It has nothing to do with "oil". It has everything with the NWO recovering control of conquests lost. Even Bush's own father left Saddam in place, so it wasn't Saddam! Saddam's gone and we're still there after 3 years, so it wasn't a new Government! The Bush admin virtually pre-selected all candidates, rather than by the primary/convention process, so it wasn't a Democratic election!
It wasn't Weapons of Mass Destruction! There wasn't a Nuclear Program! No Long Range Missiles! No Scuds were fired! No Biological Weapons! No Chemical Weapons! No Weapons Program At all. It wasn't terror, there weren't any Terrorists in Iraq. It wasn't 9/11!
The only thing we found was "billions of dollars in US cash" which the US Treasury refuses to trace. In other words, virtually every thing Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice and Powell said about why we went to war was a lie! What's he covering up?
Just the fact he's a Bush...a descendant of the England's Worst, Last, Most Ineffective Crusader Edward 1st , enemy of the Knights Templar, whose main claim to fames are that he "Lost Jerusalem", managed to destroy the Templars Stronghold in Acre, cause the death of the 3rd Grand Master, Beaufeu and murder Simon de Montfort, the greatest leader the Templars ever had.
Maybe, just maybe this perspective explains why the Saudi's are sending so many hundreds of "outsiders" or "insurgents" to keep the US or the British Crown from regaining their territory lost nearly 800 years before? Imagine if the Russians attacked to reclaim Alaska and California. Or Britain attacked to reclaim "Boston".
To stop us from "reconquering" the world "we", the British Royal family, left behind in 1190. We're in Iraq to recover the land holdings of Bush's family. In Bush's case, regaining lost glory means, repeating past incompetence of the Curse of the Edward 1, the son of King John. Is it history repeating itself, is Bush seeking to recover the family's estates in MIddle East or is Bush just following Queen's Orders?
Under the Nixon White House, Bush, Sr. was the head of the RNC and virtually all "republican policy" decisions for nearly 6 years. He was also the head of the CIA for 1 year. Bush, Sr, was V P under Reagan for another years and Head of the White House anti-terror committee.
Bush, Sr. was President for another four years and another 8 years after that as the "First Father" under the "Boy George" (26 years of Bush-Shit!) administration. During that entire period, Templar/Masonic lore has returned with a vengeance. Especially after Bush, Sr. was Knighted in l993. Didn't you EVER wonder why the "Da Vinci Code" has gained popularity? Blood lines are going to be the primary "psyops/psychological warfare battlelines in the battle as the New World "commercial" Order...replaces the old "Humanitarian" genetic Orders.
In the final analysis, nothing explains why the US is still in IRaq or why we need to have a 3 million square foot "Diplomatic" presence.... because Bush never intends to leave. Bush is a descendant of Edward the 1st of England, the Crappy Crusader...and destroyer of Simon de Montfort, the Templars "Greatest Warrior For Right" in History. Edward's stupidity in the Middle East and an ill-fated treaty with the Libyans also caused the death of the 3rd Grand Master of the Knights Templar, and perhaps the Greatest of All...William of Beaujeu.
Just as sure as Bush's "debacle" in the Middle East has been a dismal failure, Edward 1 never completed his "conquest" either. Edward's mistep of losing the Great Templar Stronghold at "Acre", the headquarters of the Knights Templar in the Holy Land, directly assured the permanent loss of Jerusalem. Edward died in Cyprus, 6 months after an attack by a "Shiite" assassin, November, 1272.
The story of Edward and de Montfort is an epic battle of the millenia, between the "landed" and Simon de Montfort who fought for decades to bring a "Democratic Parliament" to England. In fact, Edward 1 has treated the English Barons so poorly, the Barons refused to accompany Edward to the Holy Land. In fact, according the Catholic chroniclers, Llyellen of Wales refused to do "homage" to Edward after his investiture..in part due to Edwards taking of a "Moorish" bride...refused to recognize his claim to the British Throne.
It was Edward's "Moorish" or "Castillian" bride who was the mother of the Prescott Bush lineage.
When Edward arrived, in Acre, the Templar stronghold, he was shocked to see the Venitians and other "outside nations" were supplying the Muslims with metal and timber for arms and seige engines against the British, just like the Iranians and other European nations are helping arm the Iraqi insurgents.
From the moment that Edward reached the ancient coastline, success was impossible. Once Edward arrived in 1272(?), his ONLY success was to immediately sign a treaty of Peace to the ruler of "Tripoli"...which is exactly the ONLY success that Bush has secured in the Middle east. Bush got Khaddafi, the ruler of Tripoli, to sign a peace treaty and give up his Nuclear Weapons. (what's going on. Is Bush following a "failure script" or does God just have a GReAt sense of humor?)
It was "Edward" who "usurped" the throne of Wales. It was Simon de Montfort who fought Edward for 45 years for refusing to enforce Magna Carta and Charter of Liberties of the Barons, including the original "BARON VON HILTON! who was granted the his Barony by Edward in, 1295, to Robert, Baron of Hilton.
In fact, Bush' "Fantasy Battle Plan" (like Fantasy Baseball) is virtually identical to that of his ancestor.."Edward 1!) Oh! just in case you thought Edward invaded to save Jersualem from the jews...forget it..Edward 1, "expelled all jews from England, in 1290". Edward was going to keep Jurusalem all for himself. Looks like Bush is just trying to "reclaim" lost family property. Including Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Iran, Palestine & Jordan.
This is a copy of the Battle Plan that Bush's "great-grand-daddy" used to conquer the Middle East in the 1200s. Edward the 1st used French troops and Mongol Troops from Persia. In other words, he wasn't very picky about who he used to Kill the Jews and the Muslims. Still, the battle plan included the conquest of Jerusalem, Syria, Lebanon, Iraq and parts of Iran.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_I_of_England
Is History repeating itself? Is this the Ground Hog Day Presidency or is there something far more nefarious going on? It appears that either Bush is just executing the Battle Plan for the Crown! Or, is he just out of control. Maybe this explains why Bush was so "slow" in trying to reconcile the Jews with the Palestinians, divide and conquer is a better tactic.
According to http://homepages.rootsweb.com/~pmcbride/rfc/lodus41e1.htm, the Bush family through Prescott Bush is a direct descendant of Edward the 1st, the Crusader, aka Longshanks. It seems that Bush's line is descended from Edward's 8th daughter, Joan of Acre, Plantagenet. (NO! It's not Joan of ARC!..Acre is a town in Palestine that Edward conquered) She is called Joan of Acre because that's where she was born, in 1272.
Seems like battle makes the Edward family horny!
Coincidentally, Edward barely survived a murder by a "Shiite" member of the ancient order of the "Assassins", on 1272. The same years as his daugther was born in Acre. The nature of the attack is unknown, but Edward was dead within less than four months.
Joan's mother was was Eleanor of Castille, in Spain. Only, because "zorro" may be descended from a non-royal "branch" of the Castillian/Aragonese bloodline, am i aware of the "special nature" of the Castillian roots. Let's just keep it simple for now. Most Castillian nobility of that day were directly descended from the "Muslim" lines. IN other words, Bush is "moorish" or "arab" by birth on his maternal side.
http://homepages.rootsweb.com/~pmcbride/rfc/gw60.htm#I12031
Curiously, "Joan" has an excellent genetic argument for claiming "Palestinian Citzenship" from the moment she was born. It's convoluted and you'd have to understand how the "Castillian" Royalty was actually descendant from the lienage of Mohammed's "Mother"...who was, according to "Christian Mythology of the age a "nestorian Christian"?
In fact, I think it's fascinating that the "fear-mongers" of the age actually spread "rumors" that the entire "Muslim" religion was actually a branch of "Nestorian Christianity". The same form of "anti-orthodoxy" that Gheghis Khan's "wife" had been converted to, before the Khan lay seige to Rome.
Regardless of ancient myth, there is simply no question about the Bush descendants from Edward 1st of England, via his Grandfather Prescott Bush. Of course, so is his father, which explains why the Saudi Kings always hold the hand of Bush and "Boy George". They are "distant' relatives of the Saudi Royal family.
Actually, the story gets worse. In fact, there is evidence that the bloodline of the mythical "uniter" of the Sunni and Shiite, the "mythical" 12th Imam or hidden "W" was last known in the vicinity of Castile, Spain in the 700s. Of course, in the Muslim religion the missing "W" (last letter in Arabic alphabet, pronounced "vav" or "waW") corresponds to the English "omega" as in "alpha and omega" in Revelations. That would make "W", the "Last Man" or the "Last Ruler" or the "12th Imam..the Great Uniter. (BULL SHIITE!)
Bush's claim to uniter "W" status comes strictly through his "Walker" initial. ..eh...I'm not going to go there right now! But, suffice it say, his "predilection" for referring to himself as "W"..which came from the Extreme "RIGHT WING" (aka not the Christian right wing..see, you've been making assumptions again!) It doesn't come from his initial...it comes from the "Saudi Financial backers of the Bush administration".
So, if you ever wondered why the Saudi Lobby paid for all the Electronic Voting Law..it's because they don't think anyone else but "W" should ever be President of the US! So far, it's working! If the "mormon" Warren Hatch succeeds, the US Senate will pass the law allowing Presidents to achieve more than two terms. But I digress.
If you're following the logic, you may also understand that Bush has a "technical" argument that reconquering the Middle East is his family right. It has NOTHING to do with Saddam. It has nothing to do with Weapons of Mass Destruction or Uranium in Iran. Haven't you wondered why his dad SUPPORTS a "Mormon" for President?
So, let's just summarize..Bush's maternal ancestor was "arabic/moorish" princess (perhaps even Muslim"), his father conquered "Palestine/Middle East and converted it into a "family enfeoeffment" or "personal asset"...and then expelled all jews from Britain.
The Middle East is really only about the size of Utah, Idaho, Nevada and Colorado combined..which we know was originally Mormon territory, under the rule of a single man.
OK, let's summarize. Edward conquered the Middle East and "Jersualem" for his own account. Not to save the jews whom he hated. His wife was "Castillian" or Moorish or "Arabic" royalty. Perhaps even the same blood line as the Saudi Royal family. The Crusades were NOTHING about religion or saving Jews! Neither is "Palestine". Bush has made no effort to reconcile the Jews and Palestine. That's not his concern.
Are you seeing where the "tea leaves" are pointing, yet?
Grande Zorro Master
Bush's abysmal ignorance of the past "has doomed an entire nation to suffer the a repeat of the same fates as befell his ancestor"
____//____
Post new comment