The East India Company: The Original Corporate Raiders

[xparte]

adjective
The definition of effete is someone who lacks vigor or is too soft or over refined, or something that is no longer producing.
When no one listens to the leader of the group any more and his power has essentially diminished to nothing, this is an example of an effete leader.
When academics think that they are intellectually superior to everyone, this is an example of when they might be described as effete.

Read more at http://www.yourdictionary.com/effete...fFpjjjVZR6h.99 when one runs out of clever words use the varied or unlikely site gringo

[allodial]

If one man holds his supreme or absolute sovereign to be one far off, and another imagines or serves a god that is not an afar off god, then logic might have it that those are two different gods. Related: panentheism vs. pantheism. A title is not a name. I'm not sure how unity or sameness would be derived simply by using the same titles. The president of one state and the president of another state are disparate and separate, similarity titles doesn't amount to a sameness.

[allodial]

I may have missed a couple points but could you please explain how through the Crown (Templars) and initiates like Benjamin FRANKLIN and Thomas JEFFERSON the French Tennis Court/court affected the American Revolution too?

[ATTACH=CONFIG]3975[/ATTACH]
This book is a comprehensive study of the history of the political thought of the Dutch Revolt (1555-90). It explores the development of the political ideas which motivated and legitimized the Dutch resistance against the government of Philip II in the Low Countries, and which became the ideological foundations of the Dutch Republic as it emerged as one of the main powers of Europe. It shows how notions of liberty, constitutionalism, representation and popular sovereignty were of central importance to the political thought and revolutionary events of the Dutch Revolt, giving rise to a distinct political theory of resistance, to fundamental debates on the 'best state' of the new Dutch commonwealth and to passionate disputes on the relationship between church and state which prompted some of the most eloquent early modern pleas for religious toleration.

First, I suspect American high schools leaving out particulars of the Dutch Revolt do students a hefty disfavor. Why? Because it may be that the ideals behind the Dutch Revolt carried over into the American Revolution moreso than that of the French revolution (it is suggest that the monarchy was a vicitim of PSYOPS). In the same way the early American Revolutionists are mischaracterized as rebels and personalities like Locke and Bacon, the American Revolution might be errantly twinned with the French Revolution instead of the Dutch Revolt. Pairing it with the Dutch Revolt ties in too much with the idea of a Bible based society without mischaracterization of the gospel. Pairing the American Revolution with the French Revolution on the other hands might serve to pair the American Revolution with a more atheistic philosophies which may very well be to mischaracterize it.

• The American Revolution and War of Independence Was Not A Rebellion (By Gray W. Clark)
• Leibniz, Not Locke, Inspired the Declaration of Independence
• How The Venetian Virus Infected and Took Over England
• The Venetian Takeover of Enland: A 200-Year Project
• Doing Good In the World: Cotton Mather and the Origins of Modern Philanthropy
• Essays to Do Good (Cotton Mather - 1825 / Multiple formats at archive.org)
• Abraham Lincoln & Freemasonry

Nonetheless, I'd also suggest it to be important to consider that crowns and rulers existed before the Templars. I don't suspect there to be a single 'crown' although one or more shops might wish to impose 'only man in town' syndrome on the planet. Consider the pundits of 'world takeover' as having a very bad allergy to the Tennis Court Oath and so forming the UN and fomenting wars ('wars costs money + debt as slavery' paradigm) to increase debt and thwart shaking off of debt. A 'security problem' in Africa might be where a debt saddle country throws sheds its State and forms a new one: troops get sent in, the leaders is called all the negative Orwellian bad-buzzwords. Pervert dictators with perverse sexual appetites are easily pleased and fed by dark handlers. Men who care about their country will demand equity and the money system comes under scrutiny PDQ.

You concurred that the Templars traced themselves back to the post-1099 "king of Jerusalem" paradigm. Other similar or related organization may very well subscribe to teh same idea. So the story goes, they thought they were reliving a "when you see Jerusalem surrounded" prophetic event--but little did they know that happened 1,000 years before. But they didn't realize that until later. Legend has it they discovered some secret that they believed they could wield against the Papacy. Maybe the story has something to do with mischaracterization of the gospel? Perhaps they continued that tradition of mischaracterization if there was any? The claim of Europeans kings that they can trace their lineage back to "King David"? Meaning David Al-Roy vs David of ancient Israel? Same sound different kings, makes for quite the deception. It seems very unlikely the six-pointed star was something David of the Old Testament would have held as his family symbol. Its doubtful that Samuel would have allowed him to live for too long if he had. The evidence, however, shows that David Al-Roy was associated with that star (regarded to be the Star of Remphan/Chiun/Saturn-- Chiun allegedly being another way of spelling 'Cain'... China?) and that some of his successors may have carried it forward.

One of Bonaparte's grievances against Cacault was a saying attributed to the latter: "How many sources of his glory would cease if Bonaparte ever chose to play Henry VIII!" Even in those days of harmony Cacault had a presentiment that the Napoleonic policy would yet threaten the dignity of the Holy See.

Robespierre becomes god Christians are massacred under the new Atheist fervor in 1792-1793

The idea is that the French Revolution was about bringing Feudalism to an end. Another idea is that the NWO pundits are aiming to bring feudalism back on as planetary a scale as possible. But yet we see the same overthrowers of the French monarchy instituting collectivism and closed oligarchy. Same shoes, different feet? Isn't that what the Bolsheviks did????



Interestingly in Italy, Aristotle is widely presented in high schools. Seems that Aristotle found oligarchies to be quite "tasty".

Atheism is aristocratic; the idea of a great Being that watches over oppressed innocence and punishes triumphant crime is altogether popular. Maximilien Robespierre

Interesting: atheism + aristocracy ("No god but us"?) + Gnostic idea of a universe with equally matched forces of good and evil.


Qos also means 'bow.



Turkey coat of arms.

Joseph is a fruitful bough, even a fruitful bough {ben is used here} by a well; whose branches run over the wall: The archers have sorely grieved him, and shot at him, and hated him. Genesis 49:22-23 (the word archers is queshet...similar to quesh/qos, no?)

Related:

• Cult of the Supreme Being
• Collectivism
• Cult of Reason
• Charles Joseph Bonaparte [creator of the FBI]

[David Merrill]

All they need is a little attention.



Flippancy aside, by amplifying the guilt of Abraham and Sarah's incest, they need no printing presses. The debt is avoid the wrath of an angry God who can order you to kill your own bloodline.

Thank you for clarifying that. I appreciate the insight into the Dutch Revolt leading up to the Charter of 1629.

[BLBereans]

First, I suspect American high schools leaving out particulars of the Dutch Revolt do students a hefty disfavor. Why? Because it may be that the ideals behind the Dutch Revolt carried over into the American Revolution moreso than that of the French revolution (it is suggest that the monarchy was a vicitim of PSYOPS). In the same way the early American Revolutionists are mischaracterized as rebels and personalities like Locke and Bacon, the American Revolution might be errantly twinned with the French Revolution instead of the Dutch Revolt. Pairing it with the Dutch Revolt ties in too much with the idea of a Bible based society without mischaracterization of the gospel. Pairing the American Revolution with the French Revolution on the other hands might serve to pair the American Revolution with a more atheistic philosophies which may very well be to mischaracterize it.

Flippancy aside, by amplifying the guilt of Abraham and Sarah's incest, they need no printing presses. The debt is avoid the wrath of an angry God who can order you to kill your own bloodline.

Thank you for clarifying that. I appreciate the insight into the Dutch Revolt leading up to the Charter of 1629.

Sounds like mischaracterization of the torah?

guilt
incest
wrath
kill

These are the words used to describe the happenings involving the man chosen by The Creator to be the 'father' of His new and set-apart nation amidst the evil, rebellion and iniquity practiced by the people of Babylon/Mesopotamia whom He scattered around the world and whose language He confused.

I guess when one engages in mischaracterization of the gospel by using the term 'bastard' to describe the anointed Christ and unique Son of God, the same sentiment pervades one's view throughout scripture.

[David Merrill]

I was viewing history as one sequential event leading into another, but now view things better as interactive holographic.


I was joking;


How do you find a magnet in a haystack?
ANSWER: Use a compass.


I think it worthwhile to view history in the light of the allegorical metaphors produced around reclamation of the Crown of Jerusalem.

[allodial]

I think it worthwhile to view history in the light of the allegorical metaphors produced around reclamation of the Crown of Jerusalem.

It must be understood: they were 1,000 years too late. Even Ezekiel (like John) saw the New Jerusalem. The crowns were given to the saints of the most high. After 30AD, the blind and carnal may have still been looking for a "kingdom of heaven" that they could see with their physical eyes or for temples made with hands. Consider also, the saints and Jesus/Yeshua being conferred kingdoms at the right hand of the most high.

Which reminds me, once long ago I felt inclined to study an arrangement in the stars, looking beyond the Romanesque or Babylonian Zodiac and Constellations. I was after prayer inclined to seek out the representations of "the father's house" something that would be so simple even a child could see it. And there it was, at Cepheus a little house like the kind little kinds draw: a square with a triangle on top. Next I was inclined to make the determination of right and left from the vantage point of standing in the doorway of the house. And behold: the Crown to the right and Draco to the left!



Interestingly Cepheus is mischaracterized by Kaballists as "The Fool". It may have been heretical Gnostics that decided to project the upside down image of the Cepheus on his throne onto the house in order to have Draco at Cepheus' right hand. Absurd and very telling--in that they likely knew the original meaning and set out to hide it!

... the foolishness of God is wiser than men; and the weakness of God is stronger than men. ... But God has chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God has chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty. 1 Cor. 25, 27 (v. 25 in part)

The star making at the peak of the roof of the house is called Errai or Al Rai (which means Shepherd which relates to the word 'hero'). It is said that such star will become replace Polaris as the North Star in at least 2600 years.

Related:
Mazzaroth or, the Constellations (by Frances Rolleston)

[David Merrill]

Celestial Wobble - in 26,000 years it will look the same as now. I enjoy SkyGlobe from NASA but I was impressed with the program a fellow uses in The Star of Bethlehem.

I think you circle back to my point about time. It is an illusion. This is the reference to the Alpha and the Omega - the ALEPH and the TAV. The Alphabet of Creation. My point though may not be pleasing to all. The guilt trip caused a stiff-necked and hard-hearted people; so much so that when one of theirs broke through to this natural birthright - biblical prophecy - they threw a small fortune at preserving it to the culture as a national treasure.



P.S. As I developed Artificial Intuition at the young age of 69 it feels more and more that Adolph read this Century Magazine clip in 1928, before he even knew he might need a national enemy to target. One nation's treasure is another man's weapon?

[allodial]

Celestial Wobble - in 26,000 years it will look the same as now. I enjoy SkyGlobe from NASA but I was impressed with the program a fellow uses in The Star of Bethlehem.

I think you circle back to my point about time. It is an illusion.

Hologram vs. illusion. An illusion might lack genuine importance, like a counterfeit or an imitation. However, a hologram nonetheless can carry original and intended meaning. Also, re: 26,000 years: that is presuming it won't be 'rolled up like a scroll'.

P.S. As I developed Artificial Intuition at the young age of 69 it feels more and more that Adolph read this Century Magazine clip in 1928, before he even knew he might need a national enemy to target. One nation's treasure is another man's weapon?

The trouble is that so many organizations/groups claim to be "Jews" for the purpose of grandstanding as "god's chosen"--to legitimize anything and everything they do. But of course, Israelites weren't lawless. The historic record (see Edwin L. Martin) shows that Gnostics, Samaritans and Islamists heavily regarded themselves to be "Jews"; eventually even Edom had joined in. After 70AD it also became fashionable to borrow the title "Christian". What does any given group actually mean by "Jew" or Christian? Jew as in Judean or Jew as in Idumean or Jew as in Samarian or Islamic Gnostic? Christian as in Simonian or as in among the saints so dubbed at Antioch? Which points to this: Another big con that was attempted to be foisted upon bible believers is the one were saints are equated with Gentiles. Consider that by 1000 AD, Palestine/Samaria came into Islamic hands. If Isaac quit an area, who was the next heir: Ishmael. What religion were the Templars held to ultimately embrace? Some say: Islam.

A stele is dedicated to Qos-allah 'Qos is Allah' or 'Qos the god', by Qosmilk (melech - king) is found at Petra (Glueck 516). Qos is identifiable with Kaush (Qaush) the God of the older Edomites. The stele is horned and the seal from Edomite Tawilan near Petra identified with Kaush DISPLAYS A STAR AND CRESCENT (Gluek, Browning).

Post-Old-Dynasty Egypt Gnostics vs Moses (preserving the original doctrines)
Essau/Edom/Idumeans (Qos) vs Israel (includes Judah)
Rome vs non-Catholics
Ishmael vs Isaac
Archers (Qos) vs Joseph
Nimrod (Men Hunters) vs Mankind

[Michael Joseph]

Celestial Wobble - in 26,000 years it will look the same as now. I enjoy SkyGlobe from NASA but I was impressed with the program a fellow uses in The Star of Bethlehem.

I think you circle back to my point about time. It is an illusion. This is the reference to the Alpha and the Omega - the ALEPH and the TAV. The Alphabet of Creation. My point though may not be pleasing to all. The guilt trip caused a stiff-necked and hard-hearted people; so much so that when one of theirs broke through to this natural birthright - biblical prophecy - they threw a small fortune at preserving it to the culture as a national treasure.



P.S. As I developed Artificial Intuition at the young age of 69 it feels more and more that Adolph read this Century Magazine clip in 1928, before he even knew he might need a national enemy to target. One nation's treasure is another man's weapon?

Day of Trumpets: 11-Sept-3BC
Day of Atonement: 21-Sept=3BC
Feast of Tabernacles : 26 - Sept- 3BC

Num 24:17 I shall see him, but not now: I shall behold him, but not nigh: there shall come a Star out of Jacob, and a Sceptre shall rise out of Israel, and shall smite the corners of Moab, and destroy all the children of Sheth [Confusion].

[xparte]

Christ gave humanity the ability to raise itself to an understanding of the spiritual out of the life of intellect itself. inability to understand the spirit is our ignorance of the Holy Spirit,IF i talk only of the Father God and the Christ God.a far away one or internal one as i am willing to see and read it. is also for it is a revelation in and of itself man can understand those sensitivities through the spirit dwelling within him, if he only inclines himself to Christ. Holy Spirit appeared at the baptism of Christ. And with the appearance of the Holy Spirit
The Father is the unbegotten begetter who places the Son into the physical world. But at the same time the Father uses the Holy Spirit in order to tell humanity that in the spirit that we have from our pre-birth existence is raised to life through the Christ dwelling within us. And when Christ sent the Holy Spirit to his disciples this imparting occurred through the Christ, through the Son.that the Father is the unbegotten begetter, that the Son is the one begotten by the Father, and that the Holy Spirit is the one imparted to humanity by the Father and the Son. along with the teachings concerning that Trinity based on three parts or elements, especially the theological description of humans as consisting of body, soul, and spirit. Trinity
the divine principle working as Christ within evolving humanity cannot be understood without the Trinity. If, in the place of the Trinity, some other teaching concerning God were to enter, then basically speaking it would not be fully Christs teaching. Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. So actually it is the Holy Spirit who is sent by Christ in order that man might retain his consciousness of self, of his I, while Christ himself lives in the unconsciousness of human beings. Thus, if man realizes in the full sense of the word what his being really is, The effete ignorance might be me ignoring dogma not scripting Scripture I cant spirit stiff nobody i can however adjust my clouds.

[David Merrill]

Holy Spirit appeared at the baptism of Christ.

Mar 11:28 And say unto him, By what authority doest thou these things? and who gave thee this authority to do these things?
Mar 11:29 And Jesus answered and said unto them, I will also ask of you one question, and answer me, and I will tell you by what authority I do these things.
Mar 11:30 The baptism of John, was it from heaven, or of men? answer me.

Coronation.

[xparte]

[David Merrill]

The history I am familiar with is how when Paul was young Saul there was an uprising in eastern Turkey (Asia Minor) and Saul's father took part in the civil skirmish, taking up with Rome. Rome won. So Saul's father gained an entitled Roman citizenship but would not have been privileged with dual citizenship. His citizenship (religion) would have been solely Roman. Saul as Paul would have been eligible, not entitled, as indicated by the Roman officer in Acts, to purchase his Roman citizenship at a high price.

Saul apparently cherished his (Edomite) Jewry so much to form an interesting strategy. Finding of fact, that Rome existed and apparently was not going anywhere for some centuries, Saul began flirting with the idea he might become a kind of liaison officer on the Temple Mount between the Babylonian Sanhedrin and Caesar. So after his scouting out the potential for the Gospel of Mark to fly among the Asia Minor pagans - being that Life, Death and Resurrection were the primary colors of the seasons and agriculture Saul/Paul spent the alms gathered while stopped in Cyprus - a Masonic (Mnason) cover-up to invest in the actual papers.

It is so obvious once you accept the still-living Jesus spent three years writing Mark with Peter and Paul visiting Damascus too.

[allodial]

Coronation.

If one avoids confusing extra-Hebraic practices of "baptism" with the OT Hebraic immersion/mikveh, it would be clear that the Holy Spirit's settling upon him would be the only thing at Mark 11 that has to do with coronation: anointing. The entire OT temple layout figured the process of salvation. Mikveh was required for the royal priesthood--full body immersion and neither sprinkling of blood, water, wine nor oil. To project foreign or copy-cat practices onto the practices of Hebrews would just serve to confuse. The Babylonians see reality through Babylonian eyes. The Hebrews were not Babylonians.


Note: the laver comes before entry into the congregation. The light of the oil-powered lampstands would hardly be directly visible from without! To see it one had to enter into the congregation, no?

That lots of people used the word "baptism" in connection with some "coronation" ceremony after 70AD as copycats or 'holy ritual designers' (whether to legitimize one claim or another to authority or to put on a really impressive show) doesn't make retroactive projection fit the OT plan or purpose.

A person was required to be ritually pure in order to enter the Temple. In this context, "purity" and "impurity" are imperfect translations of the Hebrew "tahara" and "tumah", respectively, in that the negative connotation of the word impurity is not intended; rather being "impure" is indicative of being in a state in which certain things are prohibited until one has become "pure" again by immersion in a mikveh. {Wiki author evidences lack of comprehension of what it means to be 'ritually unclean' due to failure to specifically utilize that term.}

Consider entry into the Temple becoming part of the House of God or the Assembly of the Anointed (Christ)--mikveh was about purification not coronation. There is nothing in the scriptures OT or NT to suggest otherwise. To get the general idea, consider the notion that subsequent to purification, the one now clean could access the presence of God. Mikveh itself is not coronation/anointing. Anointing is very specific.

For those who worshiped 'sea gods' or the saw the sea (Mari/mer/mar/mermaids/mercantilism/Mercury) as the 'holy sea' (Dagon, Oannes), sure application of water might be seen as a kind of coronation. But most certainly that was neither the Hebrew nor Melchizedek perspective. In the Hebrew realm, anointing was and is done with oil not water.



In the Temple, light was provided by oil-powered candles rather than by wicked candles. Note 'wicked' candles provide their own light and burn of themselves.

...What are these two olive trees upon the right side of the candlestick and upon the left side thereof? And I answered again, and said unto him, What be these two olive branches which through the two golden pipes empty the golden oil out of themselves? And he answered me and said, Knowest thou not what these be? And I said, No, my lord. Then said he, These are the two anointed ones, that stand by the Lord of the whole earth. Zech. 4:11-14 (11 in part)

At Zechariah 4:14, "anointed ones" is literally "sons of oil" (b'nai ytzar).

One perspective: oil floats on water, water can extinguish fire and drown people. Another: The scriptural Israel wasn't about formation of secular state. Edom/Esau being carnally minded would miss this point. It was the secularization that prompted judgement even in Hezekiah's time.

30 AD to 70AD was a long grace period (two 20-year periods). The king's missionaries were in the field to maximize the extent of salvation. Who sends missionaries out for 5 seconds? There had to be adequate time to give those of the land to get clued up. Hedges of protection around Jerusalem were removed starting around 66AD and the Idumeans with other nations were standing at the gates. Judgment came ~66AD to 70AD. It has been suggested that Rome-Babylon along with the Idumeans (who were enemies of Israel and Judah) were used as instruments of such judgment. The Worthless Shepherd hardly fits Yeshua/Jesus: the war was waged on the spiritual level first and foremost, the carnally minded would miss the point entirely: the battle was won on the spiritual level. The Romans even blamed the saints for the failure of their oracles and the like subsequent to the crucifixion--even their records evidence something remarkable happened in the spiritual and psychic realms in those days.

P.S. Contrary to infant baptism proponents, it is said according to the Essenes that the age of 30 years had to be attained before any king could be anointed or perhaps even admitted to the congregation. 30 as the 'spiritual age of accountability'.

Related:
The Third Temple: Spiritual or Physical?