Previous Update: March 1 - 3

Updates Index

March 4 - 6, 2009

The False Profit

March 4

Why are car-makers suddenly doing so bad? Is it the recession? No, car sales started doing bad as the recession hit. Was this coincidental? No, it was due to increased gas prices, the same that has caused the recession. People drove less. They went out less. Fashion mattered less. Catching up with the Jones' meant less. Trying to look better than the Jones' didn't matter as much. Luxuries could be passed up on. Driving the "old" car for a few extra years has become acceptable.

Therefore, who should pay to bail out the auto industry? Those responsible. The oil middlemen. Why isn't Obama wringing their necks? Is he scared? Is he their asinine puppet? Is his integrity a sham? Has he no spine? No honor? The International Bankers are robbing the people, yet Obama pretends to rule for the causes and concerns of the people.

What if the globalists now attempting to seize many systems get caught? What if their trusted buddies figure out the realities, and back-stab the fiends? What if their own partners decide to abandon their roles? Expect it. It will happen. Everyone of them knows that the other is a liar, for which very reason none respects the other. None will weep for the ruin of the other, for they are nothing but thieves, and each one knows it.

How can the Illuminati ever grow united to the point of ruling the world? The message of the Bible is that it won't. Prophecy writers have it all wrong. The globalists will not control the world. They will wither away trying, and in an abrupt end they will die horrible deaths.

While it's true that Illuminati groups have built extremely large fortunes and financial empires, they are not united. They are in competition with one another. How do I know? It's human nature. Never has their been a kingdom built on selfish sin where a ruler was not despised by another wanting his throne. Take the Roman emperors as example of back-stabbers, one stabbing the other to gain power and then stabbed by another in the end. If I were a worldly man at this time, I would buy stock in back-stabbing knives.

Objectors to Obama's stimulus plan are pointing out that his time for blaming Bush for the recession is running out. He is making it worse by refusing to take the blame for the falling stock market. Everyone but Obamatons, including Obama himself, knows that the stock market has shrunk due to the stimulus plan. In the midst of this, Obama and Brown are trying to get us on board a global stimulus plan. My conclusion can only be that this is a controlled stock-market crash, for Obama (and Brown) shows no fear of the Dow Jones going from the 13,000s to the 6,000s in a few short months. But what happens when those who've gladly been active Illuminatists lose their companies, or see the companies of their family members go down, due to the controlled crash? How long can we expect them to remain loyal to the cause?

Ganging up on Obama's plan is gaining shrill:

"A U.S. senator berated Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke on Tuesday for refusing to name banks that borrow from the central bank and introduced legislation that would require public disclosure.

In a testy exchange at a hearing before the Senate Budget Committee, Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, an independent who usually votes with the Democrats, said he found it 'unacceptable' that the central bank risked taxpayer money without detailing where the funds went.

...'"Isn't that too bad,' Sanders interrupted, cutting [Bernanke] off. 'They took the money but they don't want to be public about the fact that they received it.'"

The ways to "control" a financial collapse include raising oil prices high, and convincing the public that they are entering a severe recession. George Bush has not created the recession except for what involvement he had in the ballooning oil prices. The Republicans under Bush over-spent, but this did not cause the people to stop spending money.


There's really not much news this morning, so I'd like to take score. What evidence is there that 2009 is shaping up like Week's start? We're more than one-sixth the way into the year, and more than one-fifth the way to Rosh Hashanna. There is only one decent sign of Gog: Russia's alliance with Iran. Medvedev told Obama yesterday that there will be no tit-for-tat deal, i.e. Russia will not reduce its arms sales to Iran. But the Russia-Iran partnership could drag on for years from now. Most are saying that Putin is the best candidate for Gog at this time; hardly anyone is pointing to Zhirinovsky anymore.

Let's face it, it's hard to believe that Gog will invade Israel this year. No one believes that Gog must enter Iraq unless they've been reading here and trusting my view of prophecy, and not everyone reading takes this position strongly. Most, I figure, are thinking that it's a fair expectation, but are waiting to see if it comes to pass. The political situation in Mosul is unstable, and yet there is no sign of Gog's entry.

Arab animosity against Egypt has subsided. The Gaza situation remains unstable, and war could break out at any time to once again resume animosities. But how reasonable is it to expect Gog to be invading Egypt this year if he must first enter Mosul? It's March already, and it doesn't look likely. The pieces are set up for a Gogi entry into Mosul, and a subsequent invasion into Egypt, but 2009 is slipping away.

I've always believed that no one has any business announcing the end times until a skincode purchasing system is feasible. The system is now imminent. It could begin at any moment. It's not likely to be mandatory by 2013, but it's possible. The Brown-Obama event yesterday galvanized the belief of some that a skincode will be forced suddenly upon a global economic system as a measure to combat an emergency. The Brown-Obama deal is good news for those of us who want the Big Beautiful Beginning to arrive sooner rather than later, but a global economic system could flitter away and go missing for years to come. There's no way that anyone could target 2009 specifically as the Week's first year based on the present progress of a cashless society.

I'm asking myself again: how could Gog enter Mosul? I nearly have a conversation with myself when on this problem. When Me #1 asked a few months ago, Me #2 thought that the provincial elections held the key. I envisioned political and/or military chaos in Mosul such that a foreign force i.e. Gog could enter and seize the day. At first I didn't know when those elections would be held in 2009, but when I learned of their being held early, on January 31, it looked very good for a Gogi entry well in time for the Feast of Tabernacles in the fall (= the proposed start of the Week). It's time to re-assess the Mosul situation now that more than a month has passed since the elections.

Explosions have occurred regularly since the election; there was one today that killed one American. Details of the villains are scanty because news articles on the topic are scanty, and it's not always known who the responsible parties are. I wouldn't assess the situation as a crisis at this point. I wouldn't say that the situation begs the entry of a foreign savior. Kurds have yet to expose a robust strategy for gaining Mosul back, and while there appears to be a military option alone if they're intent on regaining power, it's hard to believe that they would make an official decision to start a war now, for such a thing would jeopardize all their eggs in Kirkuk and beyond.

The more-likely scenario is a war started by the Arabs in the north, not necessarily by Arabs of Mosul. A war against the Kurds, that is. This would give Kurds their excuse for fighting back. If the outlawed terrorist Kurds join the battle, it could give Gog his excuse for coming to the rescue of the Arabs. If Arabs start the war in such a heinous way that angers Americans, both Iraq and the U.S. military could side with the Kurds, making the intervention of Gog even more attractive to the Arabs.

How likely is such a possibility at this time? According to several articles over the past few weeks: fairly likely. In fact, the possibility is so high that Obama has decided to break his promise by leaving all (or nearly all) the troops in Iraq until national elections late in the year have proved successful/peaceful.

Contrary to what we might believe, this decision made by Obama in the last week tends to speed the entry of Gog. Prior to this decision, plotting Sunni Arabs may have been divided, some wanting to strike out against Kurds and/or Iraq as soon as possible, but others wanting to wait for most American troops to leave. Obama had promised to reduce the numbers gradually by almost 10,000 per month, wherefore leading Sunni may have decided to strike out late this year, or even at the start of next year, but certainly not before the elections of five weeks ago.

Now, with Obama announcing that nearly the present number of American fighters in Iraq are to remain in the country until the end of 2009, or later if necessary, the Sunni plotters may be hashing out a new strategy as we speak. The faction that itched to strike out as soon as possible may now be the majority, and may argue against their opposing faction that waiting only strengthens Iraq's military.

What if Putin had already decided to facilitate a Sunni Baathist uprising for a later time (i.e. when the American troops are sufficiently reduced), but seeing now some serious antagonism from Medvedev and opposition parties, he decides that Baathists should strike sooner rather than risk waiting to a point when he finds himself politically weaker? But, then, we don't know whether or not Putin will be involved in the Gogi entry into Mosul.

I've got to assume that Putin is not Gog. I've got to assume that the Sunni plotters are on talking terms with Gog, whoever he is. I assume that he is advising the plotters. I assume that he would take the position above, that striking out sooner is better than waiting until the end of the year or later, especially as Obama has signalled a willingness to break pull-out promises should American fighters be needed in Iraq to quell uprisings.

The next question is, how far could a Baathist uprising go when opposed by American, Iraqi, and Kurdish fighters? Wouldn't it be a suicide mission? The Sunni of the north now have political power; why risk it all on starting a war they can't win? Good argument, but I'm back to square one: the Gogi-Sunni uprising cannot begin until most Americans pull out. Or, unless the Americans support the uprising.

What is the liklihood of Obama supporting the uprising? I can see only one cause: to fight the Kurds, especially the outlawed PKK Kurds. What is the liklihood that Obama will support the Sunni? It depends on which Sunni are involved. Obama wouldn't likely support an al-Qaeda uprising. One might also discredit Obama support for a Gogi-Sunni alliance...except for the Biblical fact of a Gogi alliance with the False Prophet.

However, an Obama alliance with the Gogi-Sunni alliance requires that Obama turn against the Iraqi government, for the Gogi-Sunni alliance will oppose the government...for which reason Gog will be rejected/despised by Iraqis as per Daniel 11:21. Plus, the Gogi-Sunni alliance is said (by Daniel 11) to start small before it becomes large; it wouldn't be considered small if Obama's army is a part of it. Safe to say, therefore, Obama will not turn on the Iraqi government, for this and other obvious reasons, wherefore Obama will need, at best, to remain neutral as the Gogi-Baathist uprising begins.

There is yet another possibility: Obama may be forced out of Iraq much sooner because the Sunni have a legally-binding clause granting an option for holding a referendum on the issue of the American presence. If ever the referendum is going to occur, it must (as per the official deal) take place within the next three months. What are the chances that it takes place? Higher now that Obama has mashed his promise, and is showing untold willingness to break the promise of this week to pull out next year.

The Sunni must decide whether or not to risk letting the referendum slide, which risk is an Obama ticket for remaining longer. If Sunni factions are trying to decide, as we speak, whether or not to begin an uprising against Kurds as soon as possible, holding the referendum should be their choice strategy. In short, Obama's announcement this week may cause the Sunni to hold the referendum whereas it would have been allowed to slide had Obama kept his promise to reduce the troops gradually and quickly.

There will be cause for American animosity toward the Sunni who force a referendum. It might make the Americans more gracious toward Kurds...who are at this time begging Americans to remain in Iraq as protection against the Sunni. Could the Kurds, under such circumstances, start a war against the Sunni before the Americans are forced to leave, thus securing American protection for a longer haul? If Kurds do start a war, Sunni with Shi'ites would likely vote the Americans out of Iraq in the referrendum, wherefore Kurds must be thinking not to start or partake in a war before the referendum deadline has passed.

Assuming no referendum, it is still possible for Gog to enter Iraq after the referendum deadline; I believe it's June 30th at the latest. The circumstantial possibilities in the next three months, as outlined above, are so numerous that I'm unable to make a prediction at this time.

My view of Putin has been one of a master deceiver. It has occurred to me more than once that skillful and deceptive politicians fake opposition to a person or party for the purpose if disguising a secret alliance. For example, Putin may have realized that he is losing respect and popularity because Russians believe he is holding Medvedev as his puppet. To cure this problem, both Putin and Medvedev secretly agree to stage a political fight that turns sour, thus disguising the reality that the two are in cahoots.

It could then be true that the recent turning of Zhirinovsky against Putin is also staged for the same reason, for Zhirinovsky had been accused of being Putin's pet. On the other hand, I don't think that such a close relationship mattered to the Russian people. I would say that if Zhirinovsky had ever entertained his mad dash to the south seriously, now would be the time to initiate it. He has the golden opportunity to speed things up by addressing the Baathists on the referendum. Are there any reasons that Baathists would not like to see the referendum? I can't think of any. I think it's an accepted position that the Sunni prefer to have the Americans out of Iraq NOW, especially as American presence can potentially give Kurds some clout.

Let's look at both possibilities, assuming first that Zhirinovsky is truly in defiance of Putin. I'm also going to assume that Zhirinovsky has lost all hope of attaining supreme power in Russia, especially as Putin is so strong at the moment. Zhiro's outbursts this past week against Putin may have been his final bid to secure greater voter popularity. It didn't work; he only got 10 percent of the vote. What then becomes of the mad dash to the south? It would seem dead in the waters.

Possibility two, where Zhirinovsky is staging defiance against Putin, seems a necessary tactic for the mad dash to the south. We obviously can't have Zhirinovsky in Mosul while Putin shows agreement to it. The plan could therefore be for Zhiro to worm his way into Mosul but with Putin staging the same way that Putin stages opposition to Iran's anti-Israeli agenda.

The question is, would Putin really partake in such a mad dash? Of course. So long as Obama wants to build troops in Afghanistan while being antagonistic toward Iran. Some method of sticking his Rus fingers in Iraq would seem ideal at this time.

Another possibility is that Obama's invisible leaders, including Zbigniew Brzezinski, will choose their own Russian agent (i.e. Gog), and together he with Obama will control Iraq even after American troops are forced to withdraw.

I note that the root of "Brzezin(sky)" smacks of "Abruzzo." The man is Polish, but I trace Poles/Polski back to the Po-river Veneti; the Abruzzo/Abreu surname was first found in Venetia's capital city, Patavium/Padua. On Brzezinski, Wikipedia writes:

"Wary of a move toward the reinvigoration of Russian power, Brzezinski negatively viewed the succession of former KGB agent Vladimir Putin to Boris Yeltsin. In this vein, [Brzezinski] became one of the foremost advocates of NATO expansion."

As I kept reading the article and finding that he had married "Emilie Anna Benes, a grandniece of Czechoslovakia's former president Edvard Benes," I checked the for a Benes Coat and found a Scottish one with (are you ready?) three cinquefoils!!! Two black, and one white, on a black and white shield.

Before finding this, I was just about to remind you, though I decided against it, that Padova traces back to Padasus (Mysia), where the Lelegians lived. I had tentatively traced Lelegians to Leicester, you see, the city that uses a white cinquefoil on black shield. The Benes surname is said to derive from "Balneaves," a location in Angus (Scotland). Not only does the Arms of Angus use a cinquefoil, but horseshoes, the symbol of Podkowa Lesna -- in Poland -- because "podkowa" means "horseshoe in Polish. I had found evidence that Leslies of Scotland (who also use horseshoes) originated in a Leslie-like surname (can't recall the spelling) in Padova. This helped to clinch that the Leslie horseshoes were in honor of the Podkowa-Lesna horseshoe.

After writing the above, I went back to the Brzezinski article, and the very next sentence after the mention of the Benes family said that Brzezinski's son, Ian, "is now a Principal at Booz Allen Hamilton" (founded by Edwin G. Booz). The Hamilton surname uses the Leicester cinquefoil! Moreover, as per my connection of the Hamel/Camel surname to Kemuel, third son of Nahor, "Booz" sure does evoke, Buz, second son of Nahor.

There has been more violence in northern Iraq today. Aside from an al-Qaeda operation in Tikrit to kill the Sunni tribal leader, Sheikh Ziab Ahmed Ziara, as revenge for his partaking in the anti-la-Qaeda Awakening, there was an attack on Iraqi authorities:

"The attack in Tikrit was followed by two bombings that killed a total of six members of the Iraqi security forces near the northern city of Mosul..."

As is common, the article doesn't reveal the group responsible.

In case you've been wondering about the Hamas deal with Fatah Palestinians, it's dead in the water:

"Earlier Saturday, Hamas also rejected a call by US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton for the Islamic group to recognize the state of Israel, and said her request was unacceptable to the Palestinians.

Hamas spokesman Ismail Radwan said that the group will not recognize Israel nor comply with the conditions set by the Quartet, the radio station reported"

Iran and others have been making large donations to Hezbollah for the purpose of bolstering the group for the June elections. There could be some military activity after the elections, enough to make up for lost time, but for now it seems Hezbollah is on its best behavior in efforts to entrench deeper into Lebanese power structures:

"Hizbullah launched its electoral campaign in east Lebanon's Bekaa Valley on Sunday with the group's second-in-command saying Hizbullah has 'good relations with everybody.'

'We consider these elections to be important, but not fateful,' Sheikh Naim Qassem told a news conference."

Just so you know that Lebanese election season has kicked off. It's three months to go, however.

March 5

As Rush Limbaugh is in the news these days, see that his surname is a variation of the Lombard surname. The link claims that "Limbaugh" was connected to Lombardy, Italy.

I recall first hearing Rush Limbaugh on radio, how nice it was to hear someone speaking out against the homosexual movement and other liberal holy cows. But the man turned out to be conceited, even suggesting that he is God (loosely speaking). If you're listening to Rush, you're not listening to a Christian. You're bombarded by the wrong spirit if you're listening to Rush. If you're listening to Rush, you've got your mind and heart on the things of the world, not the things of Christ.

If you're listening to Michael Savage, you're listening to a man much more the devil than like Christ. He may quote from the Bible at times, but he opposes Jesus as the only Savior. He's "Jewish," and he's nutty. Rush and Savage are routinely among the most listened-to Conservative talk-show hosts.

There is little news today. It means I get to talk about whatever I wish. But first I'll mention that I found the following statement speaking to my central focus, though nothing more on the matter was included in the article: "A vote [in Iraq] on the withdrawal of US troops is due in June..." It sounds like it's a done deal: the referendum is going to take place. What more can I say? It should be cause for the wiser anti-American groups to restrain their violence until after the referendum. By that time, the Lebanese elections will be in the past, and by the way the elections in Kirkuk and three Kurdish areas are tentatively set for May. Decisions by insurgent groups are therefore expected soon. Will they, or will they not, lay down their arms?

Let me talk about the false profit. So far as I've read, the stimulus money obtained by Obama is not going to poor workers. This is very regrettable because an opportunity like this is golden for those earning low income. How much money will get to the poorest workers as Obama gives his hundreds of billions to relatively large businesses and governments? Those who already hold jobs are not getting a dime; the stimulus package is intended to create new jobs (temporarily) and to secure the jobs of a few who may be threatened by the recession.

The deal is to create new projects, or revive old projects, involving purchases of materials and services. At every purchase point, a piece of the stimulus money gets routed to governments via taxation. The rest goes to businesses, small and large. Usually, business owners are not considered the poor, though some are. Large projects, however, tend not to see purchases from poor business owners.

After the first wave of stimulus expenditures takes place, the money gets banked by the businesses and the workers paid by them. None of it will necessarily increase the wages of workers, yet each trillion dollars of stimulus money is roughly $5,000 for each employed American (businessman or not) that must be paid back. Therefore, wage earners are going to foot the bill that is essentially a hand-out to businesses.

After sitting in the banks of businesses for a short or long period, the stimulus money gets spent by business owners, though another piece (very sizable this time) will end up in the government via income taxes (this is the part that Obama and his Dems are looking forward to, for they fear a recession's low tax intake). As the remainder is spent by business owners, more yet ends up in government accounts via sales taxes.

Purchase money on this second wave of expenditures will more likely go to retailers than to service contractors, but once again the money does not go to wage earners, nor will it raise their wages, for wage increases require a blooming economy, but the stimulus money is insufficient to cause a blooming economy.

By the fourth wave of expenditures, roughly one trillion dollars will end up in government accounts for each trillion dollars of stimulus money. Governments spend the money as they see fit, but it's generally acknowledged that government overseers waste money because they received it, not by hard work, but by taxes. To put it another way, it's not their own, personal money, so they are rather careless in how it's spent. Plus, the more that local governments spend, they more they can buck (from state governments) year by year as "required moneys" (there is a lot of waste in this aspect of the system).

Governments then tend to create unemployment by handing out free welfare monies. In every economy, there are bound to be a few percent of the people who simply will not work if welfare is available. When the U.S. unemployment rate was at a super five percent, about half of them (I'm guessing, it could be higher) would not have worked even if a job was available to each one.

An unemployment rate of seven or eight percent, as it stands now, is no cause for alarm. If stimulus money were simply handed out to the two or three percent who have lost jobs in the course of this recession, it would cost far less than $800 billion and meanwhile go to the root of the problem for which Obama had requested that amount in the first place. Two percent of American workers is roughly 4 million individuals; 800 billion for that many is $200,000 each.

How nice would it be for persons whose houses need repairs to receive several thousand dollars for free? Instead, businesses are receiving the stimulus money first, while it skirts low-income families altogether. When one gives money first to the poor, it goes immediately to business owners anyway, i.e. as soon as it's spent. In this way, most-everyone benefits as the money is circulated. Obama misses this important point, which is a shame because Democrats claim to care for low-income workers.

When low-income families are helped, divorce rates go down. There is an enormous amount of government money going to single parents raising children. A divorce means that two people pay rent/mortgage for two homes, whereas a marriage has only one rent/mortgage payment. Governments give to single parents an amount near the cost of monthly house payments.

If Democrats wish to help the poor, or if they wish to save tax dollars, let them rid the country of porn, and let them cease to encourage liberal sexuality, for these things cause many divorces directly or indirectly. There are more costs associated with divorce than financial. There are far more costs to porn than divorce. One price is Armageddon, the horrible downfall of all nations, and the crumbling of the physical planet as a measure of God's anger.

Still, as liberals see the signs, they ignore them. Look and see how bright the faces of liberals are these days, now that Democrats are back in power. See them laugh with joy, and gloat for their new world. Blessed are those, rather, who cringe in this new order. The past decade has been one for establishing homosexuality and comparable obscenities. The next decade will be for putting into our faces.

I am divorced. It was hell for me, the loss of living with my children. But I started on this book as soon as I was separated. I would not otherwise have committed to this book as I have. Many emails have been received over the years from Christians deeply appreciating the finding of the post-trib message (a rarity in Christian book stores). Many pre-tribbers have become post-tribbers by the message (which is not "my" message alone). And I stand to be the one who recognizes the anti-Christ nearly first of all, unless you do. Nothing would make me happier than for a reader to email me with the identification of the anti-Christ. Nothing would make God happier than to see his children acting as a team on his behalf.

The Lord has not allowed me to re-marry. I remember praying back in the 80s, "Lord, if ever you want to put me through a hardship, no matter how bitterly I complain or despise it, don't remove it." I have no idea why I prayed for such a thing. I must have sensed that a mind-bending hardship was coming that would be excruciating for me but good for the Kingdom. It did come, and let me tell you that I have recently despised the thought of His doing with my children what he allowed for me. My oldest boy has decided to remain in Bible college, and for me this is a great victory over the world's threats. My second boy is also a Christian, and the others are starting to lean that way. If losing my children for the Kingdom was necessary, then I remind Him that he owes me the secure spiritual passage of my children through the snake pits of this world. I don't think He minds my putting it that way.

I'm cruising again now; the deep pains are in the past. The hot iron has been lifted from me, and I feel free for finishing this job.

There is no relevant news today to speak of, so this could be all for today. No need to email me on the topic above. I thought that since I found myself mentioning divorce, I should mention mine too. Then I wanted to get personal because regular readers know little about that side of me, and because this is not a typical media outlet. I was no angel when I came to the Lord, and I'm no super-righteous man of God to this day. Please don't have any illusions. I tried to be super righteous, but discovered that the man in me would not allow it. Until the re-creation occurs at the rapture, none of us will attain it.

That is something to look forward to, because the Righteousness of God is a natural inclination for those filled to the brim with the Spirit. Righteousness is not defined in Heaven as a striving to do the right, but a natural right attitude that is basis for an exceeding good life of abundance...where "life" is defined as the inner condition and senses. The Kingdom of God is within you.

Don't welcome the light of this world to spoil what God transfers to your heart; the "light" of this world is the knowledge of evil. This is our current striving for righteousness...until striving is done away with, when the world's sin is done away with. Block the light of this world from entering your heart; the tribulation retreat will be very helpful for this purpose, but the rapture will be the final nail in Satan's coffin. Satan does not want us to retreat from, or shun, the world; he wants the television to remain on. He wants us to feed on internet porn. You get it, for God teaches this to all, by direct contact with the hearts of all, but only few obey Him.

I think that, even if I knew the tribulation to be in another generation, I might still desire to live in the country just to get away from a people sick with the light of the devil. However, there is something to be said for remaining among sin-lovers in efforts to change their ways.

I was watching CNN just now when the story was Melody Barnes, Obama's pick for his health care reform project. The link at the Barnes Coat says that the surname if from "bern," but then claims that the term means "barn." However, in light of all that's come to light on the Bernicians and Bern-like surnames, I would suggest that Melody is likewise from that family of peoples. Note the spotted leopard as the Barnes Crest, seen also on the Rhodes Crest. Moreover, both the Rhodes and the Barnes Coats share gold roundels (the official name of the spheres). As "Bernys" is a variation of the Barnes surname, the latter may be a version of the Norman Berney surname, from Bernai, Normandy.

The point is, Obama continues to chose Rhodes-related leaders. We can expect, therefore, attempts to change in health care systems according to selfish Rhodian ambitions.

Amazing, as soon as I finished the above, Michael Jackson was in the CNN news. I checked the Jackson Coat to find three white cinquefoils on black!!!

In the mid 1980's, I attended a days-long missionary-related seminar in Urbana (Illinois). As soon as I walked into the room that I was assigned, I did something I perhaps shouldn't have. I tore the Michael Jackson poster off the wall. He seemed demonic to me, and I was freshly-zealous for God to change the world. I of course changing the world. I never did become a missionary.

Is it a coincidence that Michael Jackson is seeking to make a come-back just as Democrats are starting to roll their wheels again? Is the spirit of the world ripe for Jackson acceptance again? What's it matter that he slept with boys? As long as he can sing and dance, he's just dandy for the liberals. What's it matter that Bill Clinton was a disgusting adulterer, so long as he can play the image of a "presidential" president, he's just dandy for the Democrats. So long as an adulterer is eloquent or knowledgeable, he's just dandy for leading the nation.

Thou shalt not commit adultery, unless thou art an eloquent speaker. If thou art one adulterer with several women, but thou art also eloquent, thou shalt be respected by all the peoples, and shalt be a praised leader of all thy peoples.

The English Jackman Coat looks related to the Jackson Coat, and reveals that the surname(s) is from pre-Conqueror Essex. As "Jack" is said to derive from "Jacobs," note that the English Jacobs Coat is also black and white. The link says that the surname was Anglo-Saxon, in Britain before the Conqueror arrived. It may have been from a Hebrew family, obviously. Hebrews of Britain trace to the Arthurian cult, perhaps explaining why "Jacques," the French variation of Jacobs\Jack, was first in D'ack of PicArdie.

The link at the Arthur (surname) Coat says that the derivation, "art(h)," means "bear." Perhaps this is untrue. I don't think it's a coincidence that the Arthur surname was first found in wickshire. See the black bear in the Arms of Berwickshire (taken from the Wikipedia article). It suggests that the Anglo term, "ber/bear," was used to found the Bernician term, which peoples may have originated in a bear-depicted peoples of Arda/Arta entities. The Greek for bear was "arca" (the ancient symbol of Greek's Arcadia, for example), and this term evolved into "ursa." From these two Greco-Latin terms we can see " "arth." This is a strong argument for the Bernician-Arthurian connection made earlier.

I would suggest that the holy grail of the Artho-Merovingian cult is about to rule the world in time for Armageddon, though in the end, God will crush the dragon in His Armageddon "winepress." A holy grail is filled with "wine," though in paganism this was literal blood. Remember the symbolism of Babylon the Great, as she holds a golden grail filled with her abominations, the blood of the saints of God.

It's been suspected that the Rhodes Illuminati, because it called itself the Roundtable, led back to Arthur's mythical roundtable. I have just found what seems like an excellent article on the Rhodes group, which I will read starting now because it promises to help identify the various entities of the society. No sooner did I start to read that I came across a short list of early members of the society, including sir Patrick Duncan. I checked the Duncan Coat to find that it's the shield of the Arthur (surname) Coat, and that it includes two cinquefoils. If you plug 40 or 50 surnames into the page, you will probably not come across a cinquefoil. The fact that I keep bumping into them when seeking people involved in the Obama team can only mean that the blood root of the symbol is important to the Rhodes group.

I'll be back for tomrrow's update.

March 6

The link at the English Milner Coat reveals that Cecil Rhodes was working with Hebrews, for Milner is a Hebrew surname. According to the book above, Cecil Rhodes started his globalist empire when coming together with the journalist William T. Stead, and Reginald Baliol Brett. We then read:

"The plan of organization provided for an inner circle, to be known as 'The Society of the Elect,' and an outer circle, to be known as 'The Association of Helpers.' Within The Society of the Elect, the real power was to be exercised by the leader, and a 'Junta of Three.' The leader was to be Rhodes, and the junta was to be Stead, Brett, and Alfred Milner. In accordance with this decision, Milner was added to the society by Stead shortly after the meeting we have described."

See Here

I knew that Stead and Milner were in cahoots before I found verification in the quote above, for I had by then seen the similarity in dog heads between those on the Stead Coat and those on the Milner Coat. As "Milner" is a variation of "Miller," see that the English Miller Coat has three dog heads that better reflect Stead-Coat heads. Here's more:

"From 1891 to 1902, it was known to only a score of persons. During this period, Rhodes was leader, and Stead was the most influential member. From 1902 to 1925, Milner was leader, while Philip Kerr (Lord Lothian) and Lionel Curtis were probably the most important members. From 1925 to 1940, Kerr was leader, and since his death in 1940 this role has probably been played by Robert Henry Brand (now Lord Brand)."

The Kerr and Curtis surnames should link to the Coriel term that was root to Leicester. Indeed, compare the Irish Kerr Coat with the Irish Cory/Coriell Coat; both use the six-armed jellyfish. Recall that the English Cory Coat uses three cinquefoils in its chief as evidence for a Leicester connection.

The shield of the Curtis Coat might be a version of the Dunham shield. Note that the crowns (not allowed in heraldry unless connected to royalty) in the Curtis Coat might refer to William the Conqueror (first king of Norman/Sinclair England), for it is thought the Curtis surname goes back to Robert Curthose, son of the Conqueror. Remember, the Dunham coat was adopted from the English Randolph surname, which I have recently traced back to William the Conquered's domain in the Cinque Ports (East Sussex), though Randolphs also moved to Moray, a region that I think was connected with the More of William's viking ancestors.

I'm re-enforcing here that Obama's mother's Dunham bloodline leads back to Sinclair-viking stock and that these vikings were one major root to original Cecil-Rhodes globalists. After the death of Rhodes, the organization was controlled mainly by Milner i.e. the Milner Group.

It would be a good bet that Fed-Bank chairman, Bernanke, is a part of the Bernician bloodline associated with Rhodians. It's now days after the Fed refused to disclose where the bail-out money is going, but the situation remains the same and is frustrating those who insist that disclosure is important. Is Obama going to come out and argue on behalf of transparency? Or will he side with the cover up?

"'If the American taxpayer's money is at stake, and it is, big time, I believe the American taxpayers, the people, and this committee, we need to know who benefited, where this money went,' said Senator Richard Shelby of Alabama, the committee's top Republican. 'There is no transparency here. We are going to find out.'"

I didn't know who the vice-chairman of the Fed was until I read the article above: Donald Kohn. That's a Cohen variation. It figures.

Here's what I think could be going on. The interest rates are so low these days because the priority is keep people borrowing to keep industry flowing. Banks can't make money at such low rates, however, and so banks connected to the Fed globalists are being compensated by tax payers. The Fed doesn't want to reveal that the banks being fed the money are parts of the Fed brotherhood, and/or that the banks really don't need the money to survive the "drought." What this amounts to is all tax payers paying for the interest that borrowers would otherwise pay if they were paying normal rates. Look at Bernake's duplicity:

"Fed Chairman Ben S. Bernanke and then Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson said in September they would meet congressional demands for transparency in a $700 billion bailout of the banking system."

That was before the bail-out money was given. The story has since changed. Obama also promised transparency to get his stimulus money. We shall see if transparency applies to ALL the expenditures.

These matters are just the tip of the iceberg. The powers over us have been stealing and stealing, and God knows it. He will expose them before he kills them. It wouldn't be like God to kill them without revealing what they have done. All their wealth, say the prophets, will go to the Kingdom of Israel, the Israel of God.


By a stroke of luck last night, I found the root of the Englis h Randolph Coat, which then led to other important information on the roots of Obama's mother. I found it only because I decided to do a search for the black horseshoes in the Scottish Randolph Coat. I was led to the webpage below showing and describing a few Arms in Derbyshire. The black horseshoes there belong to the Ferrers, though this does not necessary expose the Randolph horseshoes as pertaining to the Ferrers.

As I was reading the description of the Ferrer symbol, I hit the Alfreton link; this must have been fate, for had I not hit that link, I would not have known. I was brought to a second webpage describing Arms of a few more Derbyshire councils, and the first Arms on this second page was the key. It read: "The two gold chevrons on blue are from the arms of the FitzRanulphs" (no 'd' but close enough). I had just traced Ranolphs to the Sinclair Normans days before, wherefore I suspected that the gold chevron were two of the three belonging to the Clares.

In the course of a Google search for "Ranulph" connection to "Randolph," I arrived to a page showing that the daughter of Ranulph le Meschin (Earl of Chester, Lord of Cumberland) married Richard Fitz Gilbert de Clare. Another daughter of Ranulph le Meschin married William de Ferrers, Earl of Derby. These things were promising, for Cheshire was partly within the border of modern Derbyshire, and the Meschines of Cheshire named the town of Dunham Masci, the place that I had previously hypothesized as the root of Obama's mother, Anne Dunham.

A couple of hours were spent seeking evidence that FitzRanulphs of Derbyshire linked to Ranulph le Meschin. No luck, but my suspicions remained strong. In the end, after contemplating twice to leave the second webpage above showing the Alfreton Arms, by a stroke of fate I decided to look at the Latham Coat at because this second page claimed that Robert de Latham was an heir to the FitzRanulphs. This was the key. As you can see, the English Latham Coat uses the English Randolph Shield with colors reversed.

This is indisputable evidence that the Obama line back to Randolphs went further back to the fitzRanulphs of Alfreton (12th century). The black horseshoes in the Scot Randolph Coat might now link more likely to the Ferrers of Derbyshire, remembering that the Vere bloodline was a chief Aphrodite/Abruzzo bloodline to England. In fact, the two webpages describing various Arms of Derbyshire councils reveal that the symbol of Mars was rife in the area; Mars was mythically tied strongly to Aphrodite.

These webpages show multiple "rake" designs; at two descriptions I read that the design represents mountains. Beware the traditional meanings of symbols, as for example the Mars symbol on these webpages is said to represent the local iron industry. Aphrodite Hebrews were miners, for example the iron-inventing Halybes; the same stock of Hebrews mined copper on Aphrodite's island of Cyprus. It can be deduced that, sometimes, the families themselves do not know where their own symbols derive. The stag symbol is said to depict deer that were once in the Derby area, but even if stag-depicted family members knew of their ancestry in the Mures/Maros river of Arpad Transylvania, they might not like for the public to know; Hebrews have been in the habit of disquising their Hebrew-ness for fear of being abused or marginalized. For new readers, we're not talking Israelite Hebrews, but pagan Hebrews from Khaldi and Chaldean stock.

Hillary Rodham sounds like a mental case today:

"'Never waste a good crisis ... Don't waste it when it can have a very positive impact on climate change and energy security,' she said."

This recession is threatening to open wide the doors to a depression, and all she can think about is raising more tax-payer dollars to fight global warming and push wind/solar power. Of course, she's uttering this nonsense as echoes of the Obama agenda. Those of us who are sane realize that the world can wait until after the recession to work on such things not posing immediate/great threats. I think that science has come to the threshold of inventing viable alternative-energy sources because they will be used in the Millennial Kingdom of the King of kings.

Obama has still to admit that the falling stock market is the fault of his stymie package. The Dow Jones dropped a large fraction again yesterday. People are removing their share of money in corporations, which corps as a result have less to spend on their financial requirements. If something doesn't happen to fix the downward spiral very soon, a depression will set in.

Even though stock holders continue to sell their shares at a loss (fearing further fall of share values), Obama urges people to buy stocks at this time for the long haul. As this is his fix for the slide, economic experts are beginning to suspect that Obama is a nut, though I think he's also being controlled. I'm wondering if those in control of the economic downturn have lost control. Could be.

"Senate Banking Committee Chairman Christopher Dodd is moving to allow the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. to temporarily borrow as much as $500 billion from the Treasury Department.

The Connecticut Democrat's effort -- which comes in response to urging from FDIC Chairman Sheila Bair, Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke and Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner..."

Bair? Another bear? Sure enough, the German Bair Coat uses a brown bear as symbol. I get it. Sheila Bair, Bernanke, and Obama's right-hand man in crime, Timothy Geithner, urged Dodd to allow the borrowing of the half trillion for Bair's FDIC. I checked the Dodd surname, and although it's Welsh, it was first found in Cheshire (Welsh-English border) prior to the arrival of the Conqueror. Hmm. Then I checked the Chester surname that founded Cheshire's capital city (Chester), and learned that it was first found in Derbyshire. Keep in mind that the Mars-Aphrodite cult of Derbyshire was Celtic, and was therefore in Britain before the Conqueror.

The Ilkeston domain of Derbyshire uses a black (or is it brown/gold?) bear for a Crest and a black saltire for a main shield symbol. Recall that the Bernician Johnstone surname uses a black saltire, as does the Dutch De Beer Coat. The German Beer Coat uses the brown bear of the Bair Coat (the Bairs and Beers, though obviously related, were first recorded in different parts, Austria versus Silesia).

It therefore appears to me that the black saltire on white of Ilkeston depicts Bebbanburgs of Bernicia, for I had noted that Babenbergs of Germany often used black and white. The Dodd, Chester, and Gaither Coats are all black and white, as is the English Cory Coat also using a black saltire. The latter point becomes more important because I trace Corys to the founding of Leicester, while Ilkeston is near the Leicester border. I noticed that the webpage showing the Ilkeston Arms does not describe its symbols, though it describes the symbols of the other Coats. I'm suggesting that Ilkeston represented Bernicians who, though normally in England's far north, were also in Derbyshire.

Note that both the Ilkeston bear and saltire are pinned with the Mars symbol, perhaps representing the Merlin bloodline as it merged with Arthurian Bernicians. Merlin, I think, known to be from south Wales, was a depiction of Morgannwg.

After writing the above, I kid you not, I went back to the Drudge Report...from where I had accessed the article on Bair that got me into the discussion above in the first place. The next Drudge article I opened was the one on Lord Mandelson, Britain's business secretary. When I checked the Mandel Coat, I found that the surname was first in Glamorgan, which was Morgannwg!

The Mandel Coat is a white shield with a black symbol looking like the sideways 'M' of the Hastings Coat. In the Mandel Crest is what looks like the "flaming cressets or fire-baskets" in the chief of the Alfreton Arms. The Mandel page shows a "Jewish" Coat, while the German Mandel Coat uses six Zionist stars. Tell me, are "Jews" going to lead the world to the acceptance of the 666?

I continued to read the article to find, "The former deputy prime minister John Prescott..." So I checked the Prescott surname to find a black and white Coat (yawn) that looks like a cross between the Chester shield and Dodd sheild.

Hillary has pulled off a George Bush:

"Hillary Clinton raised eyebrows on her first visit to Europe as secretary of state when she mispronounced her EU counterparts' names and claimed U.S. democracy was older than Europe."

If George did this, he was called stupid or worse, but don't hold your breathe waiting for Dems to use the same standard on any Democrat idol. Do expect the Dems who grossly exaggerated Bush's goof-ups to make worse gaffes. Power has been Given to Democrats for only one reason: to punish and humiliate them. Power will go last of all to the greatest enemies of God.

There's a headline today: "Shoe reportedly thrown at Iranian president Ahmadinejad." The article says that the shoe thrower was strongly resentful of Ahmadinejad's nuclear program, for, just before getting away in the crowd, he yelled, "No nucular program, don't misunderoverestimate me!" The get-away car was driven by a balding, aging man.

As world opinion for Obama's Afghan war dwindles, CNN reported a few days ago that Steven Harper, prime minister of Canada, said: "U.S. and NATO forces are engaged in a futile war against the Taliban insurgency in Afghanistan." He flat-out says what others have been thinking but are too timid to say for fear of ruffling Obama's feathers.

I've emailed the Assyrian International News Agency twice, warning them of the anti-Christ's imminent entry into Mosul, and his beheading program of Revelation 20. No response. AINA acknowledges that Mosul is a powder keg about to blow, as per this latest article, but it seems intent on receiving Catholic Christians back into Mosul when others are wary. I'll email them again when I see Gog.

I also emailed Israel Today to share the URL to the Iraq updates, and hopefully they will listen when Gog does appear in Mosul. There is a lot of good that can be done if you and I can see him early in his appearance. While almost no-one may listen now, this situation should change.


Updates Index