don't understand this because they are willfully blind, but Nunes understands it all. He has this issue correctly stated and has nothing to fear from the Democrat side. He doesn't need to start sounding a little bit like them. Please. Keep your head, Nunes. There are a couple of miles yet to traverse, since the resident in the White House has betrayed and abandoned you. Resident Trump is no president. Kick him out for loitering.

Shock-awe-carumba, Trump threatened bitty-bitty Iran. Does this make him a great president? Just because his personality is such, to act tough, does not make him a better president than one taking a different attitude to Iran's big-mouthery. If a president just ignores Iran, does that make him a poor president? Clint Eastwood or John Wayne is now in the White House: "make my day, Iran, threaten me just one more time. Just go ahead and try, and you'll get pistol-whipped like no one's ever done it to you before." Whoopee-whoopee, what a man. And you'd be less than a man if you actually attack Iran just for what its leader says. Let the Iranian rulers think they are Superman, and you just be better than them. Instead, you want to be the bigger Superman. You need to be the best Superman ever, anywhere, your arrogance knows no bounds. You are more frightening that Iran, for if you do attack Iran, there's no telling what the fall out would be.

Did I say recently that I expect the Democrats to lead the world to Armageddon rather than Trump? Yes. I had best re-think that one. Don't let it go to your head that you've got the biggest guns in the world. Don't get trigger-happy again.

The worst recent threat for Israel was when the whole Western world, with Obama, was siding with Gaza and against Israel. That was a time of worrying whether Syria and Iran would find the confidence and success of getting some massive bomb to Gaza, especially when Obama installed the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt. Netanyahu dodged a bullet then. It was puzzling when Obama himself permitted the American military to fight Assad, which tended to spoil the power of the evil axis against Israel. I assume that the American military was seeking oil-pipeline rights in Syria, and that Obama had to play along to some extent, though he refused to attack Assad when the CIA set the latter up as one using chemical weapons. With that same plot, the CIA had much-better luck with Trump, and so the CIA might just prod SuperTrump on to attacking Iran too.

Then again, I'm not opposed to giving him credit where due. If Iran was building an attack strategy against Israel, and Trump found out about it, then it's good that he makes Iran think twice. On the other hand again, where would Trump discover such a thing but with the CIA...which can't be trusted to give him the truth. That's the evil of an Intelligence scandal the likes of which is now in better focus thanks to Trump's revelation that he himself doesn't trust it. To make matters worse, Trump is taking great pains this week to reinforce the lie that he does respect Intelligence. Someone in the land of his advisors is making him do this on behalf of propping up a false image of spyland. We therefore cannot trust either the loitering resident or the anti-resident spies. Unpredictability sets in, they nip at one another, anxiety rules.

Or, suppose that God is raising an evil plot in Iran against Israel, for one could make that case from prophecy. No big bombs in Trump's holster, and no early-morning tweets, can stop that day from coming to its high noon. In the way that Ezekiel describes the invasion, which includes Iran, it doesn't seem that the Iran we know could cause Israel's defeat. Not alone. The other invaders, Gog, Meshech and Tubal were, at one time, spread from Gogarene in Armenia to the Moschians mountains in Georgia to Tubal at Cappadocia / Cilicia / Syria. The Cappadocian capital, Mazaca, looks like a Meshech branch. Some of these areas are now in Turkey, and we are hearing anti-Israeli threats coming from the Turkish president as we speak.

But it's doubtful that Turkey and Iran could alone muster up an invasion of Israel to the point that the Israeli military folds. I don't think that the help of Armenia and Georgia, even if they were to join the invasion, would be enough, though it would be more formidable if someone anti-Israeli in the White House just let the invasion happen without trying to thwart it.

Ezekiel has Togarmah as part of the invaders, and my best shot at identifying them are the Tocharians, which Wikipedia puts in Russia, way to the north of Gogarene. Ezekiel has Togarmah in the "far north," as if to say further north than southern Caucasia (location of Gogarene), for the latter was known not to be the far north in Ezekiel's day. Even before his days, the Cimmerians were in Crimea, and they are thought to be the Gomer of Ezekiel's prophecy, the father of Togarmites. And because Ezekiel places Gog itself in the "far north," it seems that the namers of Gogarene put out branches in what is now Russia or the Ukraine. "Moscow" appears to be a branch of Meshech, for the latter went by such names as Mushki too. So, with Russia as part of the invaders of Israel, it all makes sense on why it's successful to the point of folding the Israeli military, and can even explain why an American president stays out of this war. It tends to explain why Russia is steadfast in Syria as we speak, whether the CIA likes it or not.

The question then becomes: why would Russia get into something so drastic as sponsoring the cooperation of Turkey, Iran and Syria in an attack on Israel? I have only one answer: to undo the Middle-East plots of the CIA / NATO. As things now sit, Turkey, which is not rabidly hateful of the West, as is Iran and Syria, is yet hateful toward Israel. I get the impression that the Turkish leader would spearhead an invasion of Israel, if he were to have the opportunity, even though it's a NATO member. It might even abandon NATO membership to do so. Israel is not a NATO member, which seemingly puts NATO into a conundrum in a Turkey-Israeli war, unless the West with the U.S. were to abandon Israel, which actually looks possible thanks to what was seen under Bush and Obama.

In fact, going back to the inclination I have in viewing the CIA as an Americanized evolution of Nazis, which explains why the Palestinian-state movement ("roadmap" to peace) was birthed by the younger Bush president, it can explain the future abandonment of Israel by the United States. To put it another way, God may have opened a door for the Nazification of the CIA in order to pave the way for prophecy, for it is God's will above all others to desolate end-time Israel. We must never leave that factor out of prophetic discussions.

The popular idea that Gog's invasion of Israel is followed by a more-fatal invasion by the anti-Christ is rejected by me. It's not only illogical, but there is sound evidence in the Gog text that he is the anti-Christ. I am open to viewing him as a Turk in league with some Russian assistance. Isaiah 10 has him conquering the Turkish-Syria border, which is where the Turkish army is now at work. However, Isaiah 10 calls him an Assyrian, and Isaiah 13/14 has him as both an Assyrian and the king of Babylon, which complicates any predictions we might venture into. No one would predict today that Turkey will come to rule Mosul (Assyria) and the rest of Iraq...unless it had American backing.

Turkey as the provider of the anti-Christ makes sense where Daniel 7 has him portrayed as a different kind of end-time Roman leader. Not long ago, I was thinking that the world direction was one in which Putin would join the EU in a partnership, but the CIA blew that movement apart. Trump might bring it back, but who can realistically expect it anytime soon? As we can see, Trump just buckled to the anti-Russia CIA will. We know nothing of what Trump's new CIA chief is doing, or going to do, in this respect.

It doesn't appear that the prophetic invasion of Israel is anytime soon. The national pieces are all there, but they don't seem correctly positioned yet. Go ahead and try to predict which entity will attack the "king of the south" in Daniel 8? He's very-likely Egypt, and he gets attacked successfully by the anti-Christ described as a Seleucid entity in some way. The Seleucid Greeks did rule the region of Iraq, and so the anti-Christ of Daniel 8 acceptably compliments the Assyrian / Babylonian anti-Christ of Isaiah, but how can we describe that picture as Gog? Even if we succeed with that, how do we describe the picture as a different king of end-time Roman office?

My solution is that the anti-Christ will not be native to Iraq. In Daniel 11, where he's described as following on the lines of the Seleucids, he ENTERs Iraq to subdue it. That's a helpful start. He can now be Gog entering Iraq. Is it Turkey entering Iraq? Or Russia? Or, can we view end-time Gog as the Americans by their ancestry in Scandinavian Rus? If it's the Americans, why would God confuse the issue by pointing to Israel's far north? We can't say that the Americans will come from the far north, land of Tocharians. Only Russia fits that picture, unless the Togarmah of Ezekiel refers to something other than Russian Tocharians.

On the edge of the Moschian mountains live the Bat Caucasians to this day. They named Batumi. And it just so happens that the mythical mother of the Trojans was Batia, daughter of Togar-like Teucer. The Lazi Caucasians lived amongst/beside the Bats, and they trace well to the Lydians / Lasonii, who were themselves beside Meshech-line Mysia, home of Troy. It would therefore be staggering if the Bats named the Baathists whom I tentatively peg as the end-time Seleucids.

In recent weeks/months, I've been dealing with Seleucids of Sardinia, and for much longer I've expected the namers of Sardinia from Lydia's Sardis. I've been tracing Sardinians to the Shirt/Sherrard surname, which recalls that shirt-using Tous' share eight-pointed stars with BATTi's and Stelli's. The Tous' even mention the BUTTons on their shirt, and Battistelli's were first found in Corsica, an island beside Sardinia. Just like that, Sardinians of the West can trace to the Bath and Battin surnames. And Trojans, by the way, were proto-Romans, and some say that Tubal was on Rome's Tiber river. Wikipedia's article on Dagome, the alternative name of Mieszko I, says he had ancestry in Sardinia, and this line can be to the Mieske/MESECH surname. These things may explain why the False Prophet, whom I peg as an American president, will be in league with a Seleucid-associated / Seleucid-sponsored anti-Christ.

A presidency by Joseph Biden, who brings Obama into his cabinet or advisorship, seems like an excellent description of the False Prophet, though I don't know whether Biden is anti-Israeli. I do know that Obama placed him in charge of Iraqi affairs / policies. I was under the impression recently that the False Prophet's lamb horns are from the bloodline of Mieszko II Lambert, and while Mieske's/Mesechs use the bull head, Bidens/Buttons use what look like bull horns.

Maybe we should abandon Ezekiel 38/39 altogether as Inspired text. After all, no one in the New Testament quotes this prophet, though the book of Revelation alludes to some of his pictures. And, many believers have a hard time with the post-Jesus temple that immediately follows the Gog prophecy. Was Ezekiel a false prophet taken for a real one?

On the other hand, why would he even begin to give a false prophecy concerning way-off Gog? How could he derive fame by such a thing? Why else would a false prophet give predictions if not to gain fame / honor for himself? I've decided to keep Ezekiel in the forecast. I can explain his temple sacrifices as memorials / feasts in celebration of Jesus' Death. I have not been able to resolve whether Jesus is visibly present on earth in the Millennium. Perhaps he comes and goes.

There cannot be mere political linkage between Gog and the EU as a fulfillment of the anti-Christ in Daniel 7. He is clearly said to be the Roman king, and the period of his rule is almost the full four years allotted to EU chiefs. The current EU chief is Donald Tusk of Poland. If his surname is from "Tuscany" (overlooks Sardinia), that can trace him to Lydians and Trojans i.e. to mythical Tyrrhenus of the Lydians. Rome is beside Tuscany, in the land of the Latin-branch Lydians. The people of Tuscany are called, Tyrrhenians, a term that was perhaps corrupted from, Tyrrghen, or Trogen.

Tous'/Tonso's, whom I trace to the Tonzus river of Thrace, were first found in Tuscany, but more specifically in Pisa, same as the Mosca's. The ETRUScan name of Tuscany's inhabitants looks to derive in "Tros," the alternative name of Troy, which may have developed to/from "Thrace." Ancient Cabyle is on/off the Tonzus, and then mythical Cybele was mother to the Lydians. Mythical Gugu/Gyges, king of Lydia, looks like he represented Gog in Lydia. I trace Mysians to Lake Van's Mus, where Rusa-named kings ruled that were likely the Rosh of Ezekiel. Gogarene/Gugar was to the near-north of Lake Van.

Trojans are expected to be from Tyrians. Ezekiel portrays satan as a king of Tyre. Mount Ida at Troy was traced by ancients to Crete, land of Minoan-branch Tyrians. And this very thing was called, Europa. She was given the symbol of riding to Crete on the back of the Zeus beast, which seems to be the reason for the harlot riding the back of the anti-Christ in Revelation 17, especially as he destroys her by fire while Daniel 7 has Rome burned by fire. She is said to be sitting on the seven hills of Rome, and of the Romans who ruled the kings of the earth. It implies a Gog alliance with the EU, or, if you wish to ignore Gog, a Seleucid-associated anti-Christ in alliance with the EU. But more than an alliance: a king of the EU, if we go by Daniel. Is either of these pictures fulfillable anytime soon? Not in my eyes.

The best potential fulfillment, as things now sit in our view, is where the Americans are in Iraq, and very much a ruler of the EU military: NATO. If Ezekiel's "far north" simply ignores the geographical direction of the United States, and focuses instead on Americans in Iraq, they are still not in the far north by any stretch just because they are in Syria. It doesn't work, unless we rule out Ezekiel's Gog as a true prophecy.

It leaves us to ponder how the United States, or NATO, could end up raping and burning the EU after she has ridden his back for some 3.5 years. That makes no sense. It's far better sense with the EU on Russia's back in a makeshift / flimsy / insincere alliance. If we view it as Turkey on the EU's back, it presses us to figure how mere Turkey could burn the EU with fire, or even the city of Rome, if we think that's what the harlot represents. So, the real best picture seems to be out of our view: a Russian Gog in Iraq and allied to the EU in some coming, flimsy alliance, perhaps the pilot project for an EU-Russian partnership.

The trouble is, as things now sit, Europe is expected to scream at Russia for assisting the anti-Christ's rise as a king in Iraq. How then would Europe desire a Russia-led Europe for four years? Possible solution: we now need to predict / expect a souring of relations between the West and an Iraq gone into the arms of Iranians. That picture then allows the Iraqi-Iranian alliance to embrace Russia while NATO gears up to topple Iraq for betraying the West. Russia will need to decide on whether it wants to play on the side of the EU or on the Iraq-Iran deal. NATO decides to use local fighters to upset Iraq, and Russia, scheming, agrees to help out, but in the end, the Russian side comes to control Iraq for reasons I cannot predict. At that time, the EU accepts a Russian on the EU throne, which is when the False Prophet sits on the American throne (hope not to prove wrong), and the rest of prophecy can work itself out without insurmountable problems in my view.

The problem is in getting to a Russia-EU deal with the United States in agreement, and Trump may facilitate some of this progress. Let's imagine Trump attacking Iran, with Iraq going over to Iran and booting Trump's military out of Iraq. Trump, steaming mad, has talks with Putin. What are we going to do, he asks. We've got to replace the Iraqi government with Baathists and other Sunni. Russia agrees, and together they dig in. The anti-Christ is a Russian general, we may assume, who sets up shop in Mosul = Assyria. He's rejected by the Iraqi people, as per Daniel 11:21-24, but successfully schemes and takes the horns of power with a small band of local pirates. He becomes great from a small force, says that prophecy.

I used to think that the EU would welcome a Russian leader due to fear of Russia, or out of need to stave off Armageddon. There may certainly be some of this underlying the coming alliance, but there may also be some EU gratefulness toward Russia for quelling an Iran-Iraq deal. We might envision the anti-Christ as some sort of military Gorbachev, a willing partner with the West, but traitorous.

Note that the anti-Christ gets suicidal at the end of Daniel 11, while he's in Israel with his armies, after most of his 3.5-year rule. That late point is when he's expected to rape and burn the EU. Why would he do that unless the EU had a falling-out with him by that time? Perhaps his invasion of Israel will be too much for the EU. I don't know of a prophetical indication telling whether his 3.5 years is his official time with the EU, but it's definitely a period as per his power over Jerusalem.

Back to the News...zzzzz

Wake up, wake up! Eleven Republicans have filed the impeachment papers on Rod Rosenstein. I didn't think they had the votes, maybe they do.

Wait. Congress is about to go on a long summer vacation. Go back to sleep.

Mark Meadows, who's at the tip of the spear on this impeachment attempt, said on The Angle that a "privileged motion" can be introduced on the floor without the obstructionist, Paul Ryan, being able to do anything about it. And Meadows adds that the privileged motion allows for a vote in two days i.e. before the summer recess. We must assume that the votes to impeach have not been there, or they would have moved to this solution in the past. What does this say about most House Republicans? How can we explain this amazing thing, that while Rosenstein is clearly involved in the crime of framing a president, Republicans refuse to expose and punish him? One explanation: they heard through the grape vine that the president doesn't want Rosenstein punished. It's the best explanation by far. It makes Trump look like a piece of stool...which is what he was when he became the president, no surprise.

Those who say that God has brought Trump to the White House; why would he bring a lame stud to do His clean-up work? Shoot the horse if he can't stand on his feet any longer. Get another runner. But as I always say, it is to his credit that he verbally attacks the corrupt media. He even attacks Rosenstein verbally, and the rest of the crime ring too, but, he's lame for doing anything about it. His middle name is Jeff Sessions. We hope that he has a change of attitude and then shoots real, more-than-verbal fire on the demons. There is nothing to do but wait and see.

Although the enemy can celebrate Trump's do-nothing, and the House's do-nothing, yet the enemy has not been able to fatally ruin them. They are yet capable of turning fire upon them. It is always imminent in the view of the enemy. The latter's celebrations are cut to size by what might still be a terrible ending for them. Jim Jordan begs the president. No luck, he won't act. The enemy celebrates, but looks the other way to see who else might be attacking successfully. The time may arrive when the corrupt media realizes that they are going to lose a lot of money for continuing to support the enemy, at which time the media will turn against it, or at least not support it. This situation thus far is a great one in progress, but we fear that it ends up a mere dud, no bang in the end. Nunes and the others have the enemy at the edge of a cliff. Trump can push them over, but, no, he refuses. Sympathy for the enemy? Lot's wife? Trump may have a Republican mouth, but are his bones liberal?

Rosenstein is the one who signed the last FISA application, which was the third extension of the original. By that time in mid-to-late 2017, it was well past the date on which he got Mueller to begin the "legal" spy campaign on Trump. Rosenstein claimed under official questioning that he didn't even read the FISA application. This seems absurd at its face, because the target is the president of the United States. Rosenstein thus admitted that he took this serious issue lightly, to be expected, anyway, because he was out to get Trump even though there was no evidence against him.

Let's go to the Wikipedia article on the origin of the Mueller probe, and let me first say that National Intelligence, in January, was led by Obama's James Clapper, who set the wheels in motion against Trump, no time to waste, as soon as he was officially the president. By that January, the 1st FISA warrant was already under way and about to wrap up with no success:

A January 2017 assessment by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) stated that Russian leadership favored presidential candidate Donald Trump over Hillary Clinton [no surprise], and that Russian president Vladimir Putin personally ordered an "influence campaign" to harm Clinton's electoral chances and "undermine public faith in the US democratic process" [show me]...

The Deputy Attorney General, Rod Rosenstein, appointed Mueller, a former Director of the FBI, to serve as Special Counsel for the United States Department of Justice (DOJ) in May 2017. The reference for the investigation is to examine Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections, including exploring any links or coordination between Donald Trump's 2016 presidential campaign and the Russian government, "and any matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigation", and any other matters within the scope of 28 CFR 600.4 – Jurisdiction.–present)#Origin_and_powers

As we can see, interference and collusion were wrapped up together. Evidence of interference became the fodder for checking out whether Trump was a willing part of it. It's plain to see that this was a political move on behalf of Hillary's insanity, and on behalf of all who stood to gain selfishly and/or corruptly with her presidency. Almost two years after the attack started, the enemy looks lame. A stalemate seems to be the end of the matter.

The first Wikipedia paragraph above conveniently leaves out a link to the evidence of interference. We are to trust Clapper. But after Trump installed Dan Coats to replace Clapper, in March of the same year, he too claimed that Russians interfered. When the House did its own investigation into collusion, no evidence that Trump colluded was brought forward, not even by the Democrats. The leftist media threw its lot in with Rosenstein's implied charge that Trump was a willing actor in the interference. Rosenstein would like to deny that he implied such a thing, but neither will he come out to say that Trump is innocent of any such charge, to date. Figure it out, he's using interference as an excuse to keep the spy-fire to Trump's feet, to keep him lame.

This is not a small crime, the longer it goes on. It is the duration that is most incriminating. A judge might argue, fine, take a peek to see if Trump was colluding, but, since this is a sitting president, an impartial judge would not justify the continuation of the investigation once the initial look-see showed nothing. It is a vendetta-type crime to keep a president under such clouds for no justified reason. A vendetta against a sitting president amounts to usurpation of his Office, akin to treason. The leftist media is guilty of this from days before CNN's existence. It was subtle then, but CNN had it come out of the closet brutally. And other political-animal news orgs arose, taking CNN's tack. These vicious hyenas all need to be caged, and Fox should not become the reciprocal of CNN.

Fox is not necessarily the reciprocal of CNN just because it always attacks Obama, for there's lots to attack Obama on. He's a serious leftist, and as such he's demented before he does anything as president. It is the express job of a leftist to slander the political enemy. The Mueller probe is a slanderous operation, right? But if Fox always supports the Republican president, without due criticism, then Fox starts to become the reciprocal of CNN. The thinking patterns of viewers are adversely affected if educated by media not prone to staying the true course. If the true picture of the president is not the goal, then Fox dances like a hyena too. Scavengers don't build things; they tear down.

I agree that building respectable properties requires tearing down the demented, and Fox currently does plenty of this, to its credit. The beauty of constitutional free speech is that the demented can't wholly gag the truth concerning their sins, but the demented have stretched free speech to include slander against their enemies not guilty of the slander. So long as it's the news doing the slandering, they wish for us to believe it's legal and protected by the constitution. Republicans need to take the media to court for slander, and Rosenstein needs to be impeached partially on that very thing. By omitting in his own statements that Trump has not been found guilty of collusion, and by not correcting the CNN's of its heaping collusion slander, Rosenstein is guilty of organized and high-level (high visibility) complicity to slander the president, which, as any impartial judge realizes, has the motive of unseating him. It is a crime, actually, to use slander in a democratic process, or in any process.

Slander is defined best as knowingly spreading an untrue smear campaign or crusade. It's one thing if a person says publicly that he/she believes such and such when it's not true. But a smear campaign is far worse, exactly what Rosensting and Mueller are engaging. It's high time that leftist media are charged with slander, not if they accuse someone falsely only once, but when they have a year-in, year-out program to slander a sitting president for the sheer purpose of unseating him. If one gathers all the false charges against Trump, for example, aired by CNN, the latter wouldn't stand a chance in court, unless the judge is a leftist himself. But then just appeal to the supreme court, and watch CNN cringe all the way, and get on its best behavior in the meantime.

If Trump is afraid to act against Rosenstein because he's afraid of the media backlash, then the needy solution is to take one or two of the biggest media to court on the charges of spreading false information. It seems to me that Trump is like a fool for accusing CNN of slander while not taking it to court. It's not petty to do so; it's necessary. The left wishes to elect demented sinners; it's necessary to rob them of their media powers by curtailing their slander operations. It's not optional, it's compulsory. But Trump has no gumption to clean swamp; he only acts the part. He's more interested in grabbing the limelight for successes in his political affairs. He's going to beat the left by successes even while they slander him, he thinks and hopes.

But this does nothing for doing the right thing, and it's his job as president to do the right thing, which is to force a kill switch on slander campaigns. They don't attack the president only, but all the Republican political organs. They are a colossal disaster for the world, for this attitude spreads abroad. They seek to manufacture slanderers in all the minority groups, pitting them against the typical American. When is it time to ask the supreme court to punish it? Now is the time. The votes in the top court are likely there now. Freedom of speech, yes, but the media cannot engage a crusade where there is insufficient evidence for slander-tilted remarks at the harm of other persons. The media have been so guilty of this that it stands no chance in a conservative-tilting court. Forget Iran and Korea, thou dope, and get to work in your own, destabilized, undemocratic country.

It's not slander to call him a dope if the shoe fits. It's not slander to describe CNN as a hyena if the shoe fits. And my motives are not to do unjustified harm, as is the case in slander, but to help correct the wrong. If Jesus is going to make us leaders in the next life, we had best learn the right from the wrong. Leaders are expected to more than know the difference. Leaders are expected to annihilate the wrong. Right, Mr. Trump? We wait for you, boy, to become a leader. Learn to kill the wrong. Harm not, but the wrong. Speak not angrily, but against the wrong. Judge not, but the wrong.

The Biblical call not to judge needs to be put into context. When Paul wrote that we should not judge others for sins (wrongdoing) we ourselves are prone or capable of doing, he didn't mean that we should remain wholly unconcerned with wrongdoing. He certainly didn't mean that we shouldn't bother learning the right from the wrong, which is a huge part of the Christian calling, a very good reason for the nations to honor Christianity even if Christians fail too many times. Spur us on in our failings to become better Christians, to get things righter than we have before, but the demented left wishes to wipe Christianity right off the face of the globe. God will empower this dastardly movement in the anti-Christ's coming...because Jesus is passionate about obliterating the wrong. Does Trump look passionate for doing the same?

When Paul said we shouldn't judge, he seems to have been speaking against a person, for example, who says about another Christian, "awe that Philip character is such a louse; he didn't even offer me a drink when I visited his place." In other words, he showed animosity, talking down too, which ignores that he too is capable of similar omissions. But if he had said to Philip, "when someone visits your home, be sure to be hospitable," it would have been fine. He would have been correcting him. The problem Paul and Jesus have is when we casually set up divisions to make ourselves look better when in fact we have logs in our own eyes. This is the sin of Democrats, for they make it their crusade, and are unafraid of slandering even the people of Jesus.

I've got to say, it is difficult for me to criticize Trump while not doing it wrongly. I'm not sure where I've done it wrongly at times. I suppose it's wrong where the motives are wrong. I can tell you that I want Trump to succeed, I am not wanting to tear him down as a priority, as would those guilty of slander. I want him to succeed as a Godly man even, but he disappoints on the things that matter to my brothers and sisters most. I am not criticizing because he disappoints me alone, but because I care for the respectability and spread of Christ. I'm not expecting him to push Jesus from his Office. I'm not disappointed because he's not doing that. Trump is not working to obliterate our enemies. I don't think he feels it's his job description to do so. That's what disappoints me, because he has a worldly commission to obliterate them, with or without Jesus in the picture.

Wrong is wrong, and Jesus defines what is wrong. Fighting for the true right is identical with fighting for Jesus. We are forced to fight when our enemies fight against us with the wrong. Christians have been hoping that Trump would trounce our enemies, make them less strong, but instead they are rising in mockery, with hopes of retribution against us. No matter how you cut it, this refusal or uninvolvement, a sin of omission, is squarely placing Trump in the anti-Christ camp. His inaction coupled with his bad-mouthing are winding up our enemies to do us more harm when he's gone than would otherwise be the case. And if I call him the donkey's arse that needs a good slapping, this is my motive: to show ire for his sin of omission. Get moving you jack ass!

My other motive for criticizing Trump is to distance believers from him. He is no good for Christians, that's my honest opinion. I trust that my criticisms are not exaggerated just to see myself succeed in this motive.

When God chose a donkey for Jesus to ride upon to his royal station, it was for expressly oozing the opposite flavor of Trump's luxury palace. God was not ashamed to mount his Global King on a vulnerable donkey instead of using a cannon-carrying limousine with 40 coats of wax. Jesus got up on this donkey knowing exactly what the Intention was. It required humility. And we trust the apostles to be true, not telling lies about their Jesus, because false men, if they were fabricating Jesus, would not have reported that he mounted a donkey while being hailed as the king. They would have put him on a dressed horse instead, if their purpose was to spread fame for Jesus in hopes of luring money from their duped followers.

Upon the return of Jesus, he'll be flying at the charge of white military horses, though of course Revelation calls them horses when in fact they will not be. It's symbolism for his military attack on the nations. All nations, meaning, in the least, the leading ones. Talk about a convoy. The one who first mounted the donkey was elevated by the Father to the Commander-in-Chief of the Universe. Jesus will not fail to act with his sword of justice.

This week on CNN, James Clapper admitted that Obama was behind the string of events that brought about the illegal attack on Trump. Listen to Clapper for yourself:

It was Obama, says Clapper, who tasked Clapper to engage an "Intelligence-community assessment" that led to the Mueller probe. That phrase looks like a dirt-finding expedition throughout all the waters of all the Intelligence agencies. Congress should like to know more about the messaging between Obama and Clapper at that time, or between Obama and other Intelligence agencies. Doesn't a sitting president have easy access on the communications of a former president? Why am I not hearing on this question from Fox or other Trump supporters?

If all of Obama's White-House communications belong to the public, then they belong to Trump too. Why couldn't Trump get his people to look at Obama's communications? Is it because Trump's White-House advisor(s) have advised him that this would be a no-no in this case? Or does Trump himself refuse to do the dirty work that needs to be done? What would be so wrong if Trump's White-House people came out to show where Obama's crimes lie on paper? Not one such iota of news has come to us. It's clearly out of bounds. Why?

I can imagine that the deep state, in order to protect its schemes where presidents are involved, developed policies and mechanisms to keep future presidents from looking into the communications of former presidents. I wonder what the truth is on this matter.

On CNN at the end of June, Clapper said that he expects Mueller to find some evidence. He says that there must be a reason for the probe's continuation (in what seems like la-la-land), and this reason must likely be that Mueller is on the brink of finding evidence. This seems like a tactic to hold Trump's feet to the fire; behave, or else. I would now argue that Trump has become comfortable with the Mueller probe because it gives him the excuse to do the nothing he wants to do. I hope I'm wrong, but Trump himself said that he's happy to be winning in the polls, and that do-nothing is the safest way to stay winning.

I have no idea how deep is Trump's stupidity. Perhaps there is more than stupidity behind it. If he wants higher poll numbers, the way to get them is to declassify the FISA warrants, and reveal Obama's part in these crimes. Would you not agree that this would send thrilling celebrations through his base, and in the meantime hamper and cuff the media? Where the evidence is damning against the Obama side, the leftist media needs to tread safely. It can't continue to push for the lie to its utter grave. So get the damning evidence, stupid. They seek false evidence against you, but you are unwilling to get damning evidence against them. What a farce. Sitting pretty is all that this man wants.

One goal of declassifying the FISA materials is to show that the dossier was indeed the primary ticket for the FBI's case against Trump. So long as the redactions stand, the left can claim that there's other evidence, besides the dossier, in there. The other goal is of course to discover other people involved, and what the role of all involved was, the details, etc., on this crime. Of course the FBI doesn't want to reveal these papers, as in a criminal that doesn't want to turn himself in, but when Trump gives a mere excuse for not revealing the details of the crime, he's like an obstructionist, and an accomplice of the criminal.

There can be no doubt about it. The CEO of the nation is duty-bound to read the unredacted form of these documents, and that makes Trump a criminal because he has read them, but has not acted properly after so doing. At least, if he never acts properly, he's guilty of a cover up. There is a chance that he's procrastinating for a better reason than wanting to sit pretty in the polls, and that he will eventually do the proper dirty work, but at this point, in combination with all the other factors over the broader territory of this matter, I have deep doubts.

Jeff Sessions supported Paul Ryan this week on rejecting the calls to impeach Rosenstein. No one gets punished. Name one high-level officer that Sessions has charged with a crime these past many months. We wonder what he's doing with McCabe. Not only did Sessions recuse himself from overseeing the Mueller probe, but he's supporting it. And this comes after Sessions was a Trump supporter during the campaign. How could it possibly be that Sessions opposes impeachment of Trump's worst enemy unless Sessions knew the president opposes it too? At least, that's the best explanation in my current view. Trump looks more and more like a charade.

Sessions himself withheld the documents requested by congress, wherefore it's no surprise that he supports Rosenstein. That is, if Sessions was for the impeachment, he would need to be for his won impeachment, for that of Rosenstein's is primarily due to withholding documents. Transparency is apparently a charade itself. So far as I know, there is no easy remedy set up by the government to assure that redactions in FOIA or congressional requests are justified. Generally, the last say on what gets redacted is that of the government, for appealing to courts is not exactly an easy remedy.

The best way to assure fairness while cutting out government corruption is to have an impartial organization deal with handing over government documents. Instead of the FBI being charged with handing over FBI documents, let the FBI hand documents to other government people tasked with keeping fair play between the applicant and top secrets. Easy enough. It's no guarantee of fair play, but it seems far better than allowing the police to police themselves. The applicant can have a list of people who decide what will and won't be revealed, and he/she chooses from the list. It doesn't need to be a new organization. Each person on the list comes with certain information about himself/herself, to choose by, and has an online file as per their performance on past cases.

At the least, there needs to be punishment for anyone who redacts anything without justification. The punishment is needed to assure fair play in the future. There is no justice if there is no punishment to the wrongdoer. Punish, and everything will cleanse itself. The wicked will choose to act clean, even if they are not clean, to avoid punishment. But Trump is the louse, unwilling to create the circumstances that calls for appropriate punishment. Hillary "redacted" almost all of her government business. Major punishment needed there. Sessions protects her by not revealing any emails she's sent to the DoJ. Wray does the same. And I expect Pompeo of the state department to do the same, for he did it when leading the CIA. We can grasp what's going on, a charade led by Trump because all of his chosen leaders are engaged in obstruction of justice, and when the ball bounced into his court these past couple of weeks, ditto, he did the same as they had. If this is what Trump is doing, what do you suppose should be his punishment?

Some of those arguing against impeachment are saying that Rosenstein hasn't committed any crime to deserve it. This issue reveals Rosenstein's friends, apparently, which includes judge Napolitano, and Fox commentator, Dershowitz. Napolitano says there are no crimes, only unethical behavior, and he adds that sometimes the DoJ must withhold documents to protect ongoing investigations. I'm not sure that others would agree with such a flat-broad statement. It's not a wonder that Sessions started an investigation into the FISA warrants so that his DoJ could redact more material than concerns top secrets. Is this part of the investigation? Redact it. Is that part of the investigation? Redact it. We get it, foolery.

I think that congress can prove in court that the withholding and redactions are unnecessary and therefore obstruction. I think that much is obvious. So why doesn't Napolitano agree? Let this issue roll out. Let the debate continue in the court of public opinion. Let's watch to see how the snake wiggles about to get its way.

Dershowitz says that congress can sue Rosenstein for contempt, but impeachment requires a high crime. He implies that withholding documents from congress is not a high crime. But it is in this case, isn't it? There's a difference when withholding documents in a typical crime case, but this involves a criminal framing of the president. Not all judges will give the Republicans that much, but some will.

Dershowitz argues for contempt charges instead, which, I think, involves a court of law, whereas impeachment does not. A contempt process permits the House to legally ask for papers and evidence (discovery process) from the other side that help to make the case that Rosenstein is trying to frame Trump for to set up his own impeachment of Trump. Under these conditions, it reaches "high crime," does it not?

Yes, court action allows the prosecutor to request documents from the other side, and the other side is bound to hand them over. That means that the FISA papers will need to get unredacted, doesn't it? Or, at least, the judge will get to see it unredacted in order to choose whether Rosenstein is using foolery in redacting them. But a court case also allows the House to investigate enormous numbers of DoJ papers checking to see what merit Rosenstein has for withholding other requested documents. The potential to make the case for high crime grows.

Dershowitz gets offensive where he says that impeachment should never be used for political purposes. He's framing the impeachment move as a political one, but this is very short-sighted and does justice a disservice. If no one can punish the other party because it's automatically deemed a political move, what a great bonanza (party time) for the corrupt. Besides, it doesn't matter whether there happens to be a political advantage (I didn't say "motive") to be had by the prosecutors in an impeachment move; the case should rest on whether Rosenstein has conducted himself with political bias. He's the one that must pay for it, because in his case it's criminal. It's not criminal for the other political side to charge Rosenstein whether they act with political motives or not. You can't accuse the Republicans for having a political interest while ignoring Rosensteins political crime. The latter justifies the political interest of the other side. It is not unethical to stick up for your political party when one commits a high crime against it, Mr. Dershowitz. One would think that you, who are always praised for being a law expert, would know that.

The case should rest on whether Rosenstein is attacking Trump on a nothing premise. If they make the case, then the conclusion would seem to be that politics defines his motives. To attempt the unseating of a president on a nothing premise seems to me to be a high crime. Dershowitz wishes to divorce this aspect from the impeachment's charges. I don't think that can be done. The very motive behind the refusal to hand over documents is to hide the nothing at the origin of the Mueller investigation. The house only needs to prove that the origin was nothing; it follows that the refusal to hand over documents (the evidence of the emptiness) is exactly part of the high crime. To prove the nothing, one must dispel the Carter-Page case made by the FBI.

It's not enough to claim that because Trump won the election, therefore he was colluding with the Russians. Rosenstein should be forced to show the stuff behind his calling Mueller to investigate collusion. That's what the House wants. The House is very sure at this time that Rosenstein's leg to stand on is hollow.

Just stare this in the face. The good Republicans, who do wish to defend the president, granted, want to know what the original premise was, and Rosenstein, who should be very happy to comply because it makes his case, objects. What does it tell us? That Rosenstein is picking his nose, hoping to find some evidence in his snot, because he can't even point to one thing that justifies the investigation, several months after the origin. Dershowitz would have us believe that Rosenstein really has something powerful that needs to be kept a big secret. The more that he and others frame Rosenstein this way, the more they all end up looking like clowns...unless the wizards can fabricate something that sticks.

Let's Look at the First FISA Application

To see the amount of redactions, or the extent of obstruction, in the FISA material, in 12 seconds flat, see the 1:30 point of this video:

On page two, it reads: "The United States relies on the following FACTS [caps mine] and circumstances in support of this application." Nothing complicated there. And under the first fact, it reads: "the target [Carter Page] of this application is an agent of a foreign power." Wow, speaking as though there was no doubt at all. Yet Carter Page is free without charge to this day, even after four spy applications over 360 days. You cannot get more innocent than that, of the charges, which is not to say that he's necessarily pure.

As one reads on, the unredacted parts all portray Page as a Russian agent by some small stretches, but, the problem is, the redacted parts leave us wondering whether the FBI is covering things that show clear inventiveness on their part to frame Page. The unredacted parts charge him with meeting some high-level Russian operatives. After shaping him into a spy, the warrant mentions Trump's soft side for the Russian position on the Ukraine issue. To this I can say that I happen to have a soft spot for the Russians in Ukraine too, because they too are people. I don't know that they are worse than Ukrainians. What I do know is that the West toppled a pro-Russian leader in the Ukraine, and that such intrusion, the hallmark of the CIA's global program, is justifiably despised by Putin. I can understand why he wouldn't want to be steamrolled flat into the dust by this Western boar. I think his annexing Crimea is a little over the top, but then I feel certain that the United States would have gone to war too if the shoe had been on the other foot.

Unlike American hawks, I do not think that Americans are the cat's meow of Heaven. I myself was framed by the American government on a serious false charge, learning first hand how these dogs would jail a person innocent of the charges just because they were angry with me. Let's hash out our disagreement, but don't jail me on a false criminal charge. Are they nuts? Exactly. That's the problem.

Okay, so Trump had a soft spot for Crimea, or something to that effect. He should talk about it, tell the hawks to get off his back about it. In fact, this issue may be the largest reason that the plots against him were hatched, because he appeared to promise a de-railing of their Middle-East and anti-Russian programs. What better way to keep him from doing so but to frame him in collusion with a Russian spy? I get it.

When we get to page 22, a large section of unredacted print appears. It says that a news organization's investigative reporter, neither of which are named, came out with an article on September 23, 2016...about a month before the first FISA application. This reporter, it says, revealed that U.S. Intelligence was investigating Page, and that he had met with two Russian officials back in July, which was the time roughly that the attack on Trump was gearing up. This opens the possibility that the CIA sent its agent, Carter Page, to Russia, and that the article was leaked by the will of the Intelligence people, in order to start the ball rolling on this scam. The fact that Page is still free can argue for his being a US-Intelligence operator.

Page 23 continues by saying that Page conversed with the Russian official on lifting U.S. sanctions on Russia, which makes Page look like a pro-Russia type akin to Trump. But, so far, we don't know that Page was a U.S. operator, and we don't known that he wasn't. If he was, it makes sense that he would start a pro-Russia conversation on lifting the sanctions. No surprise. We wonder how U.S. Intelligence knew what they talked about? It looks like Page may very well have been a faked Russian operative, but I don't know all the details to make a more-informed opinion. The possibility seems to be there.

On page 23, we find that the same article claims that Harry Reid wrote to the FBI to tell it about this Page-Russia affair. It looks like Trump collusion with Russia, Reid said. One could say that the story was leaked in order to explain how the FBI got it, no time to waste, because the election was in early November, some seven weeks off.

As the script does not identity the news organization or the article's author on multiple occasions of their mention, one could get the impression that the original application was altered to hide the author. We fully expect a rabid anti-Trumper / pro-Clintonite goon. We just want to know how he got the Intelligence info, and by what authority he felt free to share it with the world. Just look at the timing, a few weeks before the election, and just when it looked like Trump might beat up on Hillary.

After this, the application tells that Page contacted the authorities, and denied meeting the Russians, though, later, if I recall correctly, he did admit to meeting at least one. I can see this situation as a set-up, to make Page look like a liar (hiding things), for that plays well to making him appear as a spy. After this, there are some pages wholly redacted, until the text on page 32 speaks on the FBI conclusion that Page looks like a spy.

He met with some Russians, and was a peripheral "advisor" to the Trump campaign, and that is about the entirety of the evidence to claim as fact that Page was a Russian operative. It says that some in the Trump campaign said they didn't know Page, but the FBI framed this as their hiding his spy role. On November 3, 2017, the New-York Times leaked that Page admitted he had indeed met with Russians. We wonder why the plotters didn't have him confess a year earlier, just days before the election. Hmm. I wonder. Surely, that was the original plot.

Carter Page confessed when questioned in a closed meeting of the House Intelligence Committee. Reuters, November 2, 2017: "Page sent an email to at least one Trump campaign aide describing his insights...citing a person familiar with the message." Okay, so we imagine Page as an Intelligence goon, and he writes a Trump-team member, easy to do, to make it appear that Trump was connected to a Russian spy. Is this building up to the "discovery" of his correspondence with Trump himself? Is that what they are wanting to set up before the next election?

What made the Times feel free to leak that Page testimony? Leaks like this to liberal media should always be suspect as having a hidden agenda, just to be on the safe side.

Also from 2017:

Former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page met with an undercover Russian spy in 2013 and gave him documents, Page confirmed to BuzzFeed News. The Russian intelligence operative Victor Podobnyy was charged in the United States in January 2015 with acting as an unregistered agent of a foreign government. In his charging documents, Podobnyy is quoted as discussing his efforts to recruit Page, who is referred to as “Male-1” throughout the document. Page confirmed to BuzzFeed that he was Male-1. “[Male-1] wrote that he is sorry, he went to Moscow and forgot to check his inbox, but he wants to meet when he gets back. I think he is an idiot and forgot who I am... He got hooked on Gazprom thinking that if they have a project, he could rise up,” Podobnyy is quoted as saying in the charging document. “I also promised him a lot... this is intelligence method to cheat, how else to work with foreigners? You promise a favor for a favor...”

That Russian spy sure talks a lot, far too much. He sounds a little faked because of it. I'm trying to wrap my head around the possibility of his being an American operative disguised as a Russian spy. U.S. Intelligence could use double agents like that at times. If Page is such an idiot, why is Podobnyy talking about him at all in a recorded message? Because, one could argue, the entire conversation that he speaks could be fixed in order to frame Trump through the "evidence" it provides that Page was indeed connected to Russian spies.

What would you say if I said that U.S. Intelligence fabricates elaborate stories about Russians that Russians know are untrue, but that Intelligence doesn't care whatsoever if Russians come out to deny its false stories? Would Intelligence be that nutty? Well let's look at what could be nothing but a faked, elaborate story:

2004 to 2007. According to Page’s biography on the website of Global Energy Capital [said to be his personal company, but I'm not biting], his venture capital firm, he served as a vice president at the Merrill Lynch office in Moscow and remained there for three years. The bio adds that Page served as an adviser “on key transactions for Gazprom [wowie], RAO UES and others.” Page told Bloomberg News in March 2016 that he advised Russian energy giant Gazprom [wowie-wowie elaborate] as it was buying a stake in a lucrative Russian Far East oil and gas project called Sakhalin II.

I didn't know Page had it in him. And apparently he did not, because the very next paragraph is: "However, Politico later reported that the CEO of Sakhalin Energy, who negotiated with Gazprom on the deal, said that he didn’t know anyone named Carter Page and did not believe Merrill Lynch was involved with front-line deal negotiations at all, because the negotiations were political and done at the CEO level, with Putin himself giving the final approval." There are other pertinent quotes in the article that could suggest he was more a U.S. spy than corporate-executive material.

The same article: "...Podobnyy, an alleged Russian intelligence operative in New York City." ALLEGED. Not "confirmed." Could be fabricated by U.S. Intelligence.

The same article has a troublesome entry here:

2014. According to later reporting by CNN, the FBI begins monitoring Page's communications under a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act warrant, owing to his 2013 contacts with Russian operatives [Podobnyy].*

Did you ever hear of this FISA warrant (or more than one) on Page in 2014? Surely, if that were true, the FISA applications in 2016 would have addressed this one in 2014 as a special force to be reckoned with by the judge. Why bother using the dossier if the FBI already has the Podobnyy testimony locked up? And we want to know whether the FBI used the Podobnyy testimony in its string of four applications in 2016? If not, why not? Could it be because the Podobnyy story was invented yet? Don't be fooled by thinking that CNN had the 2014-FISA story, with its inclusion of the Podobnyy story, out in 2014. Instead, a link in the quoted paragraph above shows that the CNN article was dated August of 2017. In that article, it is alleged that there was a 2014 FISA warrant. Really? Or was this leaked to CNN by a "trusted" anonymous source? Do things like this really happen in the United States?

Same article:

March 21, 2016. In an interview with the Washington Post, Donald Trump personally names the then-obscure Page as part of his foreign policy team. News coverage at the time focused on how strange a choice this was given Page’s lack of experience. (In the same interview, Trump also listed George Papadopoulos, who graduated from college in 2009.)

We should like to know how Trump "listed" these two men who would crop up later in the attack-Trump campaign. Did Trump ring out all the names of his advisors one-by-one, or did the news anchor introduce these men in the first place, asking Trump if he knew them? The latter scenario could easily be a set-up for the future purpose of linking the two men closely to the president.

I had my suspicions (but that is all) that Hope Charlotte Hicks was a mole in the White House. I hate to defame her if untrue, but allow me to form theories in case they prove true. Same applies to Mr. Page. In the same article, she's mentioned in a curiosity. The setting: Page wants to go to Moscow during the election campaign, perfect for framing Trump as part of a Russian spy ring at just the right time. Page asks a supervisor if it's okay to go; he (J.D Gordon) doesn't like the idea. "Then, Page emails Lewandowski and Trump campaign spokeswoman Hope Hicks for official approval, and Lewandowski approves." Why would he write to the nobody, Hope Hicks, the mere pretty face (or figurehead) of the campaign, for permission? She's not the right person to ask.

Later in the article: "Aug. 5, 2016. Hicks tells the Washington Post [yikes, why is she talking to that slime?] that Page is an 'informal foreign policy adviser … {he} does not speak for Mr. Trump or the campaign.'" It sounds like she's sticking up for Trump against the media spin, yet she's also confessing or reinforcing Page's part in the election team. She's making him appear peripheral, true, but the FBI used this very theme to its advantage by claiming it to be a ploy of the team for having him pose as one not deeply involved. The very article we are reading from could have been the work of the deep state for to make its case in fine-sounding detail. Talk about election interference.

The alternative seems to be that Page was a Russian spy. That's a good reason to think that he's a deep-state pawn instead, because the deep state wants Trump tied to a Russian spy, and it's highly doubtful that Trump would have wanted one in his campaign's advisory turf. The use of Carter Page comes together in the FISA scheme with the concocted dossier so that, because the dossier was an underhanded ploy by the FBI, so might the Page material be. With the dossier backfiring on its purchasers, the Page material has little chance of upsetting Trump in the next election...unless the government goons can fabricate some new thing that sticks to Trump.

Nunes came out to say that, according to Republicans whom have seen the FISA material unredacted, there are some 20 pages, of the application signed by Rosenstein, that will shock Americans worse than the dossier scandal. Nunes is still wanting Trump to declassify. He was asked if the president has read the unredacted portions, and says he doesn't know.

Jim Jordan has come out to say that he's running for Speaker of the House, good for him. He said on Fox that there's a small group at the top of the Republican side that control most of the decisions, and he disagrees with this approach. It's always expected that the deep state should infiltrate all control centers, to control it with a few. If Jordan becomes the Speaker, he should manage some hefty damage to Trump's enemies at this time. I view Jordan as sincerely opposed to corruption for corruption's sake, no political motive required. Jordan sets off sparks when he talks, perfect for setting off explosive (do-something) moves, something Ryan knows nothing about.

We saw the deep state come out with a story of decades ago to tarnish Jordan, so that House Republicans who might be urged by their electorate to give Jordan a vote might have the excuse not to. It's another example of why Trump needs to speed up his part in inoculating this corruption with the poisons it deserves. There is nothing more important to deal with, and may take a decade of dedication to finalize.

Pompeo, who seems to be trying hard to stay on Trump's good side, came out to say, perhaps by putting words into Trump's mouth, that the United States will never support the annexation of Crimea, which the Russians of Crimea support. If the Ukraine brings in another pro-Russian leader, that annexation could go to the wayside.

Imagine if Russia toppled Trudeau, and replaced him with a pro-Russia man so that some of all Canadian taxes go to the Russian government for the purpose of strengthening the Russian hold over the country. Imagine further that some war broke out between some Canadian provinces and the Canadian capital ruled by the pro-Russian, with the hope of defeating the pro-Russian capital. What would the United States do, sit idly by and not assist? Imagine further if half the people in those rebel Canadian provinces were American citizens asking president Pompeo for annexation. If Pompeo is justified in supporting those provinces, why isn't Putin justified in supporting Crimea? It's Russia's backyard, and the West interfered with it big-time, with the wish of interfering in other nations on Russia's border. Pompeo comes out looking like a hypocrite, if we follow the truth-track and lay the skewed view from politics aside.

It may be true that the former, pro-Russian Ukraine leader was corrupt, but I certainly wouldn't trust the word of the Americans on that charge, nor the Western leaders. That's the problem: we can no longer trust American Intelligence. The globalist sky is literally falling because of this. It doesn't help when Trump looks like a world bully with missiles flung from beneath his fingernails. The world grows to hate the nation more on account of this. Gaining respect with a show of brute force works only amongst the bulls of the world. It should be the aim of the West to avoid Armageddon; God would be only too pleased to have the Coming of Jesus into a world at peace with itself and in respect of Jesus, but instead we find a chugging onward to an Armageddon-like situation. There is no cure, for the terrible end has been announced before it happens, and God does not lie.

Count your worldly endeavors as nothing. Ease up on your ambitions, live not for money-money-money. Wait for the Kingdom, even if it's until your death. This is what the Bible writers, and Jesus too, say. History is a stage to expose the re-occurring sins, and how deep they are. Surely, as the end approached, exposure of sin is meaningful to God to justify his part in Armageddon, the literal shaking of the planet and horrible storms, both in the midst of mankind's military annihilation of himself. If we trust Jesus, who spoke it long before nuclear capability, he said that no one would survive unless He comes to quell it.

Orion and Scorpio

How did people in the first century envision the wipe-out of all people? Seems impossible when known populations existed from Britain to China. And then came the book of Revelation with a description of a nuclear blast, and similar things. It's in Revelation 9, a deep hole in the ground with a furnace within it, and smoke above, all caused by a bright object falling from the sky.

Keep in mind that "earth" can be substituted with "land," according to the Greek word used:

The fifth angel sounded his trumpet, and I saw a star fall out of the sky to the earth, and a key to the shaft of the abyss was given to it. 2 And he [the angel, I assume] opened the shaft of the abyss; smoke rose from the shaft like the smoke of a great furnace, and the sun and air were darkened by the smoke from the abyss. 3 And out of the smoke locusts came down to the earth, and authority was given to them as scorpions of the earth have authority. 4 And it was said to them not to harm the grass of the earth nor any greenery nor any tree, but only the men not having the seal of God upon their foreheads (my translation as per remaining true to a Greek-interlinear Bible by Alfred Marshall).

The use of locust terminology seems to point the reader to the locusts of Joel's end-time prophecy. The fact that the locusts come out of the smoke of an explosion tends to identify them as helicopters and other war machines belonging to the nation that set the explosion off. If it's not a nuclear explosion, it's one giant bomb.

The use of scorpion terminology is not so easy to parallel in Old-Testament prophecy. The phrase, "as scorpions of the earth have authority," is novel to Scripture. Since when do scorpions have authority? Who do these scorpions represent in the world of men? I can take a stab, but it may be ruinous to the text, so take the following lightly. When I was seeking the location of the Biblical mount Gareb, I read that some translate the word as "scorpion." Later, I found Biblical evidence to suggest that mount Gareb is 1.67 miles west of the northern wall of the Temple Mount in Jerusalem rather than 1.67 miles to that wall's north. Using Google Earth mapping, it landed me on a hill either where the Israeli Knesset (parliament) sits, or the hill beside it. One might even venture to think that the people who chose that hill for the Knesset did so because they knew, or thought, it was the old Gareb.

It's completely interesting that a G-less "Gareb" can be the origin of "Repha," for Jerusalem's west side has a Biblical Rephaite hill. Long before I was talking about Rephaites, I claimed that Gareb's people, when migrated to Greece, were represented by "corvos," the Greek word for, crow, and thus mythical Coronis the crow became suspect as the Garebites. I spent considerable time reporting on the crow symbol of Garebites, and noted in my heraldry studies that the crow species of raven was prolific in heraldry. And while Israel was put on the modern map by ROTHSchilds, German Roths/Rothchilds use a giant raven.

Later, to my great surprise, when I was toying with a Gareb = Repha equation (one term could have morphed to the other over centuries), I realized that "raven" is like "Reph." Hmm, and Ralphs/Rolphs/RUFFs (probably the Dutch-Raven Shield) and Ravens happen to use the raven. One wonders if the Israeli name, "Rabin," is a Raven branch. (Use the Raven link above to load other Coats.)

Ralphs/Ruffs share the trefoil and a Crest version with Ruffords, the namers of Rudford, and the two Rudford surname are listed with Rutherfords/ROTHerfords, who themselves share the "orle" border of Rutlands and the "nec" motto term with Rodhams/Roddens. Therefore, it seems, Rephaites may have become the Rothschilds. Or, at least, they had merged with Roth liners. The Moray Randolphs come up as "Ruth" and "Rother," and some say that "Randolph" is a version of "Ralph." Moray is suspect with Amorites, and Og, a Rephaite king, happened to rule Amorites.

None of this is to say that Garebites or Rephaites necessary connect to the scorpions of Revelation 9, but the possibility is there, especially for what I'm about to say in a paragraph below. Even if "Gareb" was not derived in an old word for "scorpion," Greek myth writers had the habit of inventing codes for people groups as per sound-alike terms. And so Garebites may have become the mythical Scorpio.

Some of you may be familiar with my fairly-recent work on mythical Orion, who was from Boiotia. I didn't know until now that "In Greek mythology, the myths associated with Scorpio almost invariably also contain a reference to Orion." Amazingly, I traced the Biblical king Og, king of Rephaites, to mythical Ogyges of Boiotia! Zowie.

The quoted sentence above continues with: "According to one of these myths it is written that Orion boasted to goddess Artemis and her mother, Leto, that he would kill every animal on the Earth." It just so happens that Leto was the mother of Apollo while the latter is in Revelation 9. Moreover, Apollo was the mate of Coronis, can we believe it. Here's Revelation 9:10-11:

[The locusts] have tails like those of scorpions, and stings, an by their tails have their authority to harm men for five months. They have over them a king, the angel of the abyss, whose name in Hebrew is Abaddon, and in the Greek he has the name Apolluon.

There you have the possibility that God used scorpions as a pointer to the Apollo-Coronis relationship that produced the Meshwesh (part of the mythical, Amazon Muses) of Cyrene (eastern Libya). This entity was a branch of the Maezaei peoples in Croatia / Serbia, living beside the Coronis line of Ceraunii. Long before I knew or stressed the Maezaei, I was writing that "Serb" is a soft-version of "Gareb." I then learned that Croatians are called, KRVati, which likewise looks like "Gareb." Krv-like Carvers/Carbers were first found in Norfolk with Rolphs/Ruffs. I take it that Serbs were named after Servitium, an old location smack at the Maezaei theater. See left of this old map for surrounding details:

It just so happens that the book of Revelation was written on PatMOS, which was likely named after the same that myth writers called, Muses. Like the Amazons, to which Apollo belonged (because his twin sister was an Amazon goddess), Muses are an all-female cult. The locusts of Revelation 9 have hair like the hair of women, which may or may not point to the Muses; all I can say is that it's interesting.

I claim that the Meshwesh of Cyrene, known to be Amazons by such other names as Amazighen/Mazyes, named king Massena of Numidia. It just so happens that mythical Scylla of Sicily's Messina was given wolf-head symbolism, while Leto and her twin children all had wolf symbols too. Then, Scylla-like Skala is a city on Patmos along with Coronis-suspect Chora. I had entertained that Skala named the first part of ASCLepius' name before learning that there was an Asclepius cult on Sicily. It was very important to the whole theory because myth writers made Asclepios a son of Coronis and Apollo. They were both LAPITHs, which tended to explain the ending on "AscLEPIUS."

Wikipedia's Orion article has Asclepius: "Ancient poets differed greatly as to who Aesculapius brought back from the dead; the Argive epic poet Telesarchus is quoted as saying in a scholion that Aesculapius resurrected Orion. Other ancient authorities are quoted anonymously that Aesculapius healed Orion after he was blinded by Oenopion". Note the "pion" ending of the latter Oeno liner, for Epione was made the wife of Asclepios. Without getting into it all here, I can see that Orion is a Laish-related bloodline in contact with mythical Tiresias, the blind seer that owned the Hermes caduceus.

On top of this, I had pondered whether mythical Nephele was named ultimately after a hill at western Jerusalem (i.e. near or beside Gareb) that went by a Neph(ele)-like term, the spelling of which I repeatedly forget. I don't think I had yet known, at the time, that Ixion, Nephele's husband, was Coronis' brother.

So, the theory to be developed by these things is that the Revelation locusts and their bomb belong to Rothschilians in support of the Knesset. And this bomb may therefore be exploded on Israel's enemies during their invasion of on Israel. Or, in reverse, the scorpion symbolism may mean that the enemy of the Knesset or end-time Rephaites explode the bomb on or near Israel. As it harms no green thing, one could figure a chemical or nerve-agent bomb. It's not the bomb that causes the pain in humans. There could be more than one bomb while Revelation paints only one in symbolism.

It should be added that while king Massena formed an alliance with the Roman general, SCIPio, Meschins (Asclepios-like scallops) in high places of Norman England married SKIPtons of Krv-like CRAVen, a Raven-like term. The Craven motto honors ACTons, and ancient Acte was home to Ogyges. Actons are said to have had an Axton Kent, where Massins/Masons were first found. The latter were first found in Kent's Thanet, which term I trace to "Zenata" of Numidia, explaining why Certs share the blue lion with Massins/Masons, for the Numidian capital was CIRTa.

The god Apollo, Artemis's twin brother, grew angry and sent a scorpion to attack Orion. After Orion was killed, Artemis asked Zeus to put Orion up in the sky. So every winter Orion hunts in the sky, but every summer he flees as the constellation of the scorpion comes.

The two constellations are on opposite sides of the sky, at opposing horizons, giving birth to one chasing the other as the world turns. One might argue from this that there was no blood connection between the representations of Orion and Scorpio, or that the two were paired in myth simply due to their respective positions in the sky. On the other hand, the two constellations holding the same circle in the sky may have been identified as Orion and Scorpio in the first place due to their sharing blood i.e. fellow tribes. Orion was a giant, as was Og, king of Rephaites.

Wikipedia's article on Orion: "...there is one etiological passage which says that Orion was responsible for the present shape of the Strait of Sicily." There must have been a strong connection of Orion's representation to that strait, which is exactly the narrow water where the Scylla monster is located. To put it another way, Orion-line Boiotians were at eastern Sicily, and to this I would add that Orion-suspect Uranus was given a Sicil-like sickle symbol by myth writers. And it just so happens that Uranus was castrated by a sickle in the hand of Coronis-like Cronus. Castration was also the symbol of Attis and his Galli priests; the latter had the caduceus symbol, much like the symbol of Asclepios.

Attis was married to Cybele, who may have evolved into the Sibal(d)s because the latter share the MOLine cross of SEGURana's, colors reversed from the moline of Seagars/Sugars whom I trace to the SAKARya river, smack where Cybele was the great-mother goddess. It is expected that she was an extension of Rhea on Crete. Remember this moline symbol (for the Moline surname) because, below, you will see people defining "Asclepios" with the mole.

Attis was Aeetes of Kutaisi, and the latter location was on a Glaucus river shown on this old map of Caucasia. "Aesculapius on one occasion was shut up in the house of Glaucus, whom he was to cure...When [Aesculapius] was exercising this [resurrection] art upon Glaucus, Zeus killed Aesculapius..." In other myths, Glaucus (fish symbol) loved Scylla i.e. a good reason to view Asclepius partly as the Sicil bloodline.

It's Eschol-interesting that while I unveil the sinister symbol of heraldry as a Massey / Mason symbol, Schole's/Scayle's use a sinister-side canton. The Eschol valley to the south-west of Jerusalem, within reach of Og's Amorites, was an Amorite piece of Hebron, home of Abraham and likely also of Keturah, his other wife. Can it appear as though proto-Masseys through Patmos were in Hebron with Amorites? Might "AESCULapius" have been part code for an Eschol line to Skala of Patmos? Looks like.

"Ascalaphus" was an owl term, and while Edom's Kos god is said to have been an owl cult, I trace Amorites to mythical Merops of Kos (a Greek island). One of two mythical Ascalaphus' was made a son of Orphne, who looks like play on Rephaite-suspect Orpheus. The latter was placed into the Hebron-suspect Hebros river. Orphne lived in Attis-suspect Hades, the latter named after Hades, a son of Cronus and Rhea. Orphne was also known as Styx while the other mythical Ascalaphus (king or Orchomenus of Boiotia) was made a son of Styx-like ASTYOCHe, which looks like the line to Calydon's Astakos, home area of the Oeno / Oeneus line.

The caduceus was symbol of the Cadusii Armenians, who may have lived at MUS of Lake Van (suspect with PatMOS, right?), and this Armenian area is not far from Rhagae (modern Rey) in Uranus-suspect Iran. It just so happens that Cronus, Uranus' father, had Rey-like Rhea for a wife, and while Rhea's home was on Crete (= migration of Rhagae's Iranians to Crete), Orion went hunting on Crete with Artemis in the myth having his death by a scorpion (makes Amazons look like Garebites). Plus, the Scylla monster is always paired with a Charybdis monster, thought by others to be on the opposite side of the strait of Sicily, which is at Rhagae-like Reggio.

Just gawk at CHARYBdis, so much like "Gareb." I traced Charybdis to mythical Charops and his descendent, Repha-suspect ORPHeus (just remove the capital vowel), who was floated (by myth writers) down the Hebros river with Apollo's harp to the Lapith island of Lesbos. Coronis was a Lapith.

I trace "Orion" to "Orne," a Norman region that was home to the father of the first Meschin, whose brother married Skiptons of Craven. The same family married Clare's of Tonbridge, in Kent, same as Axton. Tonbridge's are suspect with the Coat of the Saracen surname (wolf, yup), and the Saracen people group did live at Sicily's Messina, or at least beside it. Saracens lived at Rhagae-like Ragusa (Sicily), though there is another Ragusa, home of Saraca's, at the Croatia theater. Italy's Saracena is not very far from Reggio.

The Saracen Coat, very linkable to Craigs and their Carrick kin for all this implies in a trace to the Tilurius river (= Ceraunii / Maezaei theater), is in the colors of the SHAKEspeare Coat, and both surnames were first found in Cumberland. I trace Shake's to the Biblical Shechemites, of the Israeli theater, and they were traced (by me) to Boiotia's Schimatari, home of Orion's father. I have an elaborate system to make the case for all the traces I'm pointing out here, but can't get back into it all here. Suffice it to delve into the Kennati.

While Shechemites were associated, if not related, to the Biblical Kenites, who trace well to the Kennati priests of Cetis/Citis while the Tilurius' alternative name of Cetina is linkable to "Cetis." It just so happens that the latter part of a motto term of the Caen surname (shares a red fesse with Cravens) is "Citis" while Caen is a location in Orne.

Plus, Kennati-line Kennedys are Carrick kin while Carricks can be traced excellently to emperor Caracalla, whose coin is online with "Olba" upon it. Olba is at Cetis, and was home to the Kennati. Wikipedia suggests that Olba was also "Orba, which is in-turn like "URBanus, the river of the Ceraunii. Caracalla's mother was the sister of Julia Maesa, which should prove to be from "Maezaei" because her father was stationed in Dalmatia, location of both the Cetina river and the Saracen-line of Saraca's. Dalmatia is the Croatia = KRVati theater, and the Arms of Saraka share the same fish as Gareb-possible CARP(er)s.

It's interesting that Carp(er)s are in Trump and Dol colors while all three surnames were first found at Pomerania-Mecklenburg. This tends to link the Dol whale to the same-colored Carp(er) fish. The whale is suspect as code for Waleran de Leavell, from king Lupus Laevillus of Cetis, husband of Quadratilla Bassus/Bassianus, the ancestry of Domna Bassianus, mother of Caracalla.

Of interest, Og became an Amorite king in Bassian-like Bashan, an area east of the sea of Galilee. English Bassans/Besants (Bashan colors) share the Massey/Macey quadrants. The Bassan/Besant leopard is probably that of Mosca's (Pisa). Masseys/Maceys were from Ferte-Mace near the upper Orne. Orne's are also Horns while a HUNTING HORN is used by German Bassans/Bass'. Orion was a hunter! Masseys/Maceys are said to be from Manche, as are French Sturs/Esturs, and the latter share the Bashan Coat! Zikers. I've never before realized that Bassianus' could be from Og's Bashan. If Og named Gog, it explains why the Meshech were a chief tribe of Gog. It's making sense. And Massey-branch Masci's were first found at the area of the Stura river of Italy.

Base's/Baise's share the Brunswick Coat, and while Bars (hunting horns) were in Brunswick as well as at the Little-Meuse river (at Bar-le-Duc), Bashans are also BARshans. The three pale bars of Bashans/Barshans and Sturs are in the colors of the two of Couch's (Og-suspect OXfordshire), and Googe's are also Gouch's. The Vere's, who ruled Oxford centuries, share the Massey quadrants, and are likewise said to be from Manche. It's important that while king Pharnaces of the Pontus was a Persian element, his Parr line shares the Coat of Dutch Gochs/Gouch's while the Welsh Gochs are sharing the Googe/Gouch Coat. Amorite-suspect Amore's and Damorys were first found in Oxfordshire, and both share the dog with Goggins and Goggle's/Gockels (not familiar with them).

Stur variations are Astor- / Ishtar-like while the map of Basham shows the region at ASTHORoth:

The article says that Bashan stretched from Gilead to mount Hermon (Golan Heights), the proto-Hermes stomping grounds, but also the Levite priest of Laish. "Golan, one of its cities, became a Levitical city and a city of refuge (Joshua 21:27)."

The Goggle dog is, like the dog of Bracks (horns), brown on gold. I can trace Bracks very well to Brac/Bratia, an island off the mouth of the Cetina river, where I happen to trace Bassianus! Heraldic brown is suspect with a Bruno line to Brunswicks, and the Brown surname shares the Masci / Brock fleur. Bracks probably share the Meschin fesse because the first Meschin (son of a Mr. BRIQUESsart of Orne, in the Bessin) married a Talbot bloodline (also from Orne) while heraldic dogs (Hecate symbol) are often called talbots. The other Bracks (Shropshire, same as Hunts/Hunters and Meschins, beside Masseys / Maceys) use more hunting horns, and Huns / Hundts use more dogs. Huns/Hundts use the GREYhound while Greys use a colors-reversed version of the Talbot Coat.

The Meshech and Tailbois scallops are figuring with Asclepios of Sicily, the line from Coronis, but Sicily was founded by Sicanians along with Sicils, and I trace Sicanians to "Sicyon," smack beside Corinth. Send me your best apple, historians. Don't fight the obvious facts.

I have told the story many times of my accidentally (not my fault) urinating on the HEAD (Gorgon symbol) of Pino, a child of about my age when I was five years old. I claim that God caused that event for special reasons, and it's how I discovered Orion's and Uranus' urine symbol. My mother is a Masci on her mother's side. I, a Masci liner, pee'd on Pino one day. Although I know I had spent more time with him, I cannot remember one thing we did together. We didn't play together much. But one day, I was at his garage, speaking with a man, without Pino there. He showed me a rifle, which, of course, must have been a hunting rifle. As Orion was a hunter, I sensed that God set up that pee event. There is even a rifle-like Riffel/Riff surname that can be a Rephaite line.

Probably, the most famous mythical head belonged to the Gorgon Medusa, of Africa, same as king Massena and the Amazons. I say that Parion/Parium, a Gorgon-Muse center of Mysia, applies. That Mysian city was, in my findings, the home of the Paris and Priam Trojans, and I'll get to this later when on mythical Medea farther below, very likely related to "Medusa." Gorgons lived in Parthia (Iran) too, which is generally where historians see the ancestry of Caucasian Scythians / Cimmerians. Orphne above was also called, Gorgyra.

Orphne was married to Coronis- / Ceraunii-like Acheron. "In the Homeric poems the Acheron [river of Epirus] was described as a river of Hades, into which Cocytus and PHLEGethon both flowed." Coronis was the daughter of the Lapith king, PHLEGyas. Epirus is the location of the Ceraunii mountains. Making sense. In Acheron's Wikipedia article: "The newly dead would be ferried across the Acheron by Charon in order to enter the Underworld." Orpheus went to Hades with Charon. The latter was the brother of Thanet-like Thanatos while Masons of Thanet trace to Maezaei between the Oeneus river and the Ceraunii peoples. OenoMAUS was an Amazon ruler of Oeneus elements. In Wikipedia's article on Thanatos, we see him with mythical SISYphus, king of Corinth but code for SICYon (my personal discovery, not to be found elsewhere).

Speaking of the Muses: "Ogyges is also known as king of the Ectenes, who according to Pausanias were the first inhabitants of Boeotia, where the city of Thebes would later be founded. As such, he became the first ruler of Thebes, which was, in that early time, named Ogygia after him." Later, CadMUS came along and conquered Thebes. He slew a dragon there thought to be Ogyges, or of his line. That Thebes dragon had teeth resurrected to become the Ares dragon at Colchis' Kutaisi. It's the Cadusii-Mus Armenians, explaining why the king of Kutaisi, Aeetes, left the family of Cadusii-liner Hermes in charge of Coronis-suspect Corinth when he (Aeetes) left it for Colchis (= proto-Gorgon Georgia). Corinthians are expected with the Ceraunii near the Cetina's source, and we saw why Og's Bashan elements should have been with Bassianus' at/around the Cetina.

Later, Aeetes' daughter, Medea, would be queen of Corinth, and from there she flew her sky chariot, pulled by a dozen dragons, to Athens, where Ogyges (the dragon) had ruled. We get it. We get the little pictures that the wee-minded myth writers were painting on behalf of their satanic cults. Aeetes was the same entity that had named Attica, from which the Ectenes derived, no doubt, when Acte was part of Attica. I trace Keturah and Og's line to Kodros of Athens, who had a fish symbol and a boar symbol, which recalls the proto-Rothschild Bauers. Recalling the Ruffords of Rudford, let's add that fish alone are shown by Radfords/Ratfords. Ratcliffs use two bends colors reversed from the two Schild bends. The Ratcliff Crest along with their manor at Whalley suggest merger with Walerans, first found in Devon with Radfords/Ratfords. Trefoils are partly code for proto-Rockefeller Roquefeuils, and Rutherfords use the rock while Rocks, Rods and Roe's (and Fellers and Fallis') use the trefoil.

Uranus, says / implies Wikipedia, was named after urine as a symbol of rain, since he's the sky god. I differ. I say he was named after Eran, ancient Iran, and that his name either morphed into an ancient urine term for rain, or the term had another origin that was then applied to him as his symbol. Let's look at a story on Orion:

...Here the gods Zeus, Hermes, and Poseidon come to visit Hyrieus of Tanagra, who roasts a whole bull for them. When they offer him a favor, he asks for the birth of sons. The gods take the bull's hide and ejaculate or urinate into it and bury it in the earth, then tell him to dig it up ten months later. When he does, he finds Orion; this explains why Orion is earthborn.

The earth, Gaia, just happens to have been Uranus' wife. Therefore, the myth writer knew that his Orion was play on "Uranus." And while Minos of Crete was given a nine-month symbol, which should explain the nine Muses of Apollo, Curetes of Crete had numbered both nine and ten, which can explain why Orion's father had to wait ten months instead of nine. Minos was code for Minoans on Crete, the likely entity that named OrchoMENOS in Boiotia (they were on the Argo ship), and the Minyae to which Jason of the Argonauts belonged. Jason lived in the same area as Ixion.

Same article: "The first [version] says that because of his 'living joined in too great a friendship' with Oenopion, [Orion] boasted to Artemis and Leto that he could kill anything which came from Earth. Gaia (the personification of Earth in Greek mythology) objected and created the Scorpion." That tends to identify Gaia with Garebites even more than Orion, suggesting that a Gai-like people group existed in Amorite Jerusalem.

I trace Amorites to Merovingians via mythical Merops of Kos, and it just so happens that a mythical Merope is in Orion myth. Merops was made a grandfather to queen Aedon of Boiotia, we get it. The father of king Massena (or Massinissa) was Gaia.

Let's go to another version of Orion's death: "In the second story, Apollo objected to his sister Artemis's love for Orion, and, seeing Orion swimming with just his head visible, challenged her to shoot at that mark, which she hit, killing him." I've gleaned that the mythical head symbol is of the Gorgons. Herodotus called them Gargarians, the proto-Georgians, and mates of Amazons. This tends to tell me that Rephaites were merged with Gorgons. The head alone of Rephaite-suspect Orpheus floated down the Hebros river to the island of Lapiths.

For those who have read my Oeneus material: "He is also called Oeneus, although he is not the Calydonian Oeneus". This is found in Orion's article, but I can't make out whether Oeneus was the alternative name of Orion or his father. The Wikipedia writer should not have used "He" at the start of this sentence (better some repetition than a pronoun that confuses). In any case, the Maezaei are situated on the map between the Oeneus and Urbanus rivers, and mythical Oeneus describes the Amazons of Pisa and Calydon.

The Shechemites that I see at Schimatari, which is at the Tanagra of Orion's father, are expected in some partnership with the Levites of Laish, whom I happen to trace to Oeneus of Calydon. I suspect that Jonathan of Laish, because he descended from the Levite family of Moses, had Kenites amongst him, and thus Shechemites are expected too. Kenite-liner Kennedys use a Schimatari-like scimitar as proof of the Shechemite-Kenite merger into Templar times. And Scottish Kennedys share the dolphin with Rhagae-possible Reagans while the dolphin is very traceable to Daphne of the Ladon river, the line from Laish, a city beside ancient Daphne. "Oeneus" may be play on (in reflection of) "Peneus," a father of mythical Daphne.

In Wikipedia's attempt to provide the best derivation for "Asclepios," it floors me to find that it's in a mole hill. The Shechemite-suspect Shake's may be using a mole hill for that reason, whether the derivation was correct or not:

"H. Grégoire...explains the name as 'the mole-hero', connecting skalops aspalax [two Greek words] 'mole' and refers to the resemblance of the Tholos in Epidauros and the building of a mole [looks like it should be "mole hill"]...But the variants of Asklepios and those of the word for 'mole' do not agree.

So, the idea that Asclepios was derived in a mole theme stuck in some circles, and Shake's/Shacks/Shechs can be using mole hills because Shechemites were merged with peoples of Skala who named the Sicils of Sicily. It doesn't appear coincidental that the Mole surname shares the giant boar head of SCHIMatari-like Schims/Shands. The latter looks like a Shand-liner merger with Schimatari elements. And this boar is used by Gugu-like Googe's/Gooch's (Roxburghshire, same as Mole's) while mythical Gugu was also Gyges, suspect with mythical Ogyges (monster) of Boiotia, suspect in-turn with Og, king of Rephaites. Og's bed was 13 feet long. "Ogyges" probably coined the "Gigantes," giants.

There is a very-good chance that the heraldic boar, at least some of them, are code for the line of Bauers/Bowers, Bowers/Boars and Bourlys/Bourlys (share white boars with Googe's and Gochs), all three of which share green Shields, the colors of the Shake chevron. As Rothschilds descended from Mayer Bauer, this plays well to the Rothes/Rothchild raven. Bowers/Boars share the five arrows in the Arms of Rothschilds. I trace these surnames to Boura, near the Ladon river, for good reasons not to be repeated here.

Both Horus and Orion are said to have walked on water, suggesting that they were named after the same thing. I trace "Horus" to "Hros" and Ares (father of Ascalaphus), or to the namers of the Aras river, which flows in Armenia not far from Rhagae. Myth has tens of thousands of events so that some are bound to reflect a few events in Jesus' life. We don't connect Jesus to pagan cults however, though anti-Christs will in efforts to prove that Jesus was somehow connected to them. There is no indication that Jesus was paganish. None. Walking on water is exactly to be expected from myth writers. No surprise.

Years ago, I realized that "Gareb" traces to "Jerevan," an Armenian city very near the Aras. For this reason, I traced "Hera," only/official wife of Zeus, son of Rhagae, so to speak, to "Hierosolyma," the Greek word for, Jerusalem. It suggests that the proto-Zeus cult was from Jerusalemites of some kind. Hera's daughter was even Hebrew-like Hebe (Israelites were late-comer Hebrews, not the only Hebrew tribe). Amorites of Jerusalem are expected to have been a branch of Amorites at the Euphrates river, and these, I can make the argument, evolved into Aphrodite and Hephaestus, and their Kabeiri cult.

Here is a very-stupid writer: "The Son of Man in the Gospels can be traced to the constellation Orion which represents Jesus' Spirit." Wow, what a keen sense of greater intelligence. Jesus walked on water, therefore he's descended from Orion. But of course. And Jesus made mud with spit, so all we need to do now is find a myth character that did the same, and Jesus can be traced to him too. Don't be fooled with the resurrection of Orion. There are many "resurrections" in myth, too many to count, like in cartoons, when Daffy Duck gets squashed to death, he comes to life for the next scene. Same idea, because cartoons and myths are both unreal stories.

I love the idea of loving people, being good-willed. But anti-Christs are there to anger us, to upset a normal world of love, goodwill. They will therefore be upset. It's a no-brainer. They are being upset as we speak. They are still raging mad, the headlines show. They are playing all their tricks to expose what little manhood they are made of. Go ahead, fiends, be fiendish, ruin our world, but let it make me happy to see you upset. Let us rejoice in your impoverished spirits if you won't let us rejoice in your brotherly love toward us. One way or the other, we will rejoice and be happy. Why should we allow you to make us upset? You be upset, thou fiend.

So, back to Revelation 9: "And out of the smoke locusts came down to the earth, and authority was given to them as scorpions of the earth have authority." No one ever heard that scorpions have authority. Why compare locusts to the authority of scorpions that no one ever heard of? How does that resolve things in the reader's mind? And who ever heard of the scorpions of the earth? It makes more sense to use "power" instead of "authority," as in "ability," and to use "land" instead of "earth." The latter can be taken as "planet" these days.

The text makes better sense now, merely saying that the locusts have the ability to sting with no special emphasis on a government-related power of scorpions. The emphasis is on stinging, I assume, and this can explain the use of scorpions, meaning that, perhaps, it has nothing to do with Garebites. I cannot re-find the page(s) defining "Gareb" from scorpions, but there are pages defining it as "scabby, itchy," which may play to the sores in the 5th bowl. Skin sores develop scabs, right? Scorpions are not the only things that sting, and so far as I can find, they don't cause wounds large enough to form scabs. Many scorpion stinks are not very painful, which may mean that scorpions are used as God's code for something. Why did God choose scorpions for the 5th trumpet?

How does a bomb affect only those not having the invisible seal of God on their heads? I'd guess that the bomb explodes where God's people are not found, because, at that time, they are in wilderness self-survival, avoiding the 666 mark of the anti-Christ. Revelation 12 says that satan is outraged that the people of God escape into the wilderness. He wants them to receive the mark. Ah, let it be our joy when the anti-Christs become mad with anger, because we asked them to be our brothers, to go the way of a good God, but they chose the wicked, blaspheming anti-Christ instead. Rejoice when we are persecuted, slandered, rejected, and know that they are as nothing. They don't think straight; they can't help themselves. They are bonkers. Don't try to understand monsters.

Back to the 5th Trumpet; it Got Away From Me

It's my view that the sequence of the 21 Revelation plagues progresses directly from the 5th Seal to the 5th trumpet to the 5th bowl, then to the 6th seal, sixth trumpet, 6th bowl, etc. The best evidence to obliterate the common misconception that the 7th trumpet is years prior to Armageddon is where it's in Revelation 10:7. It says there that the mystery of God is ended in the days when the 7th trumpet is about to blow. That, along with details of Paul's "last trumpet," forces it at Armageddon, after the 1260 days.

The 5th bowl comes sooner than the 7th trumpet, therefore. The 5th bowl appears to mark the end of the 1260 days, for the anti-Christ's dominion, known to last about 1260 days, is said to be plunged into darkness at the 5th bowl. We expect him in Israel at that time, and so the 5th trumpet might very well be a bomb against him in Israel. The battle of Armageddon begins (my opinion) in a 45-day period immediately following the 1260 days. He doesn't have much time between the 5th trumpet and the battle. The latter is named after Megiddo in northern Israel, but he meets his end way south in Edom, which assumes that his enemies will push him southward and finally into the Edomite wilderness, near or even at Sodom, the old proto-type of Armageddon.

His enemies in the book of Revelation are "the kings of the east," which may include North Korea. They come into Israel from its north, from the Euphrates river, but then so do the locusts of Joel come to Israel from its north:

But the northern army [literally, "northerner"] I will remove far from you, banishing it to a barren and desolate land, its front ranks into the eastern [Dead] sea, and its rear guard into the western [Mediterranean] sea. And its stench will rise; its foul odor will go up.

...I will repay you for the years that the swarming locusts have eaten -- the young locust, the destroying locust, and the devouring locust -- My great army that I sent against you. (Joel 2:20, 25; as per the Berean Study Bible).

There you have the front (Hebrew uses "face") of the locust army at Edom's Dead sea as evidence that the anti-Christ will be pushed from northern Israel to Edom. Ezekiel 38/39 has the anti-Christ's end in Edom, and Isaiah 34 has perpetual (unquenched), sulfurous fire in end-time Edom that seems to include the "lake of fire" (of Revelation) into which the anti-Christ and False Prophet will be thrown alive. So, God uses a northern invasion to thwart the anti-Christ, and finally thwarts what's left of the kings of the east with some other military force, we may gather. The sixth trumpet and 6th bowl has the kings of the east, killing one-third of the warriors at Armageddon. Prophecy leaves lots of room for speculation on the details. I don't think all the kings of the east will enter Israel; most will hold the fort in Iraq and Syria, I assume.

The darkening of the sun and moon in Revelation's 6th seal can be found in Joel 2:10. In verse 11, it sounds as though "His army" (the locusts) is part of the thunder on the day of the darkening of sun and moon:

The earth quakes before them; the sky shakes. The sun and moon grow dark, and the stars cease their shining.

The LORD makes his voice heard in the presence of his army. His camp is very large; those who carry out his command are powerful. Indeed, the day of the LORD is terrible and dreadful -- who can endure it? (Christian Standard Bible).

If one wishes to view the locust army of Joel as that of the anti-Christ, then I can't understand why his front lines would be facing Edom. Whom is he attacking in Edom? He's supposed to be at Megiddo at some point, and it only makes sense that he'll fight the in-coming kings of the east there. However, we saw above that the locust rampage lasts for "years," and that there are various kinds of invaders, which may mean that both the anti-Christ and the ones from the Euphrates are lumped into these various locusts.

In the 3rd chapter of Joel, it implies that the kings of the east push the anti-Christ forces to the valley of Jehosaphat, at or near Jerusalem, because God wants to enter judgment on them there. I take it that the 7th bowl begins at that time. The two opposing sides are shown gathering at Megiddo in the 6th bowl (Revelation 16:12-16). One can glean that the silence in the following 7th seal (immediately after the 6th bowl) is during the battle of Armageddon, while the decree to begin the Kingdom of Jesus in the 7th trumpet is at the end of the battle, a period of perhaps two or three weeks between them. The anti-Christ orders the retreat, and the easterners chase. When they cross Jerusalem, bango, the massive, global quake that knocks down cities, and terrifying things in the climate. No more DNC. Al Gore's global-warming disaster will finally arrive.

Another theory is that the locust bomb comes from the False Prophet in the United States against the kings of the east because Intelligence can see that they are about to attack the anti-Christ, or to spoil the West's Middle-East agenda. It's interesting that "Abaddon" looks like the Baden/Battin surname, first found in the same place as Baths while Bidens/Buttons are said to have had clergy in Bath...of Somerset, where Badens/Battins/BADDONs and Baths were first found. It would be amazing if Joseph Biden becomes the False Prophet to fulfill this bomb.

The problem I've developed with the 6th Trumpet is that is tells the number of 200 million who participate in the kings-of-the-east invasion. I cannot fathom such an army at this time, and therefore seems far off to the future. However, there is a scripture telling that Jesus comes at that time from the east, curiously enough, and Revelation 19:14 has it with a convoy of angels on horseback in the sky...which is why I don't take it as real horses. It allows us to view the 200 million on horses as both the kings of the east and the angels coming together, though the earthly men may not be able to see the angels until the final hour.

Revelation goes on to portray the 200 million riders on the horses as having fiery-colored breastplates, but these breastplates are also "sulfurous," the term used by my Greek interlinear. The NIV uses "yellow like sulfur." It then says that the heads of the horses are like lions (symbolism, obviously) having mouths out of which spew fire and smoke and sulfur (some translate "brimstone"), which is likely the volcanic activity gleaned in other scriptures at Armageddon, the coals of fire falling from the sky on the anti-Christ. In this way of viewing the kings of the east, its predominantly referring to the Heavenly attack. I like this far better than trying to explain 200 million men on the ground. In fact, I think I'm convinced. In ancient Sodom, there rained down fire and brimstone.

In Psalms 18:9-12 "He bowed the heavens also, and came down With thick darkness under His feet. And He rode upon a cherub and flew; And He sped upon the wings of the wind. He made darkness His hiding place, His canopy around Him, Darkness of waters, thick clouds of the skies. From the brightness before Him passed His thick clouds, Hailstones and coals of fire" (not my translation, but sounds very correctly done). The horse is now a cherub, a Heavenly creature. He's obscured by the clouds as he comes through the air. He's bright behind the clouds, which is how I interpret the white horses mounted by angles wearing white clothing (Revelation 19:14) who ride behind Him. Eventually, say other scriptures, he becomes visible to all.

When Jesus talked about his own arrival, he said it would be like lightning coming from the EAST to the west. Why did he chose that direction? Isaiah 41:2: "Who has aroused one from the EAST Whom He calls in righteousness to His feet? He delivers up nations before him And subdues kings. He makes them like dust with his sword, As the wind-driven chaff with his bow" (New American Standard Bible). One could easily read that and miss the eastern significance. It's completely odd that Jesus should come from the east. One expects it to be straight down, but here we have an eastern significance, the significance of which is not stated in the text. It's not revealed until Revelation. How do we imagine God working in the hearts of orientals to convince them to attack Iraq? Orientals by-and-large do not even acknowledge Jesus. It seems strange.

Why does he call the army of the 7th trumpet locusts if they are ordered not to eat any green thing? The locust is the symbol of eating greenery. In the first verses of Joel 2, the locust army is said to be the largest ever produced. It sounds like the kings of the east, especially as verse 1 is Armageddon. But it then says that the land to their front is like the garden of Eden, while the land to their backside is a desert waste. The implication is that it destroys all in its path, which explains well why locust terminology is used later in Joel's prophecy. But this is at odds with the locusts of the 5th trumpet. Why would the latter use locusts, which serves to confuse us if it's not referring to Joel's locusts? Maybe it is. After all, the 5th Trumpet does not describe the invasion so much as the pain of the victims.

Yes, the purpose of the 5th trumpet is to express the pain as a scorpion sting, and the locusts may have been thrown it to identify the army as part of the kings of the east, for it seems that the opening verses of Joel 2 speak to the eastern invaders. In verse 6, it says that the nations are in great fear of this locust army. In verse 10, more Armageddon terminology, suggesting that this is NOT the army of the anti-Christ, because it invades as much as four years before Armageddon.

Joel 2 is clearly portrayed as a ravaging of Israel, as punishment on Israel. It's like the 2nd wave of punishment after the anti-Christ. And God uses the 2nd wave to coax Western nations to bring their armies to Israel. Will you be in the American / French / British military at that time? The Coalition is headed for coals. The Coalition appears to be causing Armageddon as we speak. It's tired of waiting for a global reach. It wants it too soon, and is willing to gamble in order to have it now. Russia must fall to the West or bust. You don't want to be part of this. You don't want to decorate the graves of mass murderers.

If you are pro-American army in Iraq, you are like an accomplice to the murders. Is that what you wish to risk before God's judgment? To some extent, God may be using the American military to punish Middle_easterners but it's best for us to stay out of it, not support the American military in that theater, and not trust what the CIA says the situation is.

It's not ISIS that murders the best; it's the American military. It cannot argue that it's been murdering on behalf of American democracy, because that's a sham, and it's the military deep state that has proven it to be a sham. What is the real reason that it has murdered its enemies? Not because it loves justice for the other nations. Not because it cares about the corruption of other nations, for this deep state defines the same corruption in its own country. We are now seeing it unfold. The goons are being stripped naked; their obscenities are showing. It is not the time to support them. Are you crazy? Have you lost your place within the Spirit of God? Get it back. Get back into it.

Where do we think the anti-Christ's headquarters will be inside Israel? Jerusalem makes sense. Daniel 11:45 verifies: "He shall plant his palace tents between the seas, in the glorious holy mountain." That should be at the Temple Mount, where God regards him as an abomination. Right now, the U.S. embassy is a little ways south of the Temple mount, but this place may be irrelevant. "Palace tents" seems to be a contradiction. Perhaps "makeshift headquarters" would be better for our understanding. He's at this headquarters just as Daniel is telling us that "reports will trouble him from the east and from the north" (v 44). Yikes, it's the kings of the east coming for him. And he's got his tents planted smack in the middle of the army of Joel, the one that has its face pushed toward the Dead-sea shores, and its rear pushed toward the Mediterranean. It's telling us rather strongly that the easterners are the locusts of Joel.

We still want to know who it is that defeats the kings of the east. Perhaps the anti-Christ's frogs (6th bowl) come to his rescue and begin to defeat them. Finally, before they annihilate one another, and/or before an unrecallable nuclear world war starts, Christ appears to pick the anti-Christ up by his collar, to dump him into the lake of fire. And the Heavenly army then takes care of both earthly armies, with the remnants of Israel participating with miraculous "luck" well beyond what was seen in the Six-Day War.

Daniel 12:11-12 says that the very end (war's over) is 45 days after the 1260 days. That's how I read it. It's a super-fast war, not like the drawn-out ones we've seen in city warfare. The great numbers of fighters forces them to do the open-field warfare. I imagine attacks from the air from both sides.

So, in this picture, assuming that the scorpion sting is from the kings of the east upon a Western-backed anti-Christ, it appears that a huge, nerve-agent or chemical bomb lands at or near Jerusalem as a shot across the anti-Christ's bow. It doesn't affect the people of God because Jesus warns them in Matthew 24 to flee for the hills as soon as they see the anti-Christ invading the Temple Mount (success is achieved 30 days before the 1260). It's not the bomb that necessarily causes the stings to their bodies, but the tails and mouths of the locusts. Fire, it says, comes out of the mouths of the locusts, and the tails look like snakes, having heads that cause the wounds. A lot of people see these snakes with heads as machine guns in helicopters or fighter jets. If correct, this type of attack lasts five months, creating the situation in which the anti-Christ realizes that his own assault upon Israel is all but done. It brings his arrogant hurrah to gloom. That was fast.

I've never been shot by a machine gun, and can't say whether it stings like a scorpion sting. But it sure seems possible if not likely.

We can now back up to the fourth trumpet, which informs us only that a third of the day's light will be blurred. The cause seems to be in the third trumpet, at least partly, which is another star, blazing, coming down from the sky and turning many of the fresh-water sources (in Israel alone?) into bitterness. The Greek word is Apsinthos: "1. any composite plant of the genus Artemisia, esp. the bitter, aromatic plant, A. absinthium, of Eurasia, used as a vermifuge and a tonic, and as an ingredient in absinthe." Note "ARTEMISia" in that definition. Why did the science people include Artemis, Abaddon's twin sister, in this term? Is this like a tonic used in old witchcraft? In any case, it's the word used to describe the result of a bomb in the third trumpet. Do the kings of the east, while yet stationed at the Iraq theater, send this bomb to Israel? Is it from the same army that opens up Abaddon's abyss? Makes sense.

Later in Revelation, we read that the kings of the east are not permitted by God to cross the Euphrates, Israel-ward, until the start of the 45-day Armageddon period. God's agenda with the anti-Christ, allowing him 1260 days to trample Jerusalem, must come first.

Is the star of the 3rd trumpet a nuclear blast? Does a large, conventional bomb have the ability to dim the heavenly lights by one-third their shine? I don't think so. What kind of nuclear bomb can turn waters bitter? Well, we assume that the explosion corrupts the air, which in-turn corrupts the rainfall, and thus the fresh-water sources. Acid rain, I suppose, on a colossal scale. Where could all that acid come from? Not inside one bomb/missile, surely. From a source in the ground under the bomb? Possibly.

By the way, the article with the definition above adds: "There are no worms or wood involved in wormwood, which is an alteration of the word wermod [vermouth-like term], a plant used for making vermouth, absinthe and medicine." That, if correct, is a much-needed piece of disclosure, for "wormwood" is a term that confuses. It gives the impression of a wood made bitter by worm infestation.

We read further (Revelation 8:11) that many of the men, assumed to be the fighters, dies of the waters poisoned by the wormwood "star." It is said to come down "burning as a lamp", which recalls my seeking who it was that owned the mythical torch. It was Artemis. "Artemis was often depicted holding a torch or torches. In this form she was closely identified (if not the same as) Hekate." Hmm, Hekate, a witchcraft goddess of Mede elements in ancient Colchis, for example, is expected to be the Egyptian Keket, the FROG goddess.

I've traced Hecate to the Trojan queen, Hecuba, mother of HECTor, but I didn't have evidence in support like the following: "Three metamorphosis myths describe the origins of [Hecate's] animal familiars: the black she-dog and the polecat (a mustelid house pet kept by the ancients to hunt vermin). The dog was the Trojan Queen Hekabe (Hecuba) who leapt into the sea after the fall of Troy and was transformed by the goddess." There we have it: mythical Medea of Colchis (who was part of the bloodline from Abraham and his other wife, Keturah), who worshiped Hecate, was part of Trojan make-up. That's an excellent reason for tracing mythical Batia, mother of Trojans, to the Bat Colchians. Note that Hecuba's husband, Priam, is like "Abram." Might these Bats have produced "ABADDon"?

Hector's brother, Paris, is likely play on "Perses," Hecate's father. We easily see the Persians in this, explaining why Medea was said by ancients to birth the Medes. Perseus of the Danaans, born from Zeus' golden, urine shower, is exactly this Perses entity.

I'm not going to try to re-explain here all of why I traced ancient Essenes living at mount Carmel -- at the Megiddo theater, that is -- to Crete's Eileithyia, a goddess that I pegged as proto-Leto, mother of the Artemis cult in Ephesus, location of an "essene" bee/honey cult. I only want to say that the article above has Hecate's polecat symbol defined as Eileithyia, who was the goddess of midwifery and labor pains. It can explain why the plagues of Revelation can be portrayed as ever-increasing "labor pains," the phrase used by Jesus.

...Eileithyia was furious at being tricked by the woman and transformed Galinthias into a polecat.

Eileithyia was depicted as a woman wielding a torch, representing the burning pains of childbirth...She was closely identified with the goddesses Hera and Artemis, both of whom bore epithets of her name.

It all begs whether the French (Frogs) creators of the Statue of Liberty gave the woman a torch for secret reasons linked to this Hecate discussion.

Some say, logically, that the star falling like a torch or lamp is a meteorite. This acceptable view keeps us from going very deep into the question of who may have launched it as a bomb. If we can't know whether it's a bomb or meteorite, neither can we justify getting into details of the bomb view. As I see the 3rd bowl immediately following the 3rd trumpet, it's notable that the latter turns the fresh-water systems into "blood." The 3rd trumpet turns the waters bitter, to be followed by either a red color or literal blood. The latter could be assumed from battles in the fields, but there is no mention of an associated army for either the 3rd trumpet or 3rd bowl. Besides, whose battling who if the kings of the east are Prevented from coming to Israel throughout the 1260 days?

The dimming of the sun, moon and stars in the 4th trumpet argues for a meteorite in the 3rd, for the smoke of a nuclear bomb is expected to clear before the 3rd trumpet evolves into the thick of the 4th trumpet. But then I don't know what that time span is. I think I can say with certainty that the 3rd trumpet and 3rd bowl have not to do with a skirmish involving the kings of the east inside Israel.

If we then try to view the Abaddon star as a meteorite, it is contradicted by the locusts and their stinging sensation that come from its smoke. We assume that a meteorite landing is too devastating for such a picture. It makes more sense that the ones who bring the locusts are also the ones who explode the bomb, rather than some on-the-spot army taking advantage of a meteorite fall. But it still leaves the question: how can the kings of the east be in the vicinity of the bomb five months before the end of the 1260 days?

There are three ways I can answer that question: 1) the locusts are not from the kings of the east; 2) the locusts are inside Israel and, for the time being at least, on-side with the kings of the east; 3) the bomb is landed outside Israel, perhaps on the northern side of the Euphrates, at the anti-Christ's headquarters in Iraq, which I peg as Mosul (ancient Nineveh). The uncertainties provided by the texts, with lack of back-up information, that I know of, in other scriptures, is why I have never tackled these details in the past to create a military picture on the ground.

There is such a thing as a scorpion bomb, I have only just learned while seeking to enlarge on this discussion, and it comes minutes after the mention of Mosul above:

An expert in ancient pottery created an authentic replica of a terracotta pot like those found at the desert fortress of Hatra near modern Mosul, Iraq, where scorpion bombs had successfully repulsed Roman besiegers in AD 198.

Jars filled with scorpions to attack the enemy. That's from the first article that Google offers when searching "scorpion bomb." The second one has this: "The world recently learned that the Islamic State in Iraq (ISIS) has resurrected a biological weapon from the second century. Scorpion bombs are being lobbed into towns and villages to terrorize the inhabitants. As the story goes, this tactic was used almost 2,000 years ago against the desert stronghold of Hatra which was once a powerful, walled city 50 miles southwest of Mosul..." The article immediately above doubts that scorpion bombs can be used, but that's besides the point. Mosul was ISIS headquarters, and I expect the anti-Christ to invade Israel using ISIS forces. Might Revelation have used the scorpion sting to indicate a Mosul picture? Is the Abaddon star to be dropped at Mosul?

Apollo was the chief of the Muses, and "MOSul" may have been a Muse entity. That is, Muses may have been largely from the namers of Mosul. Here's a video showing ISIS scorpions. The mention of ancient scorpion bombs involved Mosulites versus the Roman emperor, same fight that ISIS was fighting. The U.S. coalition has since moved into Mosul to replace ISIS there.

Recall now the similarity between "Abaddon" and the Baden/Baddon / Bath bloodline, for ISIS invaded Mosul with Iraqi Baathists on-side. Where might ISIS or the Baathists get a huge bomb? North Korea? Iran? The Russian anti-Christ in Mosul? But wait. If the bomb is landed in Mosul late in the 1260 days, that seems to be for the purpose of attacking the anti-Christ's domain. That can argue for a Korean or a Chinese or even an Indian / Pakistani bomb. It's pretty hard to continue guessing on a solid footing with all of these options and uncertainties. It appears hopeless.

I now return to the theory that the Revelation scorpion depict the Rothschilds who set up Israel and the Knesset, and who trace back to Rephaites at mount Gareb. In this theory, the bomb is set off by this pro-Israeli entity, unless it's a faction that opposes Israel i.e. the Western / globalist faction wanting to set up the Palestinian state. I'm back to this because I recalled that a certain surname uses grasshoppers, and finding it in my files, it turned out to be the Thatchers, ekoving a former British prime minister with such a surname.

But, also, the Thatcher Coat is a reflection of the Annas and BATTistelli Coats. If that's not enough, the Thatcher Coat uses a MOLine cross in the colors of the Bath cross. Recalling that Mole's (share the SCHIM boar head) are Shechemites, note that the "Saxon sword" in the Thatcher Crest is nearly a scimitar.

As God has called me to delve into heraldry (for exposure of the dragon cults) as well as into Biblical prophecy, I've got to entertain the possibility that he may have set up some heraldry to reflect his prophetic symbolism in order for us to make the links and tell a story. Did God arrange the "thatching ROOFS" phrase in the Thatcher write-up to point to Rephaites? There is a Roof surname listed with raven-using Rolphs/Ruffs. The terms for "locusts" in the Bible are very-possibly identical with modern terms for grasshoppers.

The Thacker variation of Thatchers recalls that the Shakerley variation of Shake's/Shacks can be of the Thackery variation of Tacks (share green Shield with Bauers / Bowers/Boars / Burleys and proto-Rothschild Pollocks). AMAZINGLY, while the Tack/Thackery write-up traces to Tankerville's and Tancreds, these terms are like "TANAGRa," home of Orion's father, and smack at Schimatari!!! Zowie. There are Ralphs in the Tankerville write-up.

I must now repeat that my previous dentist's surname is part of the Tancred bloodline. I had a dream where he was laughing at the red buttons on by shirt. The Shirt surname (reflection of the Tancred Coat) happens to use red roundels that look like buttons, and the red shirt with buttons of Tous'/Tosini's can apply here for more than one reason: 1) they were first found in Florence with the Taddei's whose cross can be the Thatcher cross; 2) they share the eight-pointed star of Stelli's highly suspect with Battistelli's. Rothschilds/Roddensteins happen to use the eight-pointed star too.

Ancient Ishtar had the eight-pointed star. I trace her to Istria and nearby Este. The Bars of Este were in Brunswick, where Rothschilds/Roddensteins were first found. Pula/Pola of Istria uses the Pollock saltire as a cross. Pula/Pola is the location of Pietas-Julia, suspect with the Pettys for more reasons than the latter sharing the quadrants in this Arms of Rothschild. These quadrants are used in colors reversed by Badds/Bade's/Bauds, while French Bauds were first found in Auvergne with the Bouillons who share the Taddei cross i.e. almost the Thatcher/Thacker cross. The "galley" ships of Badds/Bauds, in the colors of the French-Baud ram, must be code for galleys who happen to share the checks of Stelli-line Steels (share billets in Chief with Battistelli's).

Galleys are suspect from Gallia, mother of Tullia of Lyon, who ruled in Clermont-Ferrand of Auvergne. The Ferrands, who share a version of the Taddei Chief, are of "Firenze" (Florence), where Taddei's were first found, assuring that Bouillons had been linked to Tullia's bloodline. The Tullia/Tull surname uses BUTTERflys while Butters are also Bitars, the surname of a Baathist co-founder, and Tulls/Tolle's share the pyramid with Battistelli's and the checks of Italian Ferrands. The single and red Tullia/Tull pale bar is in the colors of the two pale bars of German Steels. Three red pale bars are used by Bashans.

This entire discussion thus far is thanks to the Thatcher/Thacker grasshoppers. It tends to be affirming that Revelation's locust link to scorpions is about the scorpion-suspect Gareb bloodline to the Rothschild founders of Israel. Again, it doesn't matter whether "Gareb" meant "scorpion"; it only matter's that some thought so, or that a myth writer gave Gareb liners the scorpion symbol. Again: "Greek mythology, the myths associated with Scorpio almost invariably also contain a reference to Orion." That's the scorpion link to Tanagra.

Recall how the Shakespeare's are expected as Shechemites, for the Shakespeare bend is in the colors of the Gripp/GRABen/CRAVer bend. The Gareb-like Grebs/Grabows use a green fesse in both colors of the Shake/Shackerly chevron. Shake's don't use the mole alone, which they would if all they wanted to do was honor the Mole surname in their ancestry. Shake's use mole hills, and Hills happen to share the white-on-black tower of the Hoppers expected in the grassHOPPER code of Thatchers/Thackers.

Back to CLERMONT-Ferrand, for "Clermonts" brings up the Clare-related Clements that use a version of the Grub Shield. And the Grub write-up has early Grubbs at Stoke-CLIMSland (Cornwall) while the Clements are also CLIMers.

For what it's worth: the red Chief with white Shield, shared by Clements and Grubs, was used by the rulers of Montferrat, and these rulers had a Vasto branch at Saluzzo, which uses a blue Chief and white Shield, as do Saluzzo's and Clintons, for example. Clintons were first found in Oxfordshire with one of the two English Clements/Climers, and while I trace Vasto's to the Fasts, the latter share the quadrants of Pettys and Rothschilds, which are colors reversed from the same of Badds/Bauds (galley ship). The latter were first found in Stirlingshire with Newmarsh's in the Clement write-up. It's possible that Clents became Clements.

All in all, it seems that Gareb liners went through Gallia and Tullia of Clermont-Ferrand, or they later engaged Gareb liners. Tullia lived at least roughly during the time of the first Merovingian king (5th century) As Merovingians were supported by Pepins, note that Poppo I was of GRABfeld.

For all Millennium long: "As [the people] go forth, they will see the corpses of the men who have rebelled against Me; for their worm will never die, their fire will never be quenched, and they will be a horror to all mankind" (last chapter of Isaiah). It sounds as though the lake of fire is on earth in plain view. The "forever" of its burning and torment looks to be only 1,000 years long, for after this period, the earth will no longer exist. The ones who burn in it for 1,000 years are the anti-Christ's soldiers, apparently, but Revelation says that the people of all history are resurrected after the 1,000 years, to be thrown into the lake of fire at that time. The best way I can explain this is that they are thrown into the earth as it burns up in the process of replacing it with a new earth (Revelation 21), and thus the torment is not necessarily for eternity as we define it. But it may not merely be for a minute either. You don't want to be there.

Other Matters

Lenin Moreno verified that Mr. Assange needs to leave the embassy, saying that he's become "a problem for our country." What other country is making Assange a problem for Ecuador? Headlines With A Voice told that the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (lots of Central American and South American memberships) decided, on July 13, that Assange can be released only in Ecuador, not in Britain. That makes sense to me because he's on Ecuadorian property at this time. Besides, he has Ecuadorian citizenship. If Moreno refuses to do this, then he's betraying Assange to the enemy, not a respectable move, unless, perhaps, Assange did something to Ecuador to deserve some punishment. But handing him over to Britain is not the way to deal with such punishment.

Assange is not a leaker, technically, but a journalist. There is a difference. A leaker is one who acquires the hidden material and then has it released by a readership such as a news media for the purpose of wider dissemination. Assange doesn't acquire the hidden material but rather publishes the material obtained by leakers. The major media have been doing this same thing with classified material, while never becoming prosecuted. Assange can try to use this situation to become acquitted if the United States charges him with leaking classified material. However, there is a difference between the odd selected leak in the major media, and massive payloads of leaks by WikiLeaks. On the other hand, WikiLeaks seeks to expose corruption while major media are complicit with it. The problem is, courts are not apt to take the latter view for fear of acting with "treason" against the Intelligence community.

On the other hand again, it's not treason to view Intelligence as a corrupt operator; the CIA, for example, is not the presidency, and WikiLeaks makes the distinction. Protecting the presidency from Intelligence is not treason; but Intelligence is indeed guilty of treason. WikiLeaks should have the upper hand, except that judges are afraid to call Intelligence out for treason or corruption. But with a few more exposures on how Intelligence operates, that may change. More leakers are needed.

If you've read recently on the 17 squirrels, the 17 lawyers of Mueller, and the 17 Intelligence agencies in the U.S., let's add also the 17 memo's in the Steele dossier, which this video below mentions. We learn here that a judge has given Fusion GPS an order. What's the order for? Is this big or is it peanuts?

All it says is that a judge ordered Fusion to give a deposition. This is the same Florida judge (Ms. Ungaro) that ordered Steele to give a deposition last year, which he is refusing to give. Basically, the plaintiff in a court case wants to know details, and the deep-state side wants to resist giving them, same as Rosenstein et-al. The plaintiff is a Russian, Aleksej Gubarev. Just look at the situation below, and see that this is exactly how American Intelligence operates:

In January [2017], BuzzFeed set off an international firestorm when it chose to publish the entire dossier, which also included seamy allegations involving Russian technology guru Aleksej Gubarev and his companies, XBT Holdings and Webzilla.

The dossier claimed XBT and Webzilla used "botnets and porn traffic to transmit viruses, plant bugs, steal data and conduct 'altering operations' against the Democratic Party leadership."

So, you see, the deep state just makes up stories, hoping that no one will sue. But this time a law suit was started, and details may come forth by this route, even if the FBI remains silent. Depositions are discovery-process aids, telling details in writ, to be delivered into the possession of the plaintiff. Very juicy material, we expect, or Steele wouldn't be resisting, right? We want to know what these depositions state, don't we? This article is dated August. It's almost one year later, and the same judge has only now ordered Fusion, who hired Steele, to give its deposition. Why does this go the pace of a snail? Maybe to torment the deep state. I hope so.

We wonder how this and similar law suits are affecting the Mueller probe. Anything can backfire on Mueller if he comes out with his report before the discovery process in these cases are ended. The article above tells that the plaintiff wants the Florida judge to compel a London judge to force Steele to give the deposition. Late in 2017, the plaintiff took matters into his own hands:

Russian tech billionaire is asking a U.K. court to compel testimony from a former British intelligence officer who compiled the now-famous dossier...

The application to the British court, dated Nov. 3, is just the latest legal maneuver in a case that has become emblematic of the international political intrigue that followed Trump’s surprise electoral victory a year ago. The three-way legal battle involves a Russian businessman who says he’s been unfairly linked to the hacking of the Democratic Party...[oops, this is part of the DNC cover-up]

...The application filed in U.K. court last week is the second step in a complex process required to compel testimony from someone in another country for a U.S. court case. In July, a U.S. federal judge in Miami issued an order in the suit against BuzzFeed, allowing Gubarev’s lawyers to seek a British order to depose Steele, who lives in the United Kingdom [the judge has the right stuff, not the left stuff. Excellent].

Steele was hired in 2016 by an American firm, Fusion GPS, to compile information on Trump, who was then running for president. Initially, Fusion was paid by the Washington Free Beacon to investigate Republican candidates, including Trump; later, the firm received money from a law firm tied to the Democratic Party and Hillary Clinton campaign [the latter was not yet known by this judge when the article above was written; she can now rest assured that she's attacking Steele for a good and proper reason. Go girl!].

The 35-page dossier Steele wrote, which included allegations of a Trump sex tape’s existence, was published by BuzzFeed in January 2017 and is now at the center of several legal cases.

So, in the process of trying to prove that Gubarev's companies had no part in Guccifer 2.0, might Gubarev be able to prove that it was Seth Rich instead? I don't see how, but the silencing of Julian Assange these past few months may be related to this building threat, for he has the absolute evidence that it was Seth Rich. I have told readers why Assange's Paper-Planes tweet should be about the dossier scandal. Or, put it this way, I have reason to believe that God told me/us that his Paper-Planes tweet is about the dossier's players, which includes Obama. I personally can add nothing to this in the way of damaging the scandal's players; all I can do is predict what is about to happen in the news, and I can venture a guess on whether God is behind the unfolding, or more-simply just predicting it. It makes more sense that He's unfolding it.

Although BuzzFeed wants to prove that the dossier is reliable: "Last week, BuzzFeed subpoenaed the Democratic National Committee for records relating to last year’s hack of its servers." Uh-oh. BuzzFeed, though Trump's enemy, is yet a potential enemy of Hillary Clinton by touching upon the server from which Seth Rich got the material he transferred to WikiLeaks. Instead of Gubarev discovering the true "hacker" incidentally, BuzzFeed might instead cause the revelation. Risky business. If BuzzFeed gets the server details it needs, but doesn't report to the court anything of value, it will suggest that Gubarev is innocent, or the Russians didn't do it. If Gubarev is innocent, won't the court of public opinion want to know what the server told BuzzFeed as to the true hacker? For the first time this year, I just heard the hoot of an owl at precisely midnight, July 29.

Why can't Gubarev also get the DNC details? I don't see why not. He is entitled. He's trying to prove his innocence. Go Gubarev.

The order for GPS to give a deposition should provide an overlap of material exactly of what Steele would have to say in his own deposition. The two were working together on the scam, and their stories would need to match. In her 16-page ruling, "Ungaro also wrote that Fusion must answer questions about what ex-MI6 spy Christopher Steele was told about the nature of his assignment to compile the dossier." The duo are both crying the blues, giving excuses as to why they shouldn't have to reveal the details. We totally recognize their guilt, we just want to know the degree of it, and who else they are trying to protect with the cover-up.

BuzzFeed appears to be an Intelligence or deep-state operator at this time because it is justifying, by the court case, its attempt to certify that Steele's data was correct in the main. BuzzFeed "recently commissioned 'a team led by a former top F.B.I. and White House cybersecurity official' to trek all over the world 'on a secret mission to verify parts' of the explosive document." Perhaps its findings-to-be, fabricated, are timed for mid-term elections.

Explain the Moon Landing Physics

The faked moon / Mars landings are super evidence that the American government has been using photographic fakery since the 1960s at least, to deceive the entire globe. Think of how sinister this is. False wonders in the sky, right in this discussion.

Look it. Put on your thinking cap. For this discussion, you need to look at various landers. These photos are faked. It's so easy to fake them. I know they are faked because NASA has never shown any such craft landing or flying on earth. The air on the earth isn't going to make any difference, as compared to a vacuum on the moon, in how this sort of lander can be handled, in the space above the ground. The thing is going to spin out of the desired position at all times, in a vacuum as much as it will spin out of control in the air, if either men or computers try to get it to end up straight up-and-down for a soft landing. That's why they haven't shown us such a craft landing on earth.

The chances of getting it into the needed upright position, at an acceptable downward velocity to avoid a crass, is so slim that they don't bother wasting the money, and especially they don't do it with a person in it. But we are to believe that they perfected the landing when trying it for the first time on the moon with three men. And they did it over and over again, without a crash, with consecutive Apollo landings? Rubbish. Complete rubbish.

Let's entertain an attempted landing. The lander starts off flying at great speeds in an orbital path. It is wholly a lateral path, parallel with the ground. The first trick is to use on-board jets of fuel to get its back end pointed toward its front, to shoot out massive amounts of fuel, from its large central engine, to slow the craft down. Every time a forceful jet of fuel goes out, the craft will tend to get out of the desired position in different degrees for each spit of fuel. This means that spits of fuel from small burners on the legs or feet or skirt of the lander need to be fired constantly, and CORRECTLY, to keep the craft in the desired position at all times. Think of the complication. Think of how futile this would have been using computers in 1969. It would have been impossible if the burners and the main engine were operated completely manually my the men inside the lander.

OK, so the back end is pointed to the front. It's firing massive amounts of fuel to slow the craft down. Let's be positive. Let's worship NASA. Let's assume that the burners keep the desired position rather than an uncontrollable spin. As the velocity sloes, the lander starts to curve toward the ground. Some or all of its lateral / orbital velocity is gained in the downward direction due to gravity. That is, the more it slows in the lateral direction, the more it takes a vertical direction, and the faster it falls toward the ground. The curve will get steeper progressively until it's going straight down. In the meantime, the back end of this lander needs to be repositioned so that its main engine is always spitting fuel in the direction of motion. As its path curves to the ground, the lander's alignment needs to curve by exactly the same degree.

The men on board have no idea what the specific curve toward the ground is. Think of it by imagining yourself inside that lander, and looking out the window. How will you know what the degree of curve is at any time? Are you falling at 45 degrees, or 49, or 56, or 61? You have no idea. How will you get the main engine spitting in the direction of your fall/travel if you have no idea what that direction is? If you start to spin, all you will see is the moon changing positions in your window. Yikes, you're cooked. You will never get the main engines firing in the right/correct direction, which must always be in the direction of travel.

What will happen if the main engines are spitting fuel a few degrees off from the direction of fall? The curve of the fall will change. But you will never know it if its a subtle change. All the dynamics will change when your curve is not smooth, sometimes veering back toward the orbital direction, at other times veering more toward a steeper fall.

? Your fuel is running out, and you are using some of it on correcting the curve. Ideally, you want the lander flying straight downward, with zero lateral velocity, as soon as possible. If you have even 30 mph of lateral velocity as you land, the lander's likely going to go rolling over along the ground. How fast are you going in the lateral position at any given time? You have no idea.

You could end up going in the opposite direction to the original orbital direction. After the fall direction becomes great enough, you will have no idea what your lateral direction is, because you have no idea what your velocity is. You could over-shoot fuel in the orbital direction, and start going the other way, 30, 50, 70 mph, you have no idea. In the meantime, the craft is always wanting to spin one direction and then another, as four or more burners are being used to kill all would-be spins. You are going out of your mind, sweating like a pig to the slaughter. The other two passengers are saying their prayers. What were you thinking when you agreed to do this, Mr. Armstrong? Alas, he's a fake. He's going to his grave after lying to God's people ever since 1969.

This is why you have never seen such a landing on earth, even with modern computers, even with satellites and ground stations to assist in getting the craft into desired alignments and desired velocities along the curve of descent.

Granted, in such an attempt, on-board radar can be used to indicate the elevation of the lander. But the radar instrument needs to spin on something. It can't be fastened hard to the lander, as it can on a lateral ship or airplane, because it needs to shoot radar straight down while the lander is aligned in all sorts of directions, along the curve, that isn't straight down. Assuming they could spit some radar waves straight down at all times, they could have their altitude reading at all times. Granted.

They could then estimate the velocity of fall at any time, and the computers of 1969 probably could have handled the automatic showing of the fall-velocity reading on a screen / gauge. But is this enough information to predict a landing safe enough to send three men to the moon on a first-ever attempt of such a thing? The landing had to be absolutely safe. Any bit of lateral motion at landing time could knock off a leg. Then what? How would they jet off the moon with one leg knocked off? It wouldn't jet straight up, especially if the lander landed permanently tilted toward the direction of the missing leg.

We saw them fake the landing in motion, but we will never hear how they controlled the downward curve, because they don't want anyone even thinking about its complications. Just trust the NASA gods, they can do this. Not good enough for me, and it is shouldn't be good enough for you.

You might think that spitting fuel in the direction of travel at all times is not the best way to land it. In that scenario, the craft is always spitting fuel midway between the lateral direction and the fall direction. The lander will therefore continually slow in the lateral direction until its only direction is straight down. In theory, that is. But there are other directions besides the orbital and fall directions. They are in three-dimensional space, after all. If the orbital direction is, for example, due west, they could end up shooting the burners wrongly so that they veer a little south or a little north. The downward curve is now complicated by a slightly southward or northward curve in the lateral direction.

If you were viewing this thing from outer space, the straight line of the orbital path starts to curve one way or the other, at all times ever-changing, making the path snake shaped, because they will fail to shoot the burners and the main engine perfectly as desired at all times. For as long as they shoot fuel in a direction not in their path, the lander's path will shift either northward or southward, or worse. This is besides the problem of keeping the lander from spinning in a circle in the meantime. In 1969!

There is no way to get the steering perfect at all times because shooting fuel from burners is unpredictable. How will they know how due-west, or not, they are going? If they can't know, how will they be able to shoot the main engine in the direction of their path?

Which way are we going, Neil? I don't know, Buzz. Maybe we should ask NASA. We're too small, Buzz. Houston can't see us. Go ahead reader. Imagine yourself inside that lander, looking out a small window. Which way are you going? What will you use to determine which way you are going? If you don't know, neither can you point the jet engine in the direction of travel. Go ahead, try to imagine what happens when the engine is fired not in the direction of travel? You alter the direction. You have no idea how much you are changing the westward direction with any one spit of fuel, and you are likely changing the downward curve too with the same spit. The degree of change to either path is not known. All you can know is your downward velocity, IF (big if) if you know the specific force of gravity at your altitude.

If they correctly knew the specific force of lunar gravity, they could estimate, in combination with their altitude gauge, the lateral velocity. That is, if they knew beforehand what the rate of the craft's fall would be when there is zero lateral velocity, they could maybe get the computer to work the math backward to indicate the lateral velocity at anytime according to their rate of fall at the time. But only approximately. The landing needs near-zero lateral speed. If they are moving 50 mph laterally when they get to 200 feet in altitude, for example, how will they slow down in time for the landing?

Go ahead, picture yourself in that situation. How will you deal with it? You must not tilt the lander at this low altitude, or you will crash. You must keep it pointing straight up. That fuel spitting out beneath you is mighty strong to keep the heavy lander from falling too fast. It's some mighty-strong spit, and the slightest off-balance spit will tilt the craft with absolute certainty, which is why they have never shown the people even the mere attempt of this type of landing on earth. They've tried it, you can be sure, but in secret, because publicly showing the crash landings of the attempts is the best way to tell the world that the moon landings were faked.

They have tried it, tried to perfect it, but they crashed all or most of their vehicles, and then they called the project off, realizing the risks, the insurmountable complications, and the vanity.

Okay, you are coming down at 200 feet, 190 feet, 180 feet, moving 50 mph laterally in the west-south-west direction. You don't know that it's 50 mph, and so how will you know how to correct it to zero? You don't know the direction, so how will you know which side burner(s) to fire to correct it? Each shot of fuel at a side burner can tilt the vertical position. Yikes. How will you get a grip on your speed since there is not even a window looking straight down on the rocks beneath you? You are strapped in your seat due to the possibility of a crash landing, and you have the burner controls at your fingertips, but all you can see is out a side window. Are you nuts? Why did you get yourself into that position, Neil??? Thou fake. He never was in that position, was he?

But we all saw it on TV. We saw it land, and NASA would not play such a hoax on us all. We love NASA. I trust NASA. And that's the problem. The Americans love and trust their technology wizards, their military included. Therefore, the wizards fool the people. They do not love the people in return, but act as though they do. This is not hard to grasp.

As I explained in the last update, Newton's view of gravity, which evolutionists latched onto to, is false. Why believe me? I know, I sound like a lunatic. But they are the true lunatics, as was explained well enough. It's not my view of atomic physics that has signs of nuttiness, but their view is wholly nutty, impossible. They envision graviton particles in all atoms. And so they insist that all atoms attract one another by their mutual gravitons. And they have conveniently made mass (the amount if atomic stuff) equal / proportional with gravitational force, as though every atom, regardless of type, has the same number of gravitons as it has protons (in their theory, protons are the measures of material weight). That is, the force of gravity in every atom is equal to its weight. By what fat chance did this come about? Forget it, it's wrong. They have sinister motives for this view of gravity.

The point is, the oft-repeated "fact" that lunar gravity is 1/6th that of earth's is probably based on a faulty view of gravity. First of all, they didn't know the moon's mass in order to find the specific force of gravity according to their graviton theory. They had to first discover the force of lunar gravity before they worked out the moon's mass by their faulty view. The same applies to all planets; they come in weighing at the wrong mass. I don't know how they managed to get the egg to come before the chicken. How did they find a planet's gravity force without first knowing the mass?

They have a formula: Gravity Force between two planetary bodies is equal to Big G x (mass of one planet x mass of another planet divided by distance-between-the-two squared). See this simplified video below, but keep in mind that the equation first boasts that the mass of the planets is known, which, in their own theory, cannot be known unless the gravity force is first known. Therefore, they look to be playing tricks on us:

There is a question on how they figured out Big G (gravitational constant), which I don't want to get back into right now. At the 5th minute, he talks about calculating the weight of a man on the moon, and says that the mass of the moon is first required. But how did they weight the moon? They can't. So, the video fails to tell us how they knew the weight of the moon, and, I think I can guarantee, others figured it out according to some gravitational computation. So, it looks like circular reasoning = no merit = trick.

The way that science finds specific weight is by: mass times the acceleration of gravity. There is nothing complicated here. It means only that weight changes with distance from a gravity source because the acceleration of gravity gets weaker with distance from the gravity source.

But how does one find the acceleration of the moon when it is not in fact accelerating toward earth? It is true that the moon is constantly falling to earth by an amount perfectly countering the moon's outward direction due to its orbital path, but the moon's fall is clearly not accelerating to earth, or it would get progressively closer to it. The moon's orbital path is not accelerating, we may assume, because there is nothing to accelerate it. There is no justification to argue that the moon's fall accelerates if the orbital path is not accelerating. The conclusion is that the moon's fall has reached terminal velocity. Yet it's difficult if not impossible to imagine a frictional force in space that could cause terminal velocity.

My conclusion is that the inter-repulsion of the gravity forces between the earth's gravity source and that of the moon's gravity source is what keeps the moon at terminal velocity. The gravity sources of each planet attract one another's atoms, but the inter-repulsion forces of the same gravity sources needs to be included in the picture.

Put it this way. If the moon were orbiting further out in space, it would accelerate toward earth, causing a spiral in the orbit. As repulsion force increases while the two bodies thereby come closer together, the acceleration of the moon's fall will decrease until it reaches zero. The moon is still falling at zero acceleration, but not falling faster (with each unit of time). Acceleration is defined as a faster velocity per unit time.

There is, therefore, no way to measure the acceleration of the moon, in which case there is no way to measure it's specific force of gravity. And especially because no one can put the moon on a weight scale, science can't figure out the moon's gravitational force using their theory that it's proportional to mass. One or the other needs to be known first. If they cannot know the specific gravity of the moon, neither can they know the rate of fall of a lunar lander using radar to read its changing altitude.

If anyone has the time or desire to look at the science of my last update, it offers proof that planetary gravity is the negative force of heat within the planets. Gravity's negative force blows some outer electrons off of every atom, and thus creates some net-positive force in every atom. The negative of gravity therefore attracts the net-positive of every atom. Voila, weight.

The closer the atom is to the gravity source, the more its outer electrons get blown off, the greater the gravity attraction to the atom = greater weight with decreased distance from gravity...exactly what the facts show.

To prove that the sun and planets have a repulsion force, take the tails of comets, which are (my theory, probably correct) electrons being blown off the comets as it nears the sun. Sometimes a second tail forms from a planetary body nearby. But if you look at the explanation of modern science for the formation of comet tails, you can glean, with enough thought paid to it, why it's incorrect. No matter which way a comet flies as it circles the sun, the tail is always pointed directly away from the sun, always extending from the dark (far) side of the comet's rock (not ice) body.

If we could stop a comet dead in its tracks, it would cease to lose electrons. The same applies to any object not drawing near to gravity. That's why the planets have no electron tails even though some are within range of tail formation. Some say that Venus once had a tail, which may indicate that it was falling-in-orbit toward the sun at that time.

You have the choice of explaining the tail's material formed either from the physical force of merely the solar-wind electrons, or from the negative energy in the sun blowing the comet atom's electrons away (the atoms re-load later, when moving away from the sun). Which seems like the better theory? Does it seem to you that the solar wind can knock atomic (rock, not ice) material off the comet? Don't make me laugh, thou stupid evolutionists. You don't deserve anything but derision for that claim. I know exactly why they lie to us, saying that comets are made of ice, because they know how ridiculous it is for the solar wind to shave off rock material in forming tails. There is even a lot of doubt in the solar wind being able to shave off ice, but, it's more believable. No matter, it's the wrong answer. If they have shown comet bodies made of ice, it's a photographic trick / fake. It is simply ridiculous and impossible for all objects orbiting the sun as comets to be made of ice when everything else is known to be rock.

There is nothing we know of on that rocky body that can be flying off the comet, but atomic electrons. It means that there is an outward negative force in all directions from the sun. Ditto between the earth and moon.

Here's from an article, "How do scientists measure or calculate the weight of a planet?" The first sentence: "We start by determining the mass of the Earth." But you don't know it. You can't weigh the planet. You don't know what the deep interior consists of. The next sentence: "Issac Newton's Law of Universal Gravitation tells us that the force of attraction between two objects is proportional the product of their masses divided by the square of the distance between their centers of mass." What good is that, since you're admitting that you can't know the gravity force between the earth and moon without the earth's and moon's mass? What junk is this?

We then get to the second paragraph:

Because we know the radius of the Earth, we can use the Law of Universal Gravitation to calculate the mass of the Earth in terms of the gravitational force on an object (its weight) at the Earth's surface, using the radius of the Earth as the distance.

The killer is the phrase, "calculate the mass of the Earth in terms of the gravitational force on an object (its weight)." It's using gravity to figure the earth's mass. Yup, it is. And it assumes that gravity is proportional with weight. Nonsense. It's just a guess, and likely wrong. There is no evidence that mass attracts mass. Lab tests have been done, but it's debatable on whether the results were fixed in accordance to what was expected. The only forces known with certainty between objects is electromagnetic. Face it. Gravity is electromagnetic. The comet tail tells them that gravity is a negative force, but the evolutionists are unwilling to abandon their atom-attracts-atom theory. They need it for their concocted explanation of the evolution of a Godless cosmos through the big bang. Unless the atoms of the big bang attracted one another, suns could not form.

Back to the lunar lander. There is another way to get it to go straight down, in theory. As it's orbiting parallel with the ground, the lander is positioned so that the main engine spits in the direction of the orbital path. The engine simply continues to fire fuel in that direction without changing the craft's position. During this process, the velocity along the orbital path slows, causing a downward curve until it ends up falling straight down. When it's falling straight down, the lander turns so that its main engine spits fuel straight down. It's simpler than the way I landed it above. But there are problems.

If the lander is slowed to the point of falling straight down without any engine force straight down, the acceleration of the falling lander will be to it's extreme velocity (as compared to getting it vertical by a more-gradual way). The downward spit then needs to be elongated to counter that extreme velocity. Out-of-control spins may be more likely with greater velocities. The same problems exists with this method of landing as above. How will Neil Armstrong know when the craft is moving at zero lateral velocity? The radar soundings can't help with this. They can only give the altitude, the downward velocity, and the acceleration too, perhaps, if their on-board computer was able to calculate it and show it fast.

Okay, let's take this from an assumed, straight-down direction that Armstrong was able to achieve. He's got to keep the lander pointed straight up for so many minutes. If he tilts just a little, he'll start to move laterally while not knowing it. How will he know? He's still too high to use the ground to spot lateral motion. How many times will he go a little off the perfect vertical so that the craft keeps changing its lateral direction? But I'm being very kind to allow merely a small tilt with a small lateral shifting. The reality is much-more likely full and uncontrollable spins while falling extremely fast.

There could be on-board levelling instruments that indicate when the lander is perfectly vertical. The computer could arrange to fire the appropriate burners according to a program linked to the levelling instruments. For example, the program asks: is the craft tilting right? If no, do nothing with right-side burner. If yes, fire right-side burner for a certain amount of time. The program asks the question constantly. A spit of fuel from the right-side burner rotates the lander toward the left, and when it starts therefore to tilt left, the left-side burner fires. Yet, the situation will not usually be this clean, for the rotation will not often be pure right and pure left only, in a three-dimensional space.

If a tilt does not go directly toward a burner, then what? We need two burners, one on both sides of the tilt direction. Two burners send the lander rotating back toward the perfect vertical.

Instead of right and left only, we assume four burners, which we can call the east, west, south, and north burners. One could suppose eight burners, but to keep this discussion simple, let's go with four. If a tilt is perfectly between the south and east burners, it's easy for the computer to conclude that the same spit is needed simultaneously from both the south and the east burner. Assuming that the main engine makes for no further tilting while the lander now rotates toward the north-west, the time will soon come when the computer orders a simultaneous spit from both the north and west burners. Back and forth the rotation will go, from SE to NW.

But what happens due to the main engine causing the tilt, at anytime, to go more toward the south than toward the east? The computer now needs to tabulate how powerful or long the south burner should fire as compared to the east burner. And so on and so on with endless directional combinations. It could give the computer a very big headache because the programmer can't program this well enough to make it work, especially in 1969. If anyone could have, they would have shown us such machines in action on earth, because they couldn't resist showing them off. Where are they? It's 2018, and we still haven't seen them, aside from the video-doctored fakery in SpaceX rocket landings.

Tilting can be worst / fatal as the main engine comes near the ground. As the force strikes the ground, it can have serious upward repercussions on the bottom of the lander. I can't say for sure what might happen until I see an attempt. Waiting...

It could appear that God is exposing his evolutionist enemies too. See T-Rex flesh below. Go Jesus!

The stunned evolutionists are trying to stretch dinosaur tissue to a million years or more until they can find explanations to get them older. The infidels, the rebellious delinquents, refuse to believe the obvious. They even fired the woman who found the flesh because she dared to expose it publicly. Cover-ups even with evolutionists, same breed of imposters as Intelligence operators. While they create their scams to deceive with fakery, real facts come out to shame them. Beautiful vengeance. Enjoy it. Don't feel sorry for the damned. Receive those who repent. Enjoy the fall of the wicked, especially when they go mad. Repay them with pain with the truth they hate. They spent a generation or two building their empire, now falling, with no pity on our Christian children, hoping and working to make them twice the sons of Hell that they are.

You need to see the video above until mad, hollering Jack the evolutionist refuses to do a test on the flesh...because he would be crucified by the evolutionary "community" for failing to follow the cover-up procedures expected of him, like when Masons get their necks slashed for betraying the brotherhood.

Apparently, a process of de-calcification of dinosaur fossils (or perhaps rock-encapsulated bones) has been discovered or used that finds all sorts of tissue material within the bones. Wow. It's like a pistol to the head of the evolutionist. It's wonderful. They need to go extinct fast. They will fight back with greater lies, greater tricks. They will not repent. They are bent on suicide, therefore.

Here's a easy-watching video showing various fraudulent claims by evolutionists:

Same speaker Part 2 of four parts:

I like Creationism topics a lot, having very interesting and challenging materials and tasks. Imagine how much money and work evolutionists have wasted pushing their fantasies. More shame for evolutionists:


For Some Prophetic Proof for Jesus as the Predicted Son of God

If you are stuck with dial-up service, using the Opera browser can help.
It has an Opera Turbo program (free with the free browser) that speeds download time.
Go into Opera's Settings, then click on "Browser"; you'll find the on/off Turbo button in there.

Table of Contents

web site analytic