ConCen
Coat Of Arms - Printable Version

+- ConCen (https://concen.org/oldforum)
+-- Forum: Main (https://concen.org/oldforum/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: Religion, New Age & The Occult (https://concen.org/oldforum/forum-21.html)
+--- Thread: Coat Of Arms (/thread-7130.html)

Pages: 1 2


Coat Of Arms - Machine9000 - 09-27-2008

Hello all,

I am new to the forums site at CS and this is my first post. I have been a member of the tracker for some time but I finally decided to get a bit more vocal and share some ideas of mine which may or may not be unique as well as ask some questions. This appears to be a big forum and it will be difficult for me to shuffle through all the posts. That said, I dont know if what I am about to post has ever been discussed so if it has I do apologize.

While it is no new theory I have been persuing the connection between Britian and Israel for quite some time. But this is not the purpose of this post. In my research I came across something strange that I wanted to share and if anyone takes interest, please post your comments and share your thoughts and knowlege of the topic.

I noticed that the Coat Of Arms of the Rothschild's is nearly identical to that of the UK Royal Family. The supporters of the crown for both are a lion and a unicorn. I did some research on these two characters in history and it seems they come up quite a bit in history.

First, here is a link to both coat of arms so you can compare them.

Rothschild Coat of Arms
[Image: 180px-Rotschilds_arms.jpg]

UK Royal Coat of Arms
[Image: 180px-UK_Royal_Coat_of_Arms.svg.png]


The furthest I was able to go back in history where I could find the lion and unicorn used together was on the Gateway of Ishtar

[Image: Ishtar%20Gate%20view%202.jpg]

One explanation I read was that the lion represents the golden sun while the unicorn represents the moon.

However consider the following which is a quote from another site.

Quote:Spain is known as the IBERIAN Peninsula - WHY?
Why isn't it called the Spanish Peninsula?
Why was Ireland called Iberia?

The word Iberia is a corruption of the word "Eber"ia / Heberia which means "Hebrew's Land". Eber (from whom the word Hebrew derives) was the grand-sire of the Hebrew Abraham (who was NOT Jewish - Jewdah was not born yet - he was the great-grandson of Abraham) who in turn was the grand-dad of "Jacob/Israel" who sired the "12 Tribes of Israel", by his 12 sons:- 1. Reuben; 2. Simeon; 3. Levi; 4. Judah [Jew-dah]; 5. Zebulun; 6. Issachar; 7. Dan; 8. GAD; 9. Asher; 10. Naphtali; 11. Joseph; 12. Benjamin (ALL 12 sons were Hebrews - NOT Jews - 1 Chronicles 1 v 24-28). Levi were the priests and were divided amongst the other tribes. Joseph/Manasseh took their place in battle and so substituted their own standard.

(The Unicorn was Joseph's Standard and so it was shared by both of his sons - Manasseh and Ephraim who ALONE were NAMED Israel by their grand-dad Jacob/Israel - Gen. 48:16).

The FIRST inhabitants of Iberia, from the Adamic Race, were Hebrews (NOT Jews and NOT Spaniards).

True Jews (those racially descended from Judah [Jew-dah], Jacob/Israel's fourth son, not converts to Judaism, which is a religion not a race) are all Hebrews but not all Hebrews are Jews, just as all Scots are British but not all of the British are Scots. The True Jewish people are descended from only 2 of the 12 Tribes of Israel, ALL 12 of whom are Hebrews.

The other Ten Tribes of Israel, who are NOT jewish, are collectively known as "The House of Israel".

Zaragoza in the Ebro (Hebrew) Valley was originally called ZARAH-GASSA which means "Stronghold of ZARAH." ZARAH / ZERAH was one of Judah's twin sons (Genesis 38:28-30), Judah himself being ONE (the fourth) of Jacob/Israel's TWELVE sons and a Hebrew.

Closer to Gibraltar, the River Guadalquivir was called, by the Moorish invaders, "Wadi-al-Hibri" meaning "River of the Hebrews." (So Gadites were still there.)

Cadiz was originally called "Gaderia" or "Gad's City" (Gad is one of the TEN Hebrew / Israelite Tribes who are NOT Jewish). This name was later changed by the Romans (formerly of Babylon) to "Gades" (pronounced GADIZ) and now it is known as CADIZ.

Therefore Iberia belongs, RIGHTFULLY, to the (British/Israel) HEBREWS whose name it bears.

"And God said unto Jacob - now called ISRAEL ..... A NATION AND A 'COMPANY' OF NATIONS (a 'Commonwealth' of nations) shall be of thee, and kings shall come out of thy loins" - Genesis 32:28; 35:11.

Central Iberia was invaded by the Romans; Vandals and others and these invaders drove the majority of the Hebrews out, to BRITAIN (from where they spread West to America; East to India and Australasia; North to Canada and South to Africa, in exactly the order prophesied by God in Genesis 28 v 14), leaving only a few Hebrews along the Northern; Western and Southern coast-lands :-

Vizcaya and Galicia in the North; Costa de la Luz (Light) in the West and The Camp of Gibraltar in the South.

That is WHY the Basques and Galicians want independence from the rest of Spain because they are from a totally different race, being descended from Hebrews, not from Romans (formerly Babylonians) or Vandals.

The Vandals invaded Southern Iberia and named it Vandalucia (Andalucia today), however the land itself is still known today as Iberia - "The HEBREW's Land", NOT Vandal's or Roman's land or Spaniard's land.

Therefore the Spanish people, who are not Hebrews, are NOT the RIGHTFUL possessors of Iberia - the Hebrews are (not Jews).

Now let us analyse the Gibraltarian side of the argument.

The word BRIT-ISH is Hebrew and it means "the people of the Covenant", in other words "the People Israel" - ALL of whom are HEBREWS (NOT Jews).

(UNRELATED NOTE*** Siberia also includes IBERIA and Ireland was also known as IBERIA)

So, if the lion and the unicorn are symbols for Jews then why does the UK display Jewish symbols in their coat of arms if they are Hebrews and not Jews? And why do the Rothschilds who are Ashkanazim (or converted Jews) do the same?



In addition I have been scanning through two great books which have been scanned by Google for preservation and are downloadable for free:

Our Descent from Israel Proved by Cumulative Evidence (1940)
http://books.google.com/books?id=_Ru-3QQFE...=result#PPP8,M1

Our Inheritance in the Great Pyramid (1880)
http://books.google.com/books?id=HvXI8lWaG...=result#PPR3,M1

The Banner Of Israel (1881)
http://books.google.com/books?id=0KoTAAAAY...rael%22#PPP1,M1


The last one is a hoot:) The cover alone is intriguing. I found it for sale on Amaozon for $1000.00 USD used. DAMN!!! I'll take the free pdf thanks....


Coat Of Arms - Midfield.Enforcer - 09-30-2008

Quote:The word BRIT-ISH is Hebrew and it means "the people of the Covenant", in other words "the People Israel" - ALL of whom are HEBREWS (NOT Jews).


That's just not true. If you get a dictionary (or just use Wikipedia - the entry is pretty much the same) you will find the etymological roots of the word British and it isn't Hebrew/Jewish. It's Latin/Roman!!

"Greek and Roman writers between the first century BC and the first century AD describe the inhabitants of Great Britain and Ireland as Priteni, the origin of the Latin word Britannic. Etymologicum Genuinum and Parthenius mention of Bretannus (the Latinized form of the Ancient Greek Βρεττανός) as a Celt forefather of the Britons. It has been suggested that this name came from a Gaullish description meaning "people of the forms" referring to their practice of tattooing or painting their bodies using blue woad. By 50 BC Greek geographers were using equivalents of Prettanikē as a group name for the islands. However, with the Roman conquest of Britain the Latin term Britannia was used for the island of Great Britain."

Where's the mention of Jews/Hebrews there?? Or do you just subscribe blindly to the Jordan Maxwell school of evidence, i.e if you can't find any - make it up because your audience is too stupid to check.:rolleyes:

peace


M.E


Coat Of Arms - TeslaandLyne - 10-01-2008

Eber, Grand-dad of the Jews, from the Adamic Race.

So that goes back in time big time.

Check out Bill Lyne's next book about ancient trade.

The Danes (from the tribe of Dan) traded for copper from the Indians in
Canada and Main and headed up the Bronze age.

Egyptian writing in the south west on ruins indicate knowledge of
Egypt and genetic traits of people left behind indicate a
Sumerian heritage.

The Rothschild Coat of Arms has a lot more stuff on top.

Illuminati headquarters.

ED: Old editions of Lyne's book go for $300 and the new is $25.
Some seem to want the second edition for some reason.
They talk to him every day and there are thousands of illegal copies
of his books on the internet.
Illuminati making net money off conspiracy.



Coat Of Arms - --- - 10-01-2008

Quote:
Quote:The word BRIT-ISH is Hebrew and it means "the people of the Covenant", in other words "the People Israel" - ALL of whom are HEBREWS (NOT Jews).


That's just not true. If you get a dictionary (or just use Wikipedia - the entry is pretty much the same) you will find the etymological roots of the word British and it isn't Hebrew/Jewish. It's Latin/Roman!!

"Greek and Roman writers between the first century BC and the first century AD describe the inhabitants of Great Britain and Ireland as Priteni, the origin of the Latin word Britannic. Etymologicum Genuinum and Parthenius mention of Bretannus (the Latinized form of the Ancient Greek Βρεττανός) as a Celt forefather of the Britons. It has been suggested that this name came from a Gaullish description meaning "people of the forms" referring to their practice of tattooing or painting their bodies using blue woad. By 50 BC Greek geographers were using equivalents of Prettanikē as a group name for the islands. However, with the Roman conquest of Britain the Latin term Britannia was used for the island of Great Britain."

Where's the mention of Jews/Hebrews there?? Or do you just subscribe blindly to the Jordan Maxwell school of evidence, i.e if you can't find any - make it up because your audience is too stupid to check.:rolleyes:

peace


M.E

Good Post - taking the time to look into it...although this doesn't discount the belief existent in British Israelism


Coat Of Arms - TeslaandLyne - 10-01-2008

Emperor Claudius' son was named Britannicus.

But who came first.


http://www.roman-emperors.org/claudius.htm






Coat Of Arms - yeti - 10-01-2008

Did anyone notice that the unicorn in the British Coat Of Arms is chained?

That's us folks...


Coat Of Arms - Machine9000 - 10-02-2008

Midfield.Enforcer

Interesting reply but I have to disagree. The word Brit IS HEBREW in origin. I have confirmed this with many Jews.

Briss Brit milah

bə’rīt mī’lā literally: covenant [of] circumcision

And you are speaking of Latin/Roman roots of the word Brit when I am discussing Phoenicia circa 2000 BC. Furthermore, if you read the links I provided in the article, you will see that the hypothesis is that Anglo-Sexons who were of Germanic origin were also Hebrew. Now I am not saying that this is true becuase it is not provable but it is simply something to ponder over and explore further.

In addition only Northern European countires end with ISH when referring to the people of the respective countries. ie. British, Danish, Sweedish, Finnish, Flemish, Irish, Scotish, Polish

Just as YIDDISH means JEW(Yid) MAN (ish)

The only exception to the rule is Turkish but that probably links into Khazaria somehow as most Khazarians were Turkic.


Coat Of Arms - --- - 10-02-2008

Transcripts of the talks

http://www.cuttingthroughthematrix.com/tra..._Dec072004.html


here's one of them part two

http://www.cuttingthroughthematrix.com/tra..._Dec082004.html


Jackie: That's what I was wondering, the word Torah of course is in the Jews' holy book and I began to wonder well maybe that could be checked out. I mean if the Japanese word for attack is Tora – do you know that, if it is, Alan?



Alan: I'm not certain but that's definitely what they broadcast as they were going in and they said it three times, which is strangely Masonic because that's how Masonic instructions are. They're always in triplicate.



Jackie: I was trying to do a search for that earlier this evening and I just asked Jeeves do you know what this tora, tora, tora means and it just kept bringing up stuff about the Torah but I found something interesting. The first five books of the Old Testament being the Torah, I wound up in this Jewish website and I think it's called Judaism 101 or something of frequently asked questions, what does tora mean? They said, listen folks, it can have several meanings. The Torah can mean the first five books of the Old Testament, which they call the Book of Moses, or it can be all of that writing in what Christians call the Old Testament, or it can be the first five books of that Old Testament which is their Torah and all of the subsequent writings that make up the entire Talmud. So for Christians who want to put so much emphasis and attention on that Old Testament, Alan, like it's the world of God. You know what I mean? I thought that was quite fascinating and I'll tell you what else they said. They said for the Jews there is no Old Testament, yet they say the reason they're taking all that land in Israel is because it is their biblical mandate. They didn't say Talmudic mandate. They said it’s their biblical mandate. So they claim the Bible when it serves them, don't they?



Alan: That's what most legalists do. Anything to do with legalism or law is just a matter of picking and choosing what parts you want to use for that particular purpose. That's what law is all about. When you look at the supposed history of how the Old Testament was written, and you've got to remember 2,000 years ago, the Old Testament that they were given was written in Greek. It wasn't in Hebrew. It was written in Greece by a bunch of priests who supposedly were in Egypt around 200, 300 BC. This is the story, 72 priests who happened to be in Egypt wrote it in Greek for the Jews who spoke Aramaic.



Jackie: They were in Egypt translating it into Greek for the Jews who spoke Aramaic.



Alan: That's correct. That makes a lot of sense, right? It was a compilation of esoteric stories really, not the exoteric ones, of the mystery religion that had been in existence for a long, long time before that. I mean Moses is just another form of Hermes, basically. Hermes is the truly enlightened figure and so the illumined one can go up the mountain, while the rest of the people, who are the mob, are in the dark, they must stay below. Going up the mountain is symbolic of the illumined one. Moses is just the Egyptian word for child and it's just dropped the Ra, the child of Ra, Ra-moses.



Jackie: Son of?



Alan: Yes, child of Ra. It's all esoteric high masonry basically.



Jackie: Let me hear your take on the "Ten Commandments?" He went up the mountain and he became enlightened and he came down with the Ten Commandments on these two huge, what do you call them, stones? Then he got ticked off and broke them and had to go get another set.



Alan: Well, he broke the law.



Jackie: He broke the law.



Alan: He was the first guy to break the law.



Jackie: So that story is an esoteric?



Alan: Yes, it's all esoteric.



Jackie: Do you think Moses really existed?



Alan: No. As I say, it's the same in all the ancient mystic religions. There's always a Moses or a Hermes type figure and Hermes is always related to the god Soth or Thoth in Egypt who was also the one who gave law in writing to the people. Moses is a combination of Hermes and Soth.



Jackie: Did you say that the esoteric message in there, does that have anything to do with the Kabbalah, the ancient mysteries?



Alan: Even though the Kabbalah has been added to, especially around the 1500's onwards, it definitely – even Wallace Budge who translated lots of the old Egyptian for the London Museum, he claims that he found much of the Kabbalah already existed in ancient Egypt. It's not a modern thing at all, although it has been added to since the 1500's and it's the same with the Talmud. The Talmud was a Babylonian religion which was taken over, or at least a bunch of people came out of Babylon with an updated religion that was based on the Babylon Talmud. That's when Judaism began.



Jackie: Did the Pharisees not exist yet?



Alan: No. Supposedly, according to the mythology, they were taken into captivity from Israel into Babylon where they were there for a couple of hundred years. When they went in they had Levi, the priests, and a set of rituals and so on, basically the Books of Moses or at least the oral tradition of Moses. When they came out they had Talmud, which is now the main book, and they had the Pharisaical priesthood and the Sadducees, which again, as in all these mystic religions, has double meanings. The Sadducees who were the supposed nobility of the supposed Jews and I've no doubt they were the nobility of Babylon that came out there. Their symbol was the serpent and you'll find too in the Jewish traditions of Moses the brazen serpent that he had made to go in front of him with the wings and a serpent on the staff was put into a sacred grove and it was worshiped there basically for a couple of hundred years. The Sadducees, again, have this serpent symbol and remember, too, it's really a Latin term. We're reading a Latinized name here, Sadducees, and if you take the S and put it back into a C, you have the Caduceus.



Jackie: Caduceus, and that was their staff right?



Alan: The serpent again, so it's all games and tricks you see and the blind cannot see. That's the whole idea. Those who have no eyes don't see what's right in front of them. They play these games with us all the time. Pharisees is also a play on pharaoh, you see, and Pharis- and Paris is actually the eagle, so that's the royal eagle, basically.



Jackie: The eagle for whom, the royalty?



Alan: Yes, the ancient mystery religion which ran Babylon, Egypt and all the old worlds.



Jackie: Would you pronounce that and you said the Sadducees and then you put a C in it and how did you pronounce that?



Alan: Caduceus. That's the same symbol you'll see on every ambulance with the serpent round the staff.



Jackie: It's the symbol of the doctors? American Medical Association et cetera?



Alan: Yes and if you take the two – generally it's two intertwined serpents, you'll have the figure 8, which is "as above, so below," the two circles, and it's also the double helix of the gene. All of this stuff is highly symbolic and we take it for granted simply because we grew up and seen them everywhere. We never question their origins or what they really mean. If you look at the Greek occupation prior to the Roman occupation of that whole area—we can call it the supposed Holy Land—on the Greek maps there is no Israel.



Jackie: Oh, I was going to ask you that when you mentioned that they were taken out of Israel into Babylon. Israel didn’t exist at that time, did it?



Alan: There's no mention in the Persian, Egyptian or anybody else's histories of Israel. On the Greek's maps they had an entire area that was called Edomia for the Edomians. All we can really say is that the whole idea of an Israel began much later with a bunch of people coming out of Babylon.



Jackie: You were explaining the other night, Isis, Ra and El. IS-RA-EL and so if that's the trinity, would then that be a goddess trinity, being Isis, being the mother goddess?



Alan: It's more than just that. It's the sun, the moon together as the hermaphrodite because even in Judaic religions they have a whole tradition to do with god that is both male and female and again it pre-existed Judaism. Plato also talks about it, that when the god turned one way he was woman and when he turned the other he was man, so he's also hinting at the same esoteric deity that the aristocracy of ancient Greece worshiped. It's the same ancient doctrine.



Jackie: And they believe that the first man that was made was actually a hermaphrodite?



Alan: If you were to take it literally – if it was the Creator that made this particular man for the garden, the Eden story--



Jackie: Male and female created he them?



Alan: He said in the perfect image of himself he made man, you see. Now if he was male and female, then that's what they're hinting at, that Adam himself would be both, and then they took the female from Adam and he separated the two.



Jackie: Do you think they were doing some cloning?



Alan: If you go into the other histories that we're often taught to ignore, such as the histories of India, the Brahmans claim that the Brahmans of Northern India survived a catastrophe in the previous age. They said eventually the area where the Black Sea is was a huge valley which was used as an experimental laboratory where different types of humans were created and it all went sort of awry because they were mixing animals with humans and they started to eat each other, and so what they did was flood the whole valley and that became the Black Sea and that's in their histories.



Jackie: Then there's where the Khazars came from or at least there's where they landed?



Alan: You'll find too that that was also like a Miami for the holiday-makers of the nobility of ancient Greece they traveled to and then Rome as well. Always was.



Jackie: They went to Khazaria for their Roman holidays?



Alan: That's right, Khazaria by the sea. There's much, much older histories involved here and of course they think that the Troy itself was up that way somewhere, the original Troy, and there's no doubt they have found buildings by submarine. In the last few years they've found buildings one hundred feet or more beneath the surface of the Black Sea and they don't know how far down these buildings go. They're submerged.



Jackie: Isn't it a possibility that that all got covered up in that big deluge, that big conflagration that Immanuel Velikovsky wrote of?



Alan: I think this one was more deliberate.



Jackie: Do they have a timeline as to when it became a sea rather than a city?



Alan: Velikovsky's explanation would be around 1300 BC and this was prior to that. As I say, the Old Testament in Masonic parlance basically gives the rules of the game of this system in which we live.



Jackie: The rules of the game. Big game, right Alan? It's a real game.



Alan: It's the system. It's a system again based on money, wealth, debt, slavery and so on. It gives all of the rules. It's interesting to note as well that the Pharisees were the black-robed priests when they emerged from Babylon.



Jackie: Like the judges today?



Alan: The judges are exactly the same and of course that represents Saturn in the old mystery religion and Saturn was the father of the god; and they're not real gods. They're representatives of parts of the system. That's what Jupiter and so on all mean.



Jackie: Was it Zeus whose father was Saturn?



Alan: Saturn in Greek was Kronos (Κρόνος, Cronos, Chronos, etc.), so you go between the Greek and Roman. They have different names for the same thing.



Jackie: Zeus became Zeus-Pater or god the father and that's where Jupiter came from? The Greeks had Zeus-Pater. The Romans had Jupiter or Jove, which is Jehovah?



Alan: Yehovah, so it's the same thing.



Jackie: I remember that you had mentioned too that the story of Moses birth and being put into the brushes, hidden et cetera was an exact take off of the story of Sargon the Elder of was it Babylon?



Alan: That's right. He had the same story behind him and of course, again, it's a play on words because Cone or Cohen was priest in the Old Testament. That's where King comes from eventually through different dialects, but Cohen was priest and Cain was priest and so when they talk about bulrushes and the canes it's all symbology of a priesthood. It's an esoteric story combined within it.



Jackie: And the Ten Commandments?



Alan: Again, I mean there were a lot more than ten, but according to modern Judaism they have the whole Mishnah, which is the oral tradition, which is supposedly is the secret tradition that Moses gave to his followers and that was meant only for – it's crazy because there were no Jews when supposedly Moses gave them this, there was only Hebrews.



Jackie: And the world Hebrew is the word Habiru?



Alan: Habiru is the term that came up by the Egyptians of an invading people who came in from the highland areas to the northeast and invaded and took over Egypt for a period. They were vicious mercenaries basically.



Jackie: The Habiru? And that was the Hebrew, right?



Alan: That's what historians today think they must be and they do know that some of them had Semitic names, not all of them, though, but the Habiru was a conglomeration of different peoples. It wasn't just one race of people and they were all nomadic initially, until they settled within Egypt, and they were the most tyrannical rulers Egypt ever had and there was a General eventually who started an uprising to kick them out.



Jackie: The Hyksos are mentioned that way. Is that one in the same people?



Alan: It's the same thing. The Hyksos refers to another term they went by, and that was shepherd kings.



Jackie: Okay. This is still the same Habiru?



Alan: Yes.



Jackie: So they weren't taken into Egypt and enslaved, that they actually went in to and enslaved Egyptians?



Alan: There were two forces that came into Egypt at the same time. One from the Mediterranean Sea and they were called the Boat People, and another bunch came by land driving their animals before them and with them. The Hyksos, they often say shepherd kings, but 'Hyks' really refers to cattle, that they drove cattle ahead of them, and Habiru was the mercenaries who backed them up, basically, armed forces.



Jackie: So the more things change, the more they stay the same because they were the mercenaries.



Alan: Yes and so they took over Egypt. They slaughtered thousands of the Egyptians and then the Habiru nobility made themselves pharaohs for a couple of hundred years until they were eventually kicked out again.



Jackie: And the story of the Exodus. Isn't it amazing how they took that worldwide conflagration and wove it into a story around these special chosen people of Jehovah?



Alan: It's more than that. Again, it's an esoteric story of a group coming out of Egypt, but the real story was to do with Akhenaten priesthood. He was the pharaoh who they claim was the first guy to say that all gods are one and Aton was the god.



Jackie: And he closed down all of the temples, didn't he?



Alan: All the Amons and so on.



Jackie: We're getting to take that break at the half hour.



Alan: I guess I'll just talk about the Peoples of the Sea and the Hyksos in the meantime and the Peoples of the Sea may have come from the Grecian Islands at the same time as the land invaders were coming across from the east.



Jackie: I'm listening again. Thank you, Alan. Is there more you wanted to say about this?



Alan: The esoteric part of the coming out of Egypt is to do with an entire Washington, D.C.-size bureaucracy, the priests who had their brand new city of Amarna destroyed, and they were forced out basically. They were an Egyptian priesthood and of course they were following Akhenaten, basically. That was the real esoteric story behind it, that all God is one, you see. They called themselves slaves to the god or servants. They were public servants. That's where the term comes from and so that's what all the high Masons know of the truth of the coming out of Egypt and what it's all about. It's their system that was to take over the world coming out of one country and moving elsewhere.



Jackie: I have a book called "Thirty Thousand Gods Before Jehovah" and it's a very fascinating book and it told a lot of the language that you had told us how words are made and what they mean. Even our alphabet has its own little code and then they mentioned the Caduceus and according to this book, they referred to the L and they used that name a lot. They showed how often so many names end in L or begin with L, meaning God, that this priesthood is the one that actually even set the boundaries where before there were no political or national boundaries and that they actually went and set boundaries and actually changed the language. They said that is why so many of the languages have similarities, but their passport to every country that they went was the Caduceus and that was the staff with the serpents around it and they took translators with them because there were translators that could speak every language of every nation and they call them the bounds. I mean they literally set nationhood. I mean you've talked about that before, that they're the ones that dreamed up the nations because if there weren't nations there wouldn't be countries fighting against each other.



Alan: And you could not have a nobility arising



Jackie: Ruling over a nation.



Alan: There has to be a government because governments say that themselves, that their first reason for existing is to protect the people against those guys over there.



Jackie: They set up all these boundaries and now their intention is to destroy all the boundaries?



Alan: Yes, because they claim that the Great Work or this part of the Great Work came to these enlightened guys around 4,000 BC. That's what they claim and that's also part of Judaic or Talmudic law, that the Great Work was begun 4,000 BC.



Jackie: 6,000 years ago. The rabbis claim that they know the exact time and date that the world was created.



Alan: In a sense they do because it's the system they're talking about.



Jackie: Okay, their world.



Alan: It's the beginning of the system.



Jackie: It's amazing because I remember when you were with us so often back there late '98 early '99 and that was the first time I had even known anything about "international priesthood" and now in so many books that I read the priesthood is mentioned and I've just never seen it before.



Alan: It's all coming out now, but they definitely existed and when you do check out the esoteric traditions of the elite of Jewry you'll find the same esoteric traditions with the ancient elite of Greece and Rome and of the present nobility of Europe and the States. It's the same ancient tradition and religion within them all, so there is one religion running the whole show here.



Jackie: I wrote a little note down last night. A thought that came to me, actually it's a friend of mine who was listening to another broadcaster and then said that she doesn’t listen anymore because there's too much negativity. I won't mention names because I'm not saying this to be unkind, but that a lot of times it's said there was nothing you're going to be able to do about it and she said why would he even be on the air if he tells all this terrible stuff and says there's nothing you can do about it. Really, Alan, as far as doing something about it, what does one do?



Alan: Obviously, if you live in a complete iron-clad system you can't do anything about it if you use the methods that are given to you. There's no point in complaining about it because nothing is going to change the agenda that's well underway, especially at this phase of it, and so there's no point in complaining to your representatives. They all belong to a political party and their boss is the guy at the head of the party and since they're all social climbers they're not going to go against their party. They'll do what they're told. In fact, I believe they just passed the second Patriot bill, today was it?



Jackie: I brought up an email today from yesterday that said that it had passed the House and that it was expected to pass the Senate today.



Alan: Three thousand pages of laws and nobody read it, so that tells you what your representatives are.



Jackie: How could anybody have read it? Three thousand pages?



Alan: I know but it was the same with the first one when they were told that they'd be unpatriotic if they read it.



Jackie: And yet, here we are, doing these radio broadcasts, sharing information, hopefully bringing truth, understanding and awareness to people. There are people who are led at certain stages of their understanding and their awakening, I guess, to do certain things. Ken and I talked this weekend that I was at one point for an example the people that get into the "law" and I think how futile. I have this knee-jerk how futile to take a case into a court where they're so corrupt and yet it occurred to me one time that it is not for me to judge what other people are made to do because maybe it is a compilation of all of the little things that each individual does that makes the difference.



Alan: Well, definitely using the system, which is law, you see, it might be important for that individual in that sense, but technically it isn't going to change the agenda.



Jackie: It won't change the agenda but maybe if enough people are awakened. You had said this for example about the Federal Reserve system but when I challenged you because I thought Tupper Saussy's idea was pretty cool that people within the state would have the IOU that they would present for fines or fees et cetera, taxes, in the state, and say as soon as we have gold and silver coin we intend to pay. You had said no, it's not going to work. I said well at least it's something and you said no because you cannot get out of the system by using their system. Gold. They own and control the gold. They might not own it all but they certainly control it.



Alan: They also fix the prices of it.



Jackie: That's what I was going to say, the value.



Alan: FDR confiscated the gold. They can confiscate anything they want.



Jackie: But one of the things that you said that took a long while to gel for me, when you said that you cannot get out of the system by using the system and that makes sense and then I said okay well then what is your solution and you said – this is what took a while to gel. That as soon as enough people understand it, it will collapse of itself, because you bring something like this into the light of awareness and understanding and it can only exist in the darkness out of which it was created and that it's up to each and every one of us as individuals how we be.



Alan: How we be and everything boils down to individual choices as to where you are in your life or on your journey and it's true enough. Here's your mirror image. There's no doubt about it that you do come out of the darkness into the light and when you come into the light then your mind, your body, your spirit, your soul all act in unison and you do begin to radiate something from yourself to others. Your abilities are definitely increased. As Arnold Toynbee said in his international meeting of the World Socialist Party, and he taught the Rhode Scholars and he was one of the one-worlders of his day at Oxford University, but he said that a person who's awake can think a thought that will be picked up all over the world simultaneously as it's being thought; it's instant. They know that this actually works and we again in a scientific age, as they try to atheise the public in order to control them, we tend to forget that there are other forces at work here in this realm and there's no doubt about it. As you truly wake up you'll find that synchronicities become more than just synchronicities and you can actually think about something and you'll hear people suddenly spontaneously discuss it the following day, and I'm sure that it would never pop into their heads unless you'd thought the thought in the first place. This is the power of thought in itself and for thought to be pure and powerful it has to come from someone who is awake, and I don't mean just partly awake or they think they're fighting the New World Order and trying to preserve the old because the old was never theirs either. It's all stages.



Jackie: To fix it or to turn this thing around, heck, why would we want it turned around?



Alan: You can go back to the debt system of today or whenever. It's the same con game, but for these people to play their godhood role, as they truly want to do, they must conquer every mind on the planet because you can't be ultimate and supreme or a god if there's somebody left standing that you haven't conquered.



Jackie: Yes and you brought that up. It’s out of George Orwell's "1984" and I could not figure out why when they caught Winston Smith why they spent so much time torturing him until he finally could actually see that three fingers were four or whatever it was and then they killed him.



Alan: That's right. It's not good enough they said that you tell me that, you must believe it.



Jackie: When I was questioning you about it but I couldn't figure out why they didn't just kill him in the first place that was what you brought up. Everybody, before they are counted successful by their own measurement, every mind has to be controlled by them.



Alan: Every knee must bow. That's what they're after to themselves and they will coerce and cajole and use force where required until everyone does it. They tend to use coercion until you have to go into a certain direction, but ultimately they use force on those who do not.



Jackie: Let me ask you this because this thought went through my mind is that it also comes down to the emotional energy that we put out, so when we are living in fear, when we're living in hatred, when we're living in anger, we are actually feeding the beast, the system.



Alan: Oh absolutely. They're like vampires.



Jackie: Spiritual vampires.



Alan: This whole system is fear based. That's why there are no certainties in life except the fact you're going to pay taxes and die.



Jackie: So people have asked me how can you not hate them, I've just said I've chosen not to and if I do hate I'm not aware of it, because I know we can fool ourselves sometimes, but what they do is they go back to the Bible and say well Jesus said we are supposed to hate. You know, love the sinner but hate the sin or something. Well that word is a pretty strong word and would you comment on that?



Alan: The only part in the New Testament where – Christians for such a long time have been taught this strange thing of turning the other cheek and of course I'm sure that was added in there – and the Bible has been updated so many times, even from the earliest times. In fact reincarnation was its natural functioning up until the 6th century AD, the Second Council of Constantinople, they decided to take that out of the Bible.



Jackie: Under Justinian. I've got a paper on that but I've tried to do some research basically on the Internet and I can't find anything that verifies that.



Alan: You'll find it in the Vatican papers if you go into the Catholic website because the Vatican admitted that. In fact, recently they gave an apology for having removed all this in the 6th century. They gave a public apology. It was earlier this year in fact.



Jackie: So literally removing references in the New Testament referring to reincarnation?



Alan: Yes.



Jackie: Well, I'm glad to hear that confirmed here because it makes sense to me and there are a couple of places in there it looks like they may have forgotten about or left in on purpose.



Alan: That's why there are so many contradictions. The Catholic Church you must remember was actually the Roman Empire. They transferred from military might to psychological might; power over the mind was much easier and actually more effective than armies and so they kept updating and removing and so on parts of the New Testament.



Jackie: And put words in Jesus mouth that would tie the New Testament back to the Old Testament and then that proves to people that the Old Testament is the world of God.



Alan: Yes, even though they did leave in, he says, I come to fulfill it and this is the new covenant. He gave the new covenant. This is brand new.



Jackie: You mentioned that one night and we really didn't get into it because you said the New Testament was the new covenant. In other words, from my understanding the Christians believed that Jehovah of the Old Testament being "God" that when Jesus came the new covenant was made and that it is the same god that it's just a different system now.



Alan: He never mentions Jehovah.



Jackie: I know but he said something about I did not come to destroy the law but to fulfill it. Well, to me I believe he was talking about the universal law of creation.



Alan: Very possible.



Jackie: I don't think he was talking about the man's law.



Alan: There's simply no comparison between what he was teaching in his day to the Old Testament. There's no comparison at all. I mean the Old Testament was an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth and all that kind of stuff and traditions.



Jackie: And wars and slavery and killing and slaughter.



Alan: Get rich and all that, and he preached the opposite to all of that. There's no comparison whatsoever and of course that's why modern Jewry claimed that he was – that's why he was killed, because he was preaching against all of their beliefs. He was a heretic of that time.



Jackie: You said that he had studied the mysteries and he became a renegade?



Alan: He was openly (I say openly) but it was for those amongst the listeners who could understand the esoteric behind the stories that he was getting, but he was getting it out to the public and these were sacred things that were to be kept for inner religion.



Jackie: They didn't want people to know that.



Alan: People don't realize that the Pharisees were a brotherhood unto themselves and they had their own esoteric religion just for the Pharisees.



Jackie: Those would be the Levites?



Alan: Not Levites. They were no Levites by then.



Jackie: Those priests really raked in, didn't they, in the name of Jehovah? It counts all the gold and silver that was brought to them and all the animals and all the first of this and first of that, as though it were going to be given to "Jehovah" and the priests were just getting filthy rich.



Alan: Yes they were and they were also really enslaving the people because as Jesus said the people are so bound down with man made laws; you wouldn't believe how many rituals they had to go through in a day. People were being bound down with all of these laws and rules and so on that they could hardly get a days work done and if they broke any of the taboos (that's what it was all about, taboos), they had to go and cleanse themselves and so on before they could start all over again. Meanwhile, as Jesus said, you make all these laws that bind down my people but you don't follow them yourselves; so we're back to the old hypocrisy business which is ever present with us. However, the Pharisaical sect were a sect and they had an esoteric religion for themselves, which were not shared with the people they lorded over. They claim to possess the secret laws of Moses at that time, which became the Mishna, and they have dozens and dozens of other laws and rules that Gentiles have never heard of. It's far more complicated than the school system we've all been brought up in to believe and as I say there's no trace of an Israelite people ever having existed in the ancient records of well-established empires that existed supposedly at the same time as Israel and before it. The Persians took copious records. The Egyptians – they're still digging up records from all the different parts of the empires that they ruled and there is no Israel mentioned anywhere.



Jackie: We only have a couple of minutes left. Do you observe Christmas?



Alan: Not for me. I mean it's just – in fact, it's well admitted that's simply the turn over into the spring when the sun hangs in the air for three days. It doesn't go any further north and then it starts all over again. It starts going further north, so that was always the ancient tradition.



Jackie: Some people say he was born in April. Some say he was born in October and I guess it really just doesn't matter what the name was but the fact that there was a very deeply loving spirit that came to this world to bear witness unto the truth.



Alan: It was to show a way. What he was showing was all of the ways to defeat the system.

http://www.outlawjournalism.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2018



Coat Of Arms - --- - 10-02-2008

A 19th Century British Scholar Explains Why the Western World Never Learned About the Indian Origins of the Jews.

Though not generally known in this day and age, Godfrey Higgins (1772-1833), archeologist, politician, humanitarian, social reformer, and author, was one of the most enlightened and educated men of early 19th century England. He was a well-known iconoclast, rationalist, and admirer of the Jews, who vehemently opposed any kind of persecution of this ancient religious group. He wrote two oversized volumes, totaling around 1600 pages of fine print, about the Jews' Indian origins. These two volumes, entitled Anacalypsis, are extremely rare. The last printing was done in 1965 by University Books, NY. It's a difficult book to read because the author painstakingly proved the minutest of details in his dissertation. Even good readers need several weeks to finish it.

The first printing consisted of only 200 copies, twenty of which he had to give away. Only a few of the remaining 180 copies were sold. For nearly thirty years, the religious communities of England and Europe quietly suppressed the book. It has since been reprinted three times, but including the first printing, the total copies printed never totaled over a thousand. Only occasionally can it be found in a library. Even so, many authors have quoted and plagiarized it. Not a few spiritual charlatans, such as fraudulent mystics, psychics, and the Presbyterian preacher who wrote the novel on which The Book of Mormon is based, used Anacalypsis to produce their respective heresies and agendas. The famous 19th century mystic and founder of Theosophy, Madam Blavatsky, took advantage of the world's nearly total ignorance of this magnificent document, using much of Higgin's information, to convince the gullible that she had acquired her "mystical knowledge" from "otherworldly" sources called "Akashic records."

Godfrey Higgins gave an opinion that I have always espoused, which explains in part why the similarities of peoples, languages, philosophies, and place names between India and the Middle East became lost to the memory of mankind after Christianity and Islam took over the West.

"The outlines of the history of the extended empires, which I have here exhibited, would have been more conspicuous had our makers of maps and histories recorded the names of the places as they must have appeared to them. But from their native religious prejudices and necessary ignorance of the nature of the history, it seemed to them absurd to believe, that there should be places or persons in the East having exactly the same names as places and persons in the West; and to avoid the feared ridicule of their contemporaries, which in fact in opposition to the plainest evidence, and which they themselves could not entirely resist, that they thought well-founded, they have, as much as possible disguised the names. Thus, that which otherwise they would have called David-pouri, they called Daud-poutr, Solomon, Soleiman; Johnguior, Jahanguior, etc., etc. In the same way, without any wrong intention, they have been induced to secrete the truth, in many cases, from themselves, by hastily adopting the idea that the old Jewish names of places have been given by the modern Saracens or Turks, the erroneousness of which a moment's unprejudiced consideration would have shewn...I shall here merely add, that...I have observed...a great similarity in the countries where the tribes of Judah were settled in the East and in the West. The Western country seems, as much as possible, to have been accommodated by the Eastern..." (Vol. I, pp. 437-438.)

"When Mahmud of Gazna, the first Mohammedan conqueror, attacked Lahore, he found it defended by a native Hindoo prince called Daood or David. This single fact is enough to settle the question of the places not being named by Mohamedans." (Vol. I; p. 432.)

"I beg my reader to look at the ruins of the ancient cities of India: Agra, Delhi, Oude, Mundore, etc., which have many of them been much larger than London, the last for instance, 37 miles in circumference, built in the oldest style of architecture in the world, the Cyclopean, and I think he must at once see the absurdity of the little Jewish mountain tribe (the "Lost Tribes") being the founders of such a mass of cities. We must also consider that we have almost all the places of India in Western Syria...I think no one can help seeing that these circumstances are to be accounted for in no other way than by the supposition that there was in very ancient times one universal superstition, which was carried all over the world by emigrating tribes, and that they were originally from Upper India." (Vol. I; p. 432.)

"...the natives of Cashmere as well as those of Afghanistan, pretending to be descended from the Jews, give pedigrees of their kings reigning in their present country up to the sun and the moon, and along with this, they shew you the Temples still standing, built by Solomon, statues of Noah, and other Jewish Patriarchs...the traditions of the Afghans tell them, that they are descended from the tribe of Ioudi or Yuda, and in this they are right, for it is the tribe of Joudi noticed by Eusebius to have existed before the Son of Jacob in Western Syria was born, the Joudi of Oude, and from which tribe the Western Jews with the Brahmin (Abraham) descended and migrated. (Vol. I; p. 740.)

"In the valley of Cashmere, on a hill close to the lake, are the ruins of a temple of Solomon. The history states that Solomon, finding the valley all covered with water except this hill, which was an island, opened the passage in the mountains and let most of it out, thus giving to Cashmere its beautiful plains. The temple which is built on the hill is called Tucht Suliman. Afterwards Forster says, 'Previously to the Mahometan conquest of India, Kashmere was celebrated for the learning of the Brahmins and the magnificent construction of its temple.' Now what am I to make of this? Were these Brahmans Jews, or the Jews Brahmins? The inadvertent way in which Forster states the fact precludes all idea of deceit...

"The Tuct Soliman of Cashmere in the time of Bernier, was described by him to be in ruins, and to have been a temple of the idolaters and not of the Mohamedans. The Mohamedans reported that it was built by Solomon, in very ancient times. All this at once does away with the pretence that it was a building of the modern Mohamedans; and is a strong confirmation of the Jewish nature of the other names of the towns - Yuda-poor, Iod-pore, etc., etc. Bernier goes on to say...that the name of Mousa or Moses is common among the natives, that Moses died at Cashmere, and that they yet show the ruins of his tomb near the town. This is curious when connected with the fact, that the Jews of Western Syria say, no one ever knew where he was buried." (Vol. I; p. 771.)

An article in the April, 1997 issue of the Jewish magazine Moment discusses the possibility that a heavy Jewish presence once dominated India.

"A tribe of Sunni Moslems called the Pathans, now living in parts of Pakistan, number at least 15 million. The Pathan language bears traces of biblical Hebrew, and the Pathans themselves claim lineage from King Saul. They are said to follow, in varying degrees of observance, some 21 'Jewish' customs, including lighting candles on Friday night, wearing a four-cornered prayer garment, and performing circumcision on the eighth day.

Then there are the Kashmiris from Northern India, who number about five million; although they too are predominantly Sunni Moslems, many bear biblical-sounding names like Cleb (Caleb), Israel, Hahana, and Lavni..." (Searching for the Lost Tribes, by Winston Pickett, p. 51.)

Aramaic, a language as similar to Hebrew as Spanish is to Portuguese, originated in Afghanistan and Pakistan. Both Afghanistan and Pakistan were once part of India. Afghanistan seceded from Indian in the 1700s. Pakistan was cut out of India when the two nations were partitioned after World War II. Aramaic also is the source of modern Hebrew's square alphabet, used in Israel today. The Hebrew square alphabet and the truth that Hebrew is just an Aramaic dialect confirm the Indian origin of the Jews.

Those Christian and Jewish authorities who don't want it to be true that ten to thirty million Jews once lived in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Northwestern India say that it is just a "coincidence" that so many tribes and places there have biblical names. Others insist that the Moslems christened all those tribes and places. As Godfrey Higgins tells us, many of those tribes and places had already received their so-called "biblical names" millenniums before Islam was a gleam in Mohammed's eyes and many centuries before those same names started showing up in the Middle East. Some of Israel's tribal and place names also started appearing in Afghanistan, Kashmir, and Northwestern India when Sargon II and Nebuchadnezzar exiled most of the Jews to that part of the world. The confusion about the origin of those tribal and place names will always exist as long as we stubbornly refuse to give the Indo-Hebrews their rightful place in history.


Judaism-------------------------------- Shaivism

Ish; Yish; Is; Isa; Issa; El; Al; etc.
(Suffixes and prefixes for "God"------------The same in Shaivism

Yahve; Jahve; Tseeva (God)----------------Shiva; Shaiva; Siva (God)

Elohim; Elokhim (God intellectualized)------Lakhimi (Goddess of Prosperity)
--------------------------------------------------Lokhi; Lukh (Shiva)

El Shaddai (The Almigthy)--------------------Saday; Sada (Shiva)

Ha-Kadosh (The Holy One)-------------------Hakh-e-Kheda (God's Duty)

El Elyon (Possessor of Heaven and Earth)---Il Layun (Absorption in God)

Yesoda (Dual Sexual Nature of Life)---------Yeshoda (Shiva's Dual Sexual Nature)



Hebrew and Kashmiri Cabalistic Terminology Is About the Same.


Hebrew------------------------------------Kashmiri

Ani (he spark of life)---------------------Agni (Vedic god of fire)
Avoda (work; labor)----------------------Vud; Wud (skilled labor)
Ayeen (void; non-being)-----------------Ayen (eternity)
Cabala (acceptance)---------------------Cabul (acceptance)
Guevara (force)--------------------------Gav'r (surrounding and attacking)
Keter (crown)-----------------------------Kash'r (crown of the head)
Kijum (destiny)---------------------------Ko-Yimi (path to death)
Klim (nothing)-----------------------------Kholi (nothing)
Malkuth (kingdom)------------------------Mulakh (kingdom)
Nefesh (soul)------------------------------Naph's (soul; spirit self)
Sephiroth (spiritual energy centers)-----Sipath (spiritual energy centers)

Yesu; Yesh; Yeh; Yahu; Yakhu;
Yah; Yao; Ie(The Material Universe)-----The same as in Judaism
Yesh me Ayeen (The Goal of Creation)--Yech me ayen (Creation Fused to the Void)
Zohar (brilliance)---------------------------Swar; Svar (Heaven; light; brilliance)


In the following list, all references to Indian tribes, castes, subcastes, and places will be listed at the left. Biblical and Hebrew names will be listed after each Indian word, accompanied by their biblical references. You will note that the comparative words are either identical or nearly identical. The differences are trivial. Even a non-linguist can notice that all these words sprang from the same source.


Abri- Ibri (1 Chr. 24-27)
Amal - Amal (1 Chr. 7:35).
Asaul - Asahel (2 Chr. 17:18 )
Asheriya - Asher (Gen. 30:13)
Azri - Azriel (! Chr. 5:24)
Bal. - Baal (1 Chr. 5:5)
Bala; Balah - Bala (Josh. 19:3)
Bakru - Bokheru (1 Chr. 7:6)
Baktu - Baca (1 Chr. 8:38 )
Banniya - Baana (1 Chr. 11:30)
Bellu - Bela (Gen. 14:9)
Bera; Baru - Beerah (1 (Chr. 5:6)
Basaya - Basseiah (1 Chr. 6:40)
Beroth - Beeroth (2 Sam. 4:2)
Bilgai - Bilgah (Neh. 12:5)
Buhana - Bohan (Josh. 15:6)
Buir - Beor (Ps. 23:4)
Butt - Bath (1 Ki. 7:26)
Caleb; Kleb - Caleb (1 Chr. 2:18 )
Dar; Dhar; Darku - Dor (1 Ki. 4:11)
Dara - Dara (1 Chr. 2:6)
Dum - Dumah (1 Chr. 1:30)
Gabba - Geba (Josh. 18:24)
Gaddar - Gedor (1 Chr. 4:4)
Gadha - Gad (1 Chr. 2:2)
Gaddi - Gaddi (Nu. 13:11)v Gani; Gani - Guni (1 Chr. 1:40)
Gareb - Gareb (1 Chr. 7:13)
Gomer - Gomer (Gen. 10:2)
Hahput - Hatipha (Neh. 7:56)v Iqqash - Ikkesh (1 Chr. 11:28 )
Ishai - Ishui (1 Sam. 14:49)
Israel - Israel (Gen. 32:28 )
Kahan Masu - Kahana; Kan, Kanah (Josh. 19:28
Kalkul - Calcol (1 Chr. 2:6)
Kanaz - Kenaz (Ju. 3:9)
Kar - Careah (2 Ki. 25:23)
Karrah - Korah (Nu. 26:9)
Kaul - Caul (Isa. 3:18 )
Kadu; Kaddua; Khadu - Cauda (Act. 27:16)
Kotru - Keturah (Gen. 25:4)
Laddu - Lud (1 Chr. 1:17)
Lavi; Laveh - Levi (1Chr. 2:1)
Magar - Magor (Jer. 22:3)
Mahlu - Mahali (Ex. 6:19)
Maikri - Machir (Josh. 17:1)
Malla; Maula - Maaleh (Josh. 15:3)
Mallak - Mallouck (1 Chr. 6:44)
Matri - Matri (1 Sam. 10:21)
Meresh - Meres (Esther 1:14)
Mir - Mearah (Josh. 13:4)
Mahsa; Mahsi - Massah (Ex. 17:7)
Moza - Moza (1 Chr. 7:36)
Musa - Moses
Nehru - Nahor (1 Chr. 1:26)
Opal; Upal - Ophel (2 Chr. 28:3)
Pareh - Paruah (1 Ki. 4:17)
Phalu; Pau - Phallu; Puah; Pua (Nu. 26:23)
Poot; Put - Phut; Put (a Chr. 1:8 )
Raina - Rinnah (1 Chr. 4:20)
Raphu - Raphu (1 Ki. 11:23)
Reshu; Resh; Reshi - Rhesa (Luke 3:27)
Reu; Reu-wal - Reu (Gen. 12:18 )
Reual - Reuel (Nu. 2:14)
Sachu - Sechu (1 Sam. 19:22)
Sam - Shem (Gen. 5:32)
Sapru; Sapra - Saphir (Mic. 1:11)
Seh - Siah (Neh. 7:47)
Shahmiri - Shamir (1 Chr. 24:24)
Shaul - Shaul (1 Chr. 4:24)
Shavi - Shaveh (Gen. 14:17)
Shora - Sherah (1 Chr. 7:2)
Shuah - Shuah (1 Chr. 4:11)

http://www.viewzone.com/matlock.html
http://www.viewzone.com/abraham2.html


Coat Of Arms - --- - 10-02-2008

Quote:Midfield.Enforcer

Interesting reply but I have to disagree. The word Brit IS HEBREW in origin. I have confirmed this with many Jews.

Briss Brit milah

bə'rīt mī'lā literally: covenant [of] circumcision

And you are speaking of Latin/Roman roots of the word Brit when I am discussing Phoenicia circa 2000 BC. Furthermore, if you read the links I provided in the article, you will see that the hypothesis is that Anglo-Sexons who were of Germanic origin were also Hebrew. Now I am not saying that this is true becuase it is not provable but it is simply something to ponder over and explore further.

In addition only Northern European countires end with ISH when referring to the people of the respective countries. ie. British, Danish, Sweedish, Finnish, Flemish, Irish, Scotish, Polish

Just as YIDDISH means JEW(Yid) MAN (ish)

The only exception to the rule is Turkish but that probably links into Khazaria somehow as most Khazarians were Turkic.

I've started reading that British Israelist book - it's very interesting, thanks for the link


Coat Of Arms - Midfield.Enforcer - 10-02-2008

Quote:Midfield.Enforcer

Interesting reply but I have to disagree. The word Brit IS HEBREW in origin. I have confirmed this with many Jews.

So, where's your proof that British is a word of Jewish origin? Have you got any evidence to support that at all besides some vague anecdotes from "many Jews"?

Quote:Now I am not saying that this is true becuase it is not provable but it is simply something to ponder over and explore further.

Just because they have a word that sounds the same it doesn't mean the etymology is the same. Your "words sound the same so they must be the same" argument has been consistently disproven in relation to Maxwell's ramblings and the fantasies of Icke et al. So where does that leave your little theory? I'm not sure. But British is not a Jewish word and never has been. Maybe you should "ponder over and explore" that for a while!!

Quote:In addition only Northern European countires end with ISH when referring to the people of the respective countries. ie. British, Danish, Sweedish, Finnish, Flemish, Irish, Scotish, Polish

Just as YIDDISH means JEW(Yid) MAN (ish)

The only exception to the rule is Turkish but that probably links into Khazaria somehow as most Khazarians were Turkic.

The suffix "ish" in relation to race has it origins in Old English. I quote:

"From Old English -isc. Cognate with German and Dutch -isch, Latin -icus, -isce and -ice, Greek -ikos, Slavic -ic, -ich, etc."

Absolutely no mention of Phoenician at all in relation to its use as a suffix denoting racial origin. Sorry you are wrong!!

peace



M.E

Sources:

http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/-ish

http://www.blurtit.com/q657533.html

http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?search...searchmode=none

Oxford English Dictionary (2006 Edition)


Coat Of Arms - Midfield.Enforcer - 10-02-2008

Quote:Jackie: That's what I was wondering, the word Torah of course is in the Jews' holy book and I began to wonder well maybe that could be checked out. I mean if the Japanese word for attack is Tora – do you know that, if it is, Alan?

It isn't Alan!!

Tora is Japanese for "tiger" but in this case, "to" is the initial syllable of the Japanese word totsugeki, meaning "charge" or "attack" and "ra" is the initial syllable of raigeki, meaning "torpedo attack".

Quote:Alan: I'm not certain but that's definitely what they broadcast as they were going in and they said it three times, which is strangely Masonic because that's how Masonic instructions are. They're always in triplicate.

Or maybe, just maybe, the Japanese admiral (Yamamoto?) who uttered that infamous phrase was on a very noisy aircraft carrier, much the same as the Jump Master on a plane saying "Go, go, go!!" when parachutists make their jumps. Could it also be possible that the Japanese admiral might have been excited/nervous, which might've explained his repetition?

Quote:Jackie: I was trying to do a search for that earlier this evening and I just asked Jeeves do you know what this tora, tora, tora means and it just kept bringing up stuff about the Torah but I found something interesting.

Here's the results of me asking Jeeves about "Tora Tora Tora":

http://uk.ask.com/web?q=tora+tora+tora&amp...dir&siteid=

Me thinks Jackie is full of shit. There is absolutely no mention of "the Torah" on the first results page!! Even the most cursory search will provide extensive proof of the definition of the word "Tora" and its use during the Pearl Harbour attack.

peace


M.E


Coat Of Arms - humbug - 10-02-2008

midfield you are correct.

tora, tiger is ONE kanji, a different kanji used as in the totsu of totsugeki, assualt. a reason why playing with words is so difficult in spoken japanese.

these hobby linguists sure f!ck it all up most of the time....



Coat Of Arms - Machine9000 - 10-02-2008

In my previous post, I said

Briss Brit milah
bə’rīt mī’lā
literally
covenant [of] circumcision


Did you notice that midfield? If so please research it to your satisfaction. Furthermore, this topic was about the Coat Of Arms and I provided ample links to support everyting I said in the post. All you needed to do was follow and read the links. I did not want to plagerize the web sites so I simply inserted the links. Rather than following the links, you have managed to focus on a topic that was not even the point of the original post. I find that this is a tactic that politicains/lawyers often use to misguide the public. For example, when I was a kid, I got into a car accident and got sued for 1.8 million dollars. I argued that it was a 4 way stop sign and I did not see it and ran the sign, however, the other person ran it at 70 MPH in a residential area, hence completely flipped his car upside down. His car hit mine from the left side of the intersection. The lawyer focused on the point if I was travelling North or East. The lawyers established that his client was travelling East. He was trying to establish that since I was not from the area, I had no idea if I was travelling north or east and he tried to convice the jury that I infact was travelling east and hence rear ended his client and intentionally ran him off the road which was absurd. I argued that it didnt matter if I was travelling North, South, East or West becuase his client hit my left side of the car. I won that case and the guy got nothing. He should of settled for 50K which is what my insurance company was offering him.

Anyway...

If you are going to debate the post, I welcome it, however, please read my post thoroghly before replying. In your last post you asked for proof that Brit was a Hebrew word. I had already provided in my previous post. Perhaps you overlooked it in your haste to reply. If you would like I can create a whole seperate thread and provide ample data to support the idea that the word Brit is derrived from Hebrew. I can get into the Thuatha de Dannan (Tribe of Dannan/Dan) who lived in IBERIA(Ireland) and the DUNMONNI or DANMONNI who lived in ancient Britannia before Latin even existed. All this info was already provided in the links of my initial post. Please take the time to read it. And the book links I also provided discuss this very topic. These books were copyrighted in the 1800's so it not a new issue.





Coat Of Arms - Machine9000 - 10-03-2008

http://www.milah.net/

http://www.callamohel.com/brismilah.htm

http://www.305651bris.com/faq.htm

Why do some call it a Bris and others a Brit?
The word Brit/Bris is the same word pronounced differently. Brit is the Sefardik pronunciation, and Bris is the Ashkenazik pronunciation.


http://www.beth-din.org/more/circumcision.html

The Brit Milah, Bris, or circumcision is the ceremony which marks the entry of a Jewish male into the covenant of the Creator.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brit_milah

Brit milah (Hebrew: בְּרִית מִילָה [bə'rīt mī'lā] literally: "covenant of circumcision"), also berit milah (Sephardi), bris milah (Ashkenazi pronunciation) or bris (Yiddish) is a religious ceremony within Judaism to welcome infant Jewish boys into a covenant between God and the Children of Israel through ritual circumcision performed by a mohel ("circumciser"), on the eighth day of the child's life unless health reasons force a delay, in the presence of family and friends, followed by a celebratory meal (seudat mitzvah).



OK?