It goes back all throughout recorded history.

I completely agree that the cyclical nature of morality goes back throughout recorded history. However, there is substantial evidence that suggest that all of what we call "recorded history" (the parts we are generally taught) have been controlled by the same entity for all that time.

You seem to be assuming that the flow from one "power" or empire to another is organic. Maybe it is, maybe it is not completely organic, maybe it isn't organic at all. I have found a fair bit of evidence that suggests the last case, and the more I dig, the more I find that supports it. It seems that anything that looks organic is either created by the PTB to dictate the direction of some "side" (ideology), or, if it is truly organic (created by an entity that is not the "hidden hand") soon taken over if it is useful, or erased from history (or almost erased in some cases) if it is not. At best the "it's all organic' theory does not account for all of the evidence and is almost certainly not true. Yet people truly believe in the organic thing.

We have been taught to not look at the connections, specifically the money connections. We have been taught to not look at the evidence of a continuity of control. It's "anti-Semetic," or "conspiracy theory," or even just plain "crazy" to suggest that the distant past and the present are fundamentally connected and controlled. Yet the more you dig, the more evidence there is that supports an intentional "social engineering" version of a "business cycle," going on for millennia. This has been accomplished by a continuous control of both sides of every narrative.

I suggest you take a relook at history without assuming the disconnect we are taught. For example, just take a look at the "fall of the Roman Empire." Nothing matches the standard narrative. Even the concept of a Roman Empire "fall" has no real evidence to support it. It never fell at all. Even at the time when it was in power according to the standard narrative it wasn't the "biggest empire in the world." Rather, the Scythians were, and had been for from hundreds to thousands of years before the Romans were even a thing. (The "Romans" were likely originally a Scythian outpost. The Greeks almost certainly were.) At numerous times during the "Roman Empire" they paid tribute to the Scythians, thus they were, at least at some points, vassal states to the Scythian Empire. So was Judea/Israel. The Scythians retained power over that entire region for millennia, all the way up until the 17th century or so, when the Moscovy (or Rus) Khanate drove them out of most of what is now Russia. Still, Scythia proper remained a large and powerful nation (albeit a shrinking one) until finally, in the 20th century when the USSR wiped them out of history by forcing them to adopt a new alphabet and burning all their recorded history (see pages 31 to 41). You may have heard of the Scythians called the "Mongols" or the "Tartarians," but they were the Scythians, a multi-ethnic Aristocratic system with a continuity of culture and government that ruled most of the Euro-Asiatic world for millennia. The Khazarians (who make up most of what we call "the Jews" today) were nothing more than a Scythian tribe, but then again, so were the Moscovians.

Regarding the "hidden hand", look at the special privileges given to the Jews in the Roman Empire "because of the respect for their religion." Look at the economic influence they had both before and after they were "persecuted." Look at the parallels in their special privileges in the Catholic world. Look at who really ran the "inquisitions." Look at the Jewish involvement in the creation, funding, and management of the Christian religion, from it's beginning (where by "beginning" I mean Saul/Paul's beginning, not Jesus's beginning). NOTHING is what we have been taught, or rather, the common narrative in all of those areas does not match with all of the evidence. The more you dig, the more evidence you find that fits a "hidden hand" theory, where it is the exact same hidden hand as that which controls the voices that sit at the top of "both sides" of our morality in the "modern era."

It goes back all throughout recorded history.

I completely agree that the cyclical nature of morality goes back throughout recorded history. However, there is substantial evidence that suggest that all of what we call "recorded history" (the parts we are generally taught) have been controlled by the same entity for all that time.

You seem to be assuming that the flow from one "power" or empire to another is organic. Maybe it is, maybe it is not completely organic, maybe it isn't organic at all. I have found a fair bit of evidence that suggests the last case, and the more I dig, the more I find that supports it. It seems that anything that looks organic is either created by the PTB to dictate the direction of some "side" (ideology), or, if it is truly organic (created by an entity that is not the "hidden hand") soon taken over if it is useful, or erased from history (or almost erased in some cases) if it is not. At best the "it's all organic' theory does not account for all of the evidence and is almost certainly not true. Yet people truly believe in the organic thing.

We have been taught to not look at the connections, specifically the money connections. We have been taught to not look at the evidence of a continuity of control. It's "anti-Semetic," or "conspiracy theory," or even just plain "crazy" to suggest that the distant past and the present are fundamentally connected and controlled. Yet the more you dig, the more evidence there is that supports an intentional "social engineering" version of a "business cycle," going on for millennia. This has been accomplished by a continuous control of both sides of every narrative.

I suggest you take a relook at history without assuming the disconnect we are taught. For example, just take a look at the "fall of the Roman Empire." Nothing matches the standard narrative. Even the concept of a Roman Empire "fall" has no real evidence to support it. It never fell at all. Even at the time when it was in power according to the standard narrative it wasn't the "biggest empire in the world." Rather, the Scythians were, and had been for from hundreds to thousands of years before the Romans were even a thing. (The "Romans" were likely originally a Scythian outpost. The Greeks almost certainly were.) At numerous times during the "Roman Empire" they paid tribute to the Scythians, thus they were, at least at some points, vassal states to the Scythian Empire. So was Judea/Israel. The Scythians retained power over that entire region for millennia, all the way up until the 17th century or so, when the Moscovy (or Rus) Khanate drove them out of most of what is now Russia. Still, Scythia proper remained a large and powerful nation (albeit a shrinking one) until finally, in the 20th century when the USSR wiped them out of history by forcing them to adopt a new alphabet and burning all their recorded history (see pages 31 to 41). You may have heard of the Scythians called the "Mongols" or the "Tartarians," but they were the Scythians, a continuity of culture and government that ruled most of the Euro-Asiatic world for millennia. The Khazarians (who make up most of what we call "the Jews" today) were nothing more than a Scythian tribe, but then again, so were the Moscovians.

Regarding the "hidden hand", look at the special privileges given to the Jews in the Roman Empire "because of the respect for their religion." Look at the economic influence they had both before and after they were "persecuted." Look at the parallels in their special privileges in the Catholic world. Look at who really ran the "inquisitions." Look at the Jewish involvement in the creation, funding, and management of the Christian religion, from it's beginning (where by "beginning" I mean Saul/Paul's beginning, not Jesus's beginning). NOTHING is what we have been taught, or rather, the common narrative in all of those areas does not match with all of the evidence. The more you dig, the more evidence you find that fits a "hidden hand" theory, where it is the exact same hidden hand as that which controls the voices that sit at the top of "both sides" of our morality in the "modern era."

It goes back all throughout recorded history.

I completely agree that the cyclical nature of morality goes back throughout recorded history. However, there is substantial evidence that suggest that all of what we call "recorded history" (the parts we are generally taught) have been controlled by the same entity for all that time.

You seem to be assuming that the flow from one "power" or empire to another is organic. Maybe it is, maybe it is not completely organic, maybe it isn't organic at all. I have found a fair bit of evidence that suggests the last case, and the more I dig, the more I find that supports it. It seems that anything that looks organic is either created by the PTB to dictate the direction of some "side" (ideology), or, if it is truly organic (created by an entity that is not the "hidden hand") soon taken over if it is useful, or erased from history (or almost erased in some cases) if it is not. At best the "it's all organic' theory does not account for all of the evidence and is almost certainly not true. Yet people truly believe in the organic thing.

We have been taught to not look at the connections, specifically the money connections. We have been taught to not look at the evidence of a continuity of control. It's "anti-Semetic," or "conspiracy theory," or even just plain "crazy" to suggest that the distant past and the present are fundamentally connected and controlled. Yet the more you dig, the more evidence there is that supports an intentional "social engineering" version of a "business cycle," going on for millennia. This has been accomplished by a continuous control of both sides of every narrative.

I suggest you take a relook at history without assuming the disconnect we are taught. For example, just take a look at the "fall of the Roman Empire." Nothing matches the standard narrative. Even the concept of a Roman Empire "fall" has no real evidence to support it. It never fell at all. Even at the time when it was in power according to the standard narrative it wasn't the "biggest empire in the world." Rather, the Scythians were, and had been for from hundreds to thousands of years before the Romans were even a thing. (The "Romans" were likely originally a Scythian outpost. The Greeks almost certainly were.) At numerous times during the "Roman Empire" they paid tribute to the Scythians, thus they were, at least at some points, vassal states to the Scythian Empire. So was Judea/Israel. The Scythians retained power over that entire region for millennia, all the way up until the 17th century or so, when the Moscovy (or Rus) Khanate drove them out of most of what is now Russia. Still, Scythia proper remained a large and powerful nation (albeit a shirking one) until finally, in the 20th century when the USSR wiped them out of history by forcing them to adopt a new alphabet and burning all their recorded history (see pages 31 to 41). You may have heard of the Scythians called the "Mongols" or the "Tartarians," but they were the Scythians, a continuity of culture and government that ruled most of the Euro-Asiatic world for millennia. The Khazarians (who make up most of what we call "the Jews" today) were nothing more than a Scythian tribe, but then again, so were the Moscovians.

Regarding the "hidden hand", look at the special privileges given to the Jews in the Roman Empire "because of the respect for their religion." Look at the economic influence they had both before and after they were "persecuted." Look at the parallels in their special privileges in the Catholic world. Look at who really ran the "inquisitions." Look at the Jewish involvement in the creation, funding, and management of the Christian religion, from it's beginning (where by "beginning" I mean Saul/Paul's beginning, not Jesus's beginning). NOTHING is what we have been taught, or rather, the common narrative in all of those areas does not match with all of the evidence. The more you dig, the more evidence you find that fits a "hidden hand" theory, where it is the exact same hidden hand as that which controls the voices that sit at the top of "both sides" of our morality in the "modern era."

It goes back all throughout recorded history.

I completely agree that the cyclical nature of morality goes back throughout recorded history. However, there is substantial evidence that suggest that all of what we call "recorded history" (the parts we are generally taught) have been controlled by the same entity for all that time.

You seem to be assuming that the flow from one "power" or empire to another is organic. Maybe it is, maybe it is not completely organic, maybe it isn't organic at all. I have found a fair bit of evidence that suggests the last case, and the more I dig, the more I find that supports it. It seems that anything that looks organic is either created by the PTB to dictate the direction of some "side" (ideology), or, if it is truly organic (created by an entity that is not the "hidden hand") soon taken over if it is useful, or erased from history (or almost erased in some cases) if it is not. At best the "it's all organic' theory does not account for all of the evidence and is almost certainly not true. Yet people truly believe in the organic thing.

We have been taught to not look at the connections, specifically the money connections. We have been taught to not look at the evidence of a continuity of control. It's "anti-Semetic," or "conspiracy theory," or even just plain "crazy" to suggest that the distant past and the present are fundamentally connected and controlled. Yet the more you dig, the more evidence there is that supports an intentional "social engineering" version of a "business cycle," going on for millennia. This has been accomplished by a continuous control of both sides of every narrative.

I suggest you take a relook at history without assuming the disconnect we are taught. For example, just take a look at the "fall of the Roman Empire." Nothing matches the standard narrative. Even the concept of a Roman Empire "fall" has no real evidence to support it. It never fell at all. Even at the time when it was in power according to the standard narrative it wasn't the "biggest empire in the world." Rather, the Scythians were, and had been for from hundreds to thousands of years before the Romans were even a thing. (The "Romans" were likely originally a Scythian outpost. The Greeks almost certainly were.) At numerous times during the "Roman Empire" they paid tribute to the Scythians, thus they were, at least at some points, vassal states to the Scythian Empire. So was Judea/Israel. The Scythians retained power over that entire region for millennia, all the way up until the 17th century or so, when the Moscovy (or Rus) Khanate drove them out of most of what is now Russia. Still, Scythia proper remained a large and powerful nation (albeit a shirking one) until finally, in the 20th century when the USSR wiped them out of history by forcing them to adopt a new alphabet and burning all their recorded history (see pages 31 to 41). You may have heard of the Scythians called the "Mongols" or the "Tartarians," but they were the Scythians, a continuity of culture and government that ruled most of the Euro-Asiatic world for millennia. The Khazarians (who make up most of what we call "the Jews") were nothing more than a Scythian tribe, but then again, so were the Moscovians.

Regarding the "hidden hand", look at the special privileges given to the Jews in the Roman Empire "because of the respect for their religion." Look at the economic influence they had both before and after they were "persecuted." Look at the parallels in their special privileges in the Catholic world. Look at who really ran the "inquisitions." Look at the Jewish involvement in the creation, funding, and management of the Christian religion, from it's beginning (where by "beginning" I mean Saul/Paul's beginning, not Jesus's beginning). NOTHING is what we have been taught, or rather, the common narrative in all of those areas does not match with all of the evidence. The more you dig, the more evidence you find that fits a "hidden hand" theory, where it is the exact same hidden hand as that which controls the voices that sit at the top of "both sides" of our morality in the "modern era."

It goes back all throughout recorded history.

I completely agree that the cyclical nature of morality goes back throughout recorded history. However, there is substantial evidence that suggest that all of what we call "recorded history" (the parts we are generally taught) have been controlled by the same entity for all that time.

You seem to be assuming that the flow from one "power" or empire to another is organic. Maybe it is, maybe it is not completely organic, maybe it isn't organic at all. I have found a fair bit of evidence that suggests the last case, and the more I dig, the more I find that supports it. It seems that anything that looks organic is either created by the PTB, or, if it is truly organic (created by an entity that is not the "hidden hand," soon taken over if it is useful, or erased from history (or almost erased in some cases) if it is not. At best the "it's all organic' theory does not account for all of the evidence and is almost certainly not true. Yet people truly believe in the organic thing.

We have been taught to not look at the connections, specifically the money connections. We have been taught to not look at the evidence of a continuity of control. It's "anti-Semetic," or "conspiracy theory," or even just plain "crazy" to suggest that the distant past and the present are fundamentally connected and controlled. Yet the more you dig, the more evidence there is that supports an intentional "social engineering" version of a "business cycle," going on for millennia. This has been accomplished by a continuous control of both sides of every narrative.

I suggest you take a relook at history without assuming the disconnect we are taught. For example, just take a look at the "fall of the Roman Empire." Nothing matches the standard narrative. Even the concept of a Roman Empire "fall" has no real evidence to support it. It never fell at all. Even at the time when it was in power according to the standard narrative it wasn't the "biggest empire in the world." Rather, the Scythians were, and had been for from hundreds to thousands of years before the Romans were even a thing. (The "Romans" were likely originally a Scythian outpost. The Greeks almost certainly were.) At numerous times during the "Roman Empire" they paid tribute to the Scythians, thus they were, at least at some points, vassal states to the Scythian Empire. So was Judea/Israel. The Scythians retained power over that entire region for millennia, all the way up until the 17th century or so, when the Moscovy (or Rus) Khanate drove them out of most of what is now Russia. Still, Scythia proper remained a large and powerful nation (albeit a shirking one) until finally, in the 20th century when the USSR wiped them out of history by forcing them to adopt a new alphabet and burning all their recorded history (see pages 31 to 41). You may have heard of the Scythians called the "Mongols" or the "Tartarians," but they were the Scythians, a continuity of culture and government that ruled most of the Euro-Asiatic world for millennia. The Khazarians (who make up most of what we call "the Jews") were nothing more than a Scythian tribe, but then again, so were the Moscovians.

Regarding the "hidden hand", look at the special privileges given to the Jews in the Roman Empire "because of the respect for their religion." Look at the economic influence they had both before and after they were "persecuted." Look at the parallels in their special privileges in the Catholic world. Look at who really ran the "inquisitions." Look at the Jewish involvement in the creation, funding, and management of the Christian religion, from it's beginning (where by "beginning" I mean Saul/Paul's beginning, not Jesus's beginning). NOTHING is what we have been taught, or rather, the common narrative in all of those areas does not match with all of the evidence. The more you dig, the more evidence you find that fits a "hidden hand" theory, where it is the exact same hidden hand as that which controls the voices that sit at the top of "both sides" of our morality in the "modern era."

It goes back all throughout recorded history.

I completely agree that the cyclical nature of morality goes back throughout recorded history. However, there is substantial evidence that suggest that all of what we call "recorded history" (the parts we are generally taught) have been controlled by the same entity for all that time.

You seem to be assuming that the flow from one "power" or empire to another is organic. Maybe it is, maybe it is not completely organic, maybe it isn't organic at all. I have found a fair bit of evidence that suggests the last case, and the more I dig, the more I find that supports it. It seems that anything that looks organic is either created by the PTB, soon taken over if it is useful, or erased from history (or almost erased in some cases) if it is not. At best the "it's all organic' theory does not account for all of the evidence and is almost certainly not true. Yet people truly believe in the organic thing.

We have been taught to not look at the connections, specifically the money connections. We have been taught to not look at the evidence of a continuity of control. It's "anti-Semetic," or "conspiracy theory," or even just plain "crazy" to suggest that the distant past and the present are fundamentally connected and controlled. Yet the more you dig, the more evidence there is that supports an intentional "social engineering" version of a "business cycle," going on for millennia. This has been accomplished by a continuous control of both sides of every narrative.

I suggest you take a relook at history without assuming the disconnect we are taught. For example, just take a look at the "fall of the Roman Empire." Nothing matches the standard narrative. Even the concept of a Roman Empire "fall" has no real evidence to support it. It never fell at all. Even at the time when it was in power according to the standard narrative it wasn't the "biggest empire in the world." Rather, the Scythians were, and had been for from hundreds to thousands of years before the Romans were even a thing. (The "Romans" were likely originally a Scythian outpost. The Greeks almost certainly were.) At numerous times during the "Roman Empire" they paid tribute to the Scythians, thus they were, at least at some points, vassal states to the Scythian Empire. So was Judea/Israel. The Scythians retained power over that entire region for millennia, all the way up until the 17th century or so, when the Moscovy (or Rus) Khanate drove them out of most of what is now Russia. Still, Scythia proper remained a large and powerful nation (albeit a shirking one) until finally, in the 20th century when the USSR wiped them out of history by forcing them to adopt a new alphabet and burning all their recorded history (see pages 31 to 41). You may have heard of the Scythians called the "Mongols" or the "Tartarians," but they were the Scythians, a continuity of culture and government that ruled most of the Euro-Asiatic world for millennia. The Khazarians (who make up most of what we call "the Jews") were nothing more than a Scythian tribe, but then again, so were the Moscovians.

Regarding the "hidden hand", look at the special privileges given to the Jews in the Roman Empire "because of the respect for their religion." Look at the economic influence they had both before and after they were "persecuted." Look at the parallels in their special privileges in the Catholic world. Look at who really ran the "inquisitions." Look at the Jewish involvement in the creation, funding, and management of the Christian religion, from it's beginning (where by "beginning" I mean Saul/Paul's beginning, not Jesus's beginning). NOTHING is what we have been taught, or rather, the common narrative in all of those areas does not match with all of the evidence. The more you dig, the more evidence you find that fits a "hidden hand" theory, where it is the exact same hidden hand as that which controls the voices that sit at the top of "both sides" of our morality in the "modern era."

It goes back all throughout recorded history.

I completely agree that the cyclical nature of morality goes back throughout recorded history. However, there is substantial evidence that suggest that all of what we call "recorded history" (the parts we are generally taught) have been controlled by the same entity for all that time.

You seem to be assuming that the flow from one "power" or empire to another is organic. Maybe it is, maybe it is not completely organic, maybe it isn't organic at all. I have found a fair bit of evidence that suggests the last case, and the more I dig, the more I find that supports it. It seems that anything that looks organic is soon either taken over if it is useful, or erased from history (or almost erased in some cases) if it is not. At best the "it's all organic' theory does not account for all of the evidence and is almost certainly not true. Yet people truly believe in the organic thing.

We have been taught to not look at the connections, specifically the money connections. We have been taught to not look at the evidence of a continuity of control. It's "anti-Semetic," or "conspiracy theory," or even just plain "crazy" to suggest that the distant past and the present are fundamentally connected and controlled. Yet the more you dig, the more evidence there is that supports an intentional "social engineering" version of a "business cycle," going on for millennia. This has been accomplished by a continuous control of both sides of every narrative.

I suggest you take a relook at history without assuming the disconnect we are taught. For example, just take a look at the "fall of the Roman Empire." Nothing matches the standard narrative. Even the concept of a Roman Empire "fall" has no real evidence to support it. It never fell at all. Even at the time when it was in power according to the standard narrative it wasn't the "biggest empire in the world." Rather, the Scythians were, and had been for from hundreds to thousands of years before the Romans were even a thing. (The "Romans" were likely originally a Scythian outpost. The Greeks almost certainly were.) At numerous times during the "Roman Empire" they paid tribute to the Scythians, thus they were, at least at some points, vassal states to the Scythian Empire. So was Judea/Israel. The Scythians retained power over that entire region for millennia, all the way up until the 17th century or so, when the Moscovy (or Rus) Khanate drove them out of most of what is now Russia. Still, Scythia proper remained a large and powerful nation (albeit a shirking one) until finally, in the 20th century when the USSR wiped them out of history by forcing them to adopt a new alphabet and burning all their recorded history (see pages 31 to 41). You may have heard of the Scythians called the "Mongols" or the "Tartarians," but they were the Scythians, a continuity of culture and government that ruled most of the Euro-Asiatic world for millennia. The Khazarians (who make up most of what we call "the Jews") were nothing more than a Scythian tribe, but then again, so were the Moscovians.

Regarding the "hidden hand", look at the special privileges given to the Jews in the Roman Empire "because of the respect for their religion." Look at the economic influence they had both before and after they were "persecuted." Look at the parallels in their special privileges in the Catholic world. Look at who really ran the "inquisitions." Look at the Jewish involvement in the creation, funding, and management of the Christian religion, from it's beginning (where by "beginning" I mean Saul/Paul's beginning, not Jesus's beginning). NOTHING is what we have been taught, or rather, the common narrative in all of those areas does not match with all of the evidence. The more you dig, the more evidence you find that fits a "hidden hand" theory, where it is the exact same hidden hand as that which controls the voices that sit at the top of "both sides" of our morality in the "modern era."

It goes back all throughout recorded history.

I completely agree that the cyclical nature of morality goes back throughout recorded history. However, there is substantial evidence that suggest that all of what we call "recorded history" (the parts we are generally taught) have been controlled by the same entity for all that time.

You seem to be assuming that the flow from one "power" or empire to another is organic. Maybe it is, maybe it is not completely organic, maybe it isn't organic at all. I have found a fair bit of evidence that suggests the last case, and the more I dig, the more I find that supports it. It seems that anything that looks organic is soon either taken over if it is useful, or erased from history (or almost erased in some cases) if it is not. At best the "it's all organic' theory does not account for all of the evidence and is almost certainly not true. Yet people truly believe in the organic thing.

We have been taught to not look at the connections, specifically the money connections. We have been taught to not look at the evidence of a continuity of control. It's "anti-Semetic," or "conspiracy theory," or even just plain "crazy" to suggest that the distant past and the present are fundamentally connected and controlled. Yet the more you dig, the more evidence there is that supports an intentional "social engineering" version of a "business cycle," going on for millennia. This has been accomplished by a continuous control of both sides of every narrative.

I suggest you take a relook at history without assuming the disconnect we are taught. For example, just take a look at the "fall of the Roman Empire." Nothing matches the standard narrative. Even the concept of a Roman Empire "fall" has no real evidence to support it. It never fell at all. Even at the time when it was in power it wasn't the "biggest empire in the world." Rather, the Scythians were, and had been for from hundreds to thousands of years before the Romans were even a thing. (The "Romans" were likely originally a Scythian outpost. The Greeks almost certainly were.) At numerous times during the "Roman Empire" they paid tribute to the Scythians, thus they were, at least at some points, vassal states to the Scythian Empire. So was Judea/Israel. The Scythians retained power over that entire region for millennia, all the way up until the 17th century or so, when the Moscovy (or Rus) Khanate drove them out of most of what is now Russia. Still, Scythia proper remained a large and powerful nation (albeit a shirking one) until finally, in the 20th century when the USSR wiped them out of history by forcing them to adopt a new alphabet and burning all their recorded history (see pages 31 to 41). You may have heard of the Scythians called the "Mongols" or the "Tartarians," but they were the Scythians, a continuity of culture and government that ruled most of the Euro-Asiatic world for millennia. The Khazarians (who make up most of what we call "the Jews") were nothing more than a Scythian tribe, but then again, so were the Moscovians.

Regarding the "hidden hand", look at the special privileges given to the Jews in the Roman Empire "because of the respect for their religion." Look at the economic influence they had both before and after they were "persecuted." Look at the parallels in their special privileges in the Catholic world. Look at who really ran the "inquisitions." Look at the Jewish involvement in the creation, funding, and management of the Christian religion, from it's beginning (where by "beginning" I mean Saul/Paul's beginning, not Jesus's beginning). NOTHING is what we have been taught, or rather, the common narrative in all of those areas does not match with all of the evidence. The more you dig, the more evidence you find that fits a "hidden hand" theory, where it is the exact same hidden hand as that which controls the voices that sit at the top of "both sides" of our morality in the "modern era."

It goes back all throughout recorded history.

I completely agree that the cyclical nature of morality goes back throughout recorded history. However, there is substantial evidence that suggest that all of what we call "recorded history" (the parts we are generally taught) have been controlled by the same entity for all that time.

You seem to be assuming that the flow from one "power" or empire to another is organic. Maybe it is, maybe it is not completely organic, maybe it isn't organic at all. I have found a fair bit of evidence that suggests the last case, and the more I dig, the more I find that supports a "nothing is organic" theory. It seems that anything that looks organic is soon either taken over if it is useful, or erased from history (or almost erased in some cases) if it is not. At best the "it's all organic' theory does not account for all of the evidence and is almost certainly not true. Yet people truly believe in the organic thing.

We have been taught to not look at the connections, specifically the money connections. We have been taught to not look at the evidence of a continuity of control. It's "anti-Semetic," or "conspiracy theory," or even just plain "crazy" to suggest that the distant past and the present are fundamentally connected and controlled. Yet the more you dig, the more evidence there is that supports an intentional "social engineering" version of a "business cycle," going on for millennia. This has been accomplished by a continuous control of both sides of every narrative.

I suggest you take a relook at history without assuming the disconnect we are taught. For example, just take a look at the "fall of the Roman Empire." Nothing matches the standard narrative. Even the concept of a Roman Empire "fall" has no real evidence to support it. It never fell at all. Even at the time when it was in power it wasn't the "biggest empire in the world." Rather, the Scythians were, and had been for from hundreds to thousands of years before the Romans were even a thing. (The "Romans" were likely originally a Scythian outpost. The Greeks almost certainly were.) At numerous times during the "Roman Empire" they paid tribute to the Scythians, thus they were, at least at some points, vassal states to the Scythian Empire. So was Judea/Israel. The Scythians retained power over that entire region for millennia, all the way up until the 17th century or so, when the Moscovy (or Rus) Khanate drove them out of most of what is now Russia. Still, Scythia proper remained a large and powerful nation (albeit a shirking one) until finally, in the 20th century when the USSR wiped them out of history by forcing them to adopt a new alphabet and burning all their recorded history (see pages 31 to 41). You may have heard of the Scythians called the "Mongols" or the "Tartarians," but they were the Scythians, a continuity of culture and government that ruled most of the Euro-Asiatic world for millennia. The Khazarians (who make up most of what we call "the Jews") were nothing more than a Scythian tribe, but then again, so were the Moscovians.

Regarding the "hidden hand", look at the special privileges given to the Jews in the Roman Empire "because of the respect for their religion." Look at the economic influence they had both before and after they were "persecuted." Look at the parallels in their special privileges in the Catholic world. Look at who really ran the "inquisitions." Look at the Jewish involvement in the creation, funding, and management of the Christian religion, from it's beginning (where by "beginning" I mean Saul/Paul's beginning, not Jesus's beginning). NOTHING is what we have been taught, or rather, the common narrative in all of those areas does not match with all of the evidence. The more you dig, the more evidence you find that fits a "hidden hand" theory, where it is the exact same hidden hand as that which controls the voices that sit at the top of "both sides" of our morality in the "modern era."

It goes back all throughout recorded history.

I completely agree that the cyclical nature of morality goes back throughout recorded history. However, there is substantial evidence that suggest that all of what we call "recorded history" (the parts we are generally taught) have been controlled by the same entity for all that time.

You seem to be assuming that the flow from one "power" or empire to another is organic. Maybe it is, maybe it is not completely organic, maybe it isn't organic at all. I have found a fair bit of evidence that suggests the last case, and the more I dig, the more I find that supports a "nothing is organic" theory. It seems that anything that looks organic is soon either taken over if it is useful, or erased from history (or almost erased in some cases) if it is not. At best the "it's all organic' theory does not account for all of the evidence and is almost certainly not true. Yet people truly believe in the organic thing.

We have been taught to not look at the connections, specifically the money connections. We have been taught to not look at the evidence of a continuity of control. It's "anti-Semetic," or "conspiracy theory," or even just plain "crazy" to suggest that the distant past and the present are fundamentally connected and controlled. Yet the more you dig, the more evidence there is that supports an intentional "social engineering" version of a "business cycle," going on for millennia. This has been accomplished by a continuous control of both sides of every narrative.

I suggest you take a relook at history without assuming the disconnect we are taught. For example, just take a look at the "fall of the Roman Empire." Nothing matches the standard narrative. Even the concept of a Roman Empire "fall" has no real evidence to support it. It never fell at all. Even at the time when it was in power it wasn't the "biggest empire in the world." Rather, the Scythians were, and had been for from hundreds to thousands of years before the Romans were even a thing. (The "Romans" were likely originally a Scythian outpost. The Greeks almost certainly were.) At numerous times during the "Roman Empire" they paid tribute to the Scythians, thus they were, at least at some points, vassal states to the Scythian Empire. So was Judea/Israel. The Scythians retained power over that entire region for millennia, all the way up until the 17th century or so, when the Moscovy (or Rus) Khanate drove them out of most of what is now Russia. Still, Scythia proper remained a large and powerful nation (albeit a shirking one) until finally, in the 20th century when the USSR wiped them out of history by forcing them to adopt a new alphabet and burning all their recorded history (see pages 31 to 41). You may have heard of the Scythians called the "Mongols" or the "Tartarians," but they were the Scythians, a continuity of culture and government that ruled most of the Euro-Asiatic world for millennia. The Khazarians (who make up most of what we call "the Jews") were nothing more than a Scythian tribe, but then again, so were the Moscovians.

Regarding the "hidden hand", look at the special privileges given to the Jews in the Roman Empire "because of the respect for their religion." Look at the economic influence they had both before and after they were "persecuted." Look at the parallels in their special privileges in the Catholic world. Look at who really ran the "inquisitions." Look at the Jewish involvement in the creation, funding, and management of the Christian religion, from it's beginning (where by "beginning" I mean Paul's beginning, not Jesus's beginning). NOTHING is what we have been taught, or rather, the common narrative in all of those areas does not match with all of the evidence. The more you dig, the more evidence you find that fits a "hidden hand" theory, where it is the exact same hidden hand as that which controls the voices that sit at the top of "both sides" of our morality in the "modern era."

It goes back all throughout recorded history.

I completely agree that the cyclical nature of morality goes back throughout recorded history. However, there is substantial evidence that suggest that all of what we call "recorded history" (the parts we are generally taught) have been controlled by the same entity for all that time.

You seem to be assuming that the flow from one "power" or empire to another is organic. Maybe it is, maybe it is not completely organic, maybe it isn't organic at all. I have found a fair bit of evidence that suggests the last case, and the more I dig, the more I find that supports a "nothing is organic" theory. It seems that anything that looks organic is soon either taken over if it is useful, or shoved down the memory hole if it is not. At best the "it's all organic' theory does not account for all of the evidence and is almost certainly not true. Yet people truly believe in the organic thing.

We have been taught to not look at the connections, specifically the money connections. We have been taught to not look at the evidence of a continuity of control. It's "anti-Semetic," or "conspiracy theory," or even just plain "crazy" to suggest that the distant past and the present are fundamentally connected and controlled. Yet the more you dig, the more evidence there is that supports an intentional "social engineering" version of a "business cycle," going on for millennia. This has been accomplished by a continuous control of both sides of every narrative.

I suggest you take a relook at history without assuming the disconnect we are taught. For example, just take a look at the "fall of the Roman Empire." Nothing matches the standard narrative. Even the concept of a Roman Empire "fall" has no real evidence to support it. It never fell at all. Even at the time when it was in power it wasn't the "biggest empire in the world." Rather, the Scythians were, and had been for from hundreds to thousands of years before the Romans were even a thing. (The "Romans" were likely originally a Scythian outpost. The Greeks almost certainly were.) At numerous times during the "Roman Empire" they paid tribute to the Scythians, thus they were, at least at some points, vassal states to the Scythian Empire. So was Judea/Israel. The Scythians retained power over that entire region for millennia, all the way up until the 17th century or so, when the Moscovy (or Rus) Khanate drove them out of most of what is now Russia. Still, Scythia proper remained a large and powerful nation (albeit a shirking one) until finally, in the 20th century when the USSR wiped them out of history by forcing them to adopt a new alphabet and burning all their recorded history (see pages 31 to 41). You may have heard of the Scythians called the "Mongols" or the "Tartarians," but they were the Scythians, a continuity of culture and government that ruled most of the Euro-Asiatic world for millennia. The Khazarians (who make up most of what we call "the Jews") were nothing more than a Scythian tribe, but then again, so were the Moscovians.

Regarding the "hidden hand", look at the special privileges given to the Jews in the Roman Empire "because of the respect for their religion." Look at the economic influence they had both before and after they were "persecuted." Look at the parallels in their special privileges in the Catholic world. Look at who really ran the "inquisitions." Look at the Jewish involvement in the creation, funding, and management of the Christian religion, from it's beginning (where by "beginning" I mean Paul's beginning, not Jesus's beginning). NOTHING is what we have been taught, or rather, the common narrative in all of those areas does not match with all of the evidence. The more you dig, the more evidence you find that fits a "hidden hand" theory, where it is the exact same hidden hand as that which controls the voices that sit at the top of "both sides" of our morality in the "modern era."

It goes back all throughout recorded history.

I completely agree that the cyclical nature of morality goes back throughout recorded history. However, there is substantial evidence that suggest that all of what we call "recorded history" (the parts we are generally taught) have been controlled by the same entity for all that time.

You seem to be assuming that the flow from one "power" or empire to another is organic. Maybe it is, maybe it is not completely organic, maybe it isn't organic at all. I have found a fair bit of evidence that suggests the last case, and the more I dig, the more I find. At best the "it's all organic' theory does not account for all of the evidence and is almost certainly not true. Yet people truly believe in the organic thing.

We have been taught to not look at the connections, specifically the money connections. We have been taught to not look at the evidence of a continuity of control. It's "anti-Semetic," or "conspiracy theory," or even just plain "crazy" to suggest that the distant past and the present are fundamentally connected and controlled. Yet the more you dig, the more evidence there is that supports an intentional "social engineering" version of a "business cycle," going on for millennia. This has been accomplished by a continuous control of both sides of every narrative.

I suggest you take a relook at history without assuming the disconnect we are taught. For example, just take a look at the "fall of the Roman Empire." Nothing matches the standard narrative. Even the concept of a Roman Empire "fall" has no real evidence to support it. It never fell at all. Even at the time when it was in power it wasn't the "biggest empire in the world." Rather, the Scythians were, and had been for from hundreds to thousands of years before the Romans were even a thing. (The "Romans" were likely originally a Scythian outpost. The Greeks almost certainly were.) At numerous times during the "Roman Empire" they paid tribute to the Scythians, thus they were, at least at some points, vassal states to the Scythian Empire. So was Judea/Israel. The Scythians retained power over that entire region for millennia, all the way up until the 17th century or so, when the Moscovy (or Rus) Khanate drove them out of most of what is now Russia. Still, Scythia proper remained a large and powerful nation (albeit a shirking one) until finally, in the 20th century when the USSR wiped them out of history by forcing them to adopt a new alphabet and burning all their recorded history (see pages 31 to 41). You may have heard of the Scythians called the "Mongols" or the "Tartarians," but they were the Scythians, a continuity of culture and government that ruled most of the Euro-Asiatic world for millennia. The Khazarians (who make up most of what we call "the Jews") were nothing more than a Scythian tribe, but then again, so were the Moscovians.

Regarding the "hidden hand", look at the special privileges given to the Jews in the Roman Empire "because of the respect for their religion." Look at the economic influence they had both before and after they were "persecuted." Look at the parallels in their special privileges in the Catholic world. Look at who really ran the "inquisitions." Look at the Jewish involvement in the creation, funding, and management of the Christian religion, from it's beginning (where by "beginning" I mean Paul's beginning, not Jesus's beginning). NOTHING is what we have been taught, or rather, the common narrative in all of those areas does not match with all of the evidence. The more you dig, the more evidence you find that fits a "hidden hand" theory, where it is the exact same hidden hand as that which controls the voices that sit at the top of "both sides" of our morality in the "modern era."

It goes back all throughout recorded history.

I completely agree that the cyclical nature of morality goes back throughout recorded history. However, there is substantial evidence that suggest that all of what we call "recorded history" (the parts we are generally taught) have been controlled by the same entity for all that time.

You seem to be assuming that the flow from one "power" or empire to another is organic. Maybe it is, maybe it is not completely organic, maybe it isn't organic at all. I have found a fair bit of evidence that suggests the last case, and the more I dig, the more I find. At best the "it's all organic' theory does not account for all of the evidence and is almost certainly not true. Yet people truly believe in the organic thing.

We have been taught to not look at the connections, specifically the money connections. We have been taught to not look at the evidence of a continuity of control. It's "anti-Semetic," or "conspiracy theory," or even just plain "crazy" to suggest that the distant past and the present are fundamentally connected and controlled. Yet the more you dig, the more evidence there is that supports an intentional "social engineering" version of a "business cycle," going on for millennia. This has been accomplished by a continuous control of both sides of every narrative.

I suggest you take a relook at history without assuming the disconnect we are taught. For example, just take a look at the "fall of the Roman Empire." Nothing matches the standard narrative. Even the concept of a Roman Empire "fall" has no real evidence to support it. It never fell at all. Even at the time when it was in power it wasn't the "biggest empire in the world." Rather, the Scythians were, and had been for from hundreds to thousands of years before the Romans were even a thing. (The "Romans" were likely originally a Scythian outpost. The Greeks almost certainly were.) At numerous times during the "Roman Empire" they paid tribute to the Scythians, thus they were, at least at some points, vassal states to the Scythian Empire. So was Judea/Israel. The Scythians retained power over that entire region for millennia, all the way up until the 17th century or so, when the Moscovy (or Rus) Khanate drove them out of most of what is now Russia. Still, Scythia proper remained a nation until finally, in the 20th century when the USSR wiped them out of history by forcing them to adopt a new alphabet and burning all their recorded history (see pages 31 to 41). You may have heard of the Scythians called the "Mongols" or the "Tartarians," but they were the Scythians, a continuity of culture and government that ruled most of the Euro-Asiatic world for millennia. The Khazarians (who make up most of what we call "the Jews") were nothing more than a Scythian tribe, but then again, so were the Moscovians.

Regarding the "hidden hand", look at the special privileges given to the Jews in the Roman Empire "because of the respect for their religion." Look at the economic influence they had both before and after they were "persecuted." Look at the parallels in their special privileges in the Catholic world. Look at who really ran the "inquisitions." Look at the Jewish involvement in the creation, funding, and management of the Christian religion, from it's beginning (where by "beginning" I mean Paul's beginning, not Jesus's beginning). NOTHING is what we have been taught, or rather, the common narrative in all of those areas does not match with all of the evidence. The more you dig, the more evidence you find that fits a "hidden hand" theory, where it is the exact same hidden hand as that which controls the voices that sit at the top of "both sides" of our morality in the "modern era."

It goes back all throughout recorded history.

I completely agree that the cyclical nature of morality goes back throughout recorded history. However, there is substantial evidence that suggest that all of what we call "recorded history" (the parts we are generally taught) have been controlled by the same entity for all that time.

You seem to be assuming that the flow from one "power" or empire to another is organic. Maybe it is, maybe it is not completely organic, maybe it isn't organic at all. I have found a fair bit of evidence that suggests the last case, and the more I dig, the more I find. At best the "it's all organic' theory does not account for all of the evidence and is almost certainly not true. Yet people truly believe in the organic thing.

We have been taught to not look at the connections, specifically the money connections. We have been taught to not look at the evidence of a continuity of control. It's "anti-Semetic," or "conspiracy theory," or even just plain "crazy" to suggest that the distant past and the present are fundamentally connected and controlled. Yet the more you dig, the more evidence there is that supports an intentional "social engineering" version of a "business cycle," going on for millennia. This has been accomplished by a continuous control of both sides of every narrative.

I suggest you take a relook at history without assuming the disconnect we are taught. For example, just take a look at the "fall of the Roman Empire." Nothing matches the standard narrative. Even the concept of a Roman Empire "fall" has no real evidence to support it. It never fell at all. Even at the time when it was in power it wasn't the "biggest empire in the world." Rather, the Scythians were, and had been for from hundreds to thousands of years before the Romans were even a thing (they were likely originally a Scythian outpost). At numerous times during the "Roman Empire" they paid tribute to the Scythians, thus they were, at least at some points, vassal states to the Scythian Empire. So was Judea/Israel. The Scythians retained power over that entire region for millennia, all the way up until the 17th century or so, when the Moscovy (or Rus) Khanate drove them out of most of what is now Russia. Still, Scythia proper remained a nation until finally, in the 20th century when the USSR wiped them out of history by forcing them to adopt a new alphabet and burning all their recorded history (see pages 31 to 41). You may have heard of the Scythians called the "Mongols" or the "Tartarians," but they were the Scythians, a continuity of culture and government that ruled most of the Euro-Asiatic world for millennia. The Khazarians (who make up most of what we call "the Jews") were nothing more than a Scythian tribe, but then again, so were the Moscovians.

Regarding the "hidden hand", look at the special privileges given to the Jews in the Roman Empire "because of the respect for their religion." Look at the economic influence they had both before and after they were "persecuted." Look at the parallels in their special privileges in the Catholic world. Look at who really ran the "inquisitions." Look at the Jewish involvement in the creation, funding, and management of the Christian religion, from it's beginning (where by "beginning" I mean Paul's beginning, not Jesus's beginning). NOTHING is what we have been taught, or rather, the common narrative in all of those areas does not match with all of the evidence. The more you dig, the more evidence you find that fits a "hidden hand" theory, where it is the exact same hidden hand as that which controls the voices that sit at the top of "both sides" of our morality in the "modern era."

It goes back all throughout recorded history.

I completely agree that the cyclical nature of morality goes back throughout recorded history. However, there is substantial evidence that suggest that all of what we call "recorded history" (the parts we are generally taught) have been controlled by the same entity for all that time.

You seem to be assuming that the flow from one "power" or empire to another is organic. Maybe it is, maybe it is not completely organic, maybe it isn't organic at all. I have found a fair bit of evidence that suggests the last case, and the more I dig, the more I find. At best the "it's all organic' theory does not account for all of the evidence and is almost certainly not true. Yet people truly believe in the organic thing.

We have been taught to not look at the connections, specifically the money connections. We have been taught to not look at the evidence of a continuity of control. It's "anti-Semetic," or "conspiracy theory," or even just plain "crazy" to suggest that the distant past and the present are fundamentally connected and controlled. Yet the more you dig, the more evidence there is that supports an intentional "social engineering" version of a "business cycle," going on for millennia. This has been accomplished by a continuous control of both sides of every narrative.

I suggest you take a relook at history without assuming the disconnect we are taught. For example, just take a look at the "fall of the Roman Empire." Nothing matches the standard narrative. Even the concept of a Roman Empire "fall" has no real evidence to support it. It never fell at all. Even at the time when it was in power it wasn't the "biggest empire in the world." Rather, the Scythians were, and had been for from hundreds to thousands of years before the Romans were even a thing (they were likely originally a Scythian outpost). At numerous times during the "Roman Empire" they paid tribute to the Scythians, thus they were, at least at some points, vassal states to the Scythian Empire. So was Judea/Israel. The Scythians retained power over that entire region for millennia, all the way up until the 17th century or so, when the Moscovy (or Rus) Khanate drove them out of most of what is now Russia. Still, Scythia proper remained a nation until finally, in the 20th century when the USSR wiped them out of history by forcing them to adopt a new alphabet and burning all their recorded history (see pages 31 to 41). You may have heard of the Scythians called the "Mongols" or the "Tartarians," but they were the Scythians, a continuity of culture and government that ruled most of the Euro-Asiatic world for millennia. The Khazarians (who make up most of what we call "the Jews") were nothing more than a Scythian tribe, but then again, so were the Moscovians.

Regarding the "hidden hand", look at the special privileges given to the Jews in the Roman Empire "because of the respect for their religion." Look at the economic influence they had both before and after they were "persecuted." Look at the parallels in their special privileges in the Catholic world. Look at their involvement in the creation of the Christian religion. NOTHING is what we have been taught, or rather, the common narrative in all of those areas does not match with all of the evidence. The more you dig, the more evidence you find that fits a "hidden hand" theory, where it is the exact same hidden hand as that which controls the voices that sit at the top of "both sides" of our morality in the "modern era."

It goes back all throughout recorded history.

I completely agree that the cyclical nature of morality goes back throughout recorded history. However, there is substantial evidence that suggest that all of what we call "recorded history" (the parts we are generally taught) have been controlled by the same entity for all that time.

You seem to be assuming that the flow from one "power" or empire to another is organic. Maybe it is, maybe it is not completely organic, maybe it isn't organic at all. I have found a fair bit of evidence that suggests the last case, and the more I dig, the more I find. At best the "it's all organic' theory does not account for all of the evidence and is almost certainly not true. Yet people truly believe in the organic thing.

We have been taught to not look at the connections, specifically the money connections. We have been taught to not look at the evidence of a continuity of control. It's "anti-Semetic," or "conspiracy theory," or even just plain "crazy" to suggest that the distant past and the present are fundamentally connected and controlled. Yet the more you dig, the more evidence there is that supports an intentional "social engineering" version of a "business cycle," going on for millennia. This has been accomplished by a continuous control of both sides of every narrative.

I suggest you take a relook at history without assuming the disconnect we are taught. For example, just take a look at the "fall of the Roman Empire." Nothing matches the standard narrative. Even the concept of a Roman Empire "fall" has no real evidence to support it. It never fell at all. Even at the time when it was in power it wasn't the "biggest empire in the world." Rather, the Scythians were, and had been for from hundreds to thousands of years before the Romans were even a thing (they were likely originally a Scythian outpost). At numerous times during the "Roman Empire" they paid tribute to the Scythians, thus they were, at least at some points, vassal states to the Scythian Empire. So was Judea/Israel. The Scythians retained power over that entire region for millennia, all the way up until the 17th century or so, when the Moscovy (or Rus) Khanate drove them out of most of what is now Russia. Still, Scythia proper remained a nation until finally, in the 20th century when the USSR wiped them out of history by forcing them to adopt a new alphabet and burning all their recorded history (see pages 31 to 41). You may have heard of the Scythians called the "Mongols" or the "Tartarians," but they were the Scythians, a continuity of culture and government that ruled most of the Euro-Asiatic world for millennia. The Khazarians, btw were nothing more than a Scythian tribe, but then again, so were the Moscovians.

Regarding the "hidden hand", look at the special privileges given to the Jews in the Roman Empire "because of the respect for their religion." Look at the economic influence they had both before and after they were "persecuted." Look at the parallels in their special privileges in the Catholic world. Look at their involvement in the creation of the Christian religion. NOTHING is what we have been taught, or rather, the common narrative in all of those areas does not match with all of the evidence. The more you dig, the more evidence you find that fits a "hidden hand" theory, where it is the exact same hidden hand as that which controls the voices that sit at the top of "both sides" of our morality in the "modern era."

It goes back all throughout recorded history.

I completely agree that the cyclical nature of morality goes back throughout recorded history. However, there is substantial evidence that suggest that all of what we call "recorded history" (the parts we are generally taught) have been controlled by the same entity for all that time.

You seem to be assuming that the flow from one "power" or empire to another is organic. Maybe it is, maybe it is not completely organic, maybe it isn't organic at all. I have found a fair bit of evidence that suggests the last case, and the more I dig, the more I find. At best the "it's all organic' theory does not account for all of the evidence and is almost certainly not true. Yet people truly believe in the organic thing.

We have been taught to not look at the connections, specifically the money connections. We have been taught to not look at the evidence of a continuity of control. It's "anti-Semetic," or "conspiracy theory," or even just plain "crazy" to suggest that the distant past and the present are fundamentally connected and controlled. Yet the more you dig, the more evidence there is that supports an intentional "social engineering" version of a "business cycle," going on for millennia. This has been accomplished by a continuous control of both sides of every narrative.

I suggest you take a relook at history without assuming the disconnect we are taught. For example, just take a look at the "fall of the Roman Empire." Nothing matches the standard narrative. Even the concept of a Roman Empire "fall" has no real evidence to support it. It never fell at all. Even at the time when it was in power it wasn't the "biggest empire in the world." Rather, the Scythians were, and had been for from hundreds to thousands of years before the Romans were even a thing (they were likely originally a Scythian outpost). At numerous times during the "Roman Empire" they paid tribute to the Scythians, thus they were, at least at some points, vassal states to the Scythian Empire. So was Judea/Israel. The Scythians retained power over that entire region for millennia, all the way up until the 17th century or so, when the Moscovy (or Rus) Khanate drove them out of most of what is now Russia. Still, Scythia proper remained a nation until finally, in the 20th century when the USSR wiped them out of history by forcing them to adopt a new language and burning all their recorded history (see pages 31 to 41). You may have heard of the Scythians called the "Mongols" or the "Tartarians," but they were the Scythians, a continuity of culture and government that ruled most of the Euro-Asiatic world for millennia. The Khazarians, btw were nothing more than a Scythian tribe, but then again, so were the Moscovians.

Regarding the "hidden hand", look at the special privileges given to the Jews in the Roman Empire "because of the respect for their religion." Look at the economic influence they had both before and after they were "persecuted." Look at the parallels in their special privileges in the Catholic world. Look at their involvement in the creation of the Christian religion. NOTHING is what we have been taught, or rather, the common narrative in all of those areas does not match with all of the evidence. The more you dig, the more evidence you find that fits a "hidden hand" theory, where it is the exact same hidden hand as that which controls the voices that sit at the top of "both sides" of our morality in the "modern era."

It goes back all throughout recorded history.

I completely agree that the cyclical nature of morality goes back throughout recorded history. However, there is substantial evidence that suggest that all of what we call "recorded history" (the parts we are generally taught) have been controlled by the same entity for all that time.

You seem to be assuming that the flow from one "power" or empire to another is organic. Maybe it is, maybe it is not completely organic, maybe it isn't organic at all. I have found a fair bit of evidence that suggests the last case, and the more I dig, the more I find. At best the "it's all organic' theory does not account for all of the evidence and is almost certainly not true. Yet people truly believe in the organic thing.

We have been taught to not look at the connections, specifically the money connections. We have been taught to not look at the evidence of a continuity of control. It's "anti-Semetic," or "conspiracy theory," or even just plain "crazy" to suggest that the distant past and the present are fundamentally connected and controlled. Yet the more you dig, the more evidence there is that supports an intentional "social engineering" version of a "business cycle," going on for millennia. This has been accomplished by a continuous control of both sides of every narrative.

I suggest you take a relook at history without assuming the disconnect we are taught. For example, just take a look at the "fall of the Roman Empire." Nothing matches the standard narrative. Even the concept of a Roman Empire "fall" has no real evidence to support it. It never fell at all. Even at the time when it was in power it wasn't the "biggest empire in the world." Rather, the Scythians were, and had been for from hundreds to thousands of years before the Romans were even a thing (they were likely originally a Scythian outpost). At numerous times during the "Roman Empire" they paid tribute to the Scythians, thus they were, at least at some points, vassal states to the Scythian Empire. So was Judea/Israel. The Scythians retained power over that entire region for millennia, all the way up until the 17th century or so, when the Moscovy (or Rus) Khanate drove them out of most of what is now Russia. Still, Scythia proper remained a nation until finally, in the 20th century when the USSR wiped them out of history (see pages 31 to 41). You may have heard of the Scythians called the "Mongols" or the "Tartarians," but they were the Scythians, a continuity of culture and government that ruled most of the Euro-Asiatic world for millennia. The Khazarians, btw were nothing more than a Scythian tribe, but then again, so were the Moscovians.

Regarding the "hidden hand", look at the special privileges given to the Jews in the Roman Empire "because of the respect for their religion." Look at the economic influence they had both before and after they were "persecuted." Look at the parallels in their special privileges in the Catholic world. Look at their involvement in the creation of the Christian religion. NOTHING is what we have been taught, or rather, the common narrative in all of those areas does not match with all of the evidence. The more you dig, the more evidence you find that fits a "hidden hand" theory, where it is the exact same hidden hand as that which controls the voices that sit at the top of "both sides" of our morality in the "modern era."

It goes back all throughout recorded history.

I completely agree that the cyclical nature of morality goes back throughout recorded history. However, there is substantial evidence that suggest that all of what we call "recorded history" (the parts we are generally taught) have been controlled by the same entity for all that time.

You seem to be assuming that the flow from one "power" or empire to another is organic. Maybe it is, maybe it is not completely organic, maybe it isn't organic at all. I have found a fair bit of evidence that suggests the last case, and the more I dig, the more I find. At best the "it's all organic' theory does not account for all of the evidence and is almost certainly not true. Yet people truly believe in the organic thing.

We have been taught to not look at the connections, specifically the money connections. We have been taught to not look at the evidence of a continuity of control. It's "anti-Semetic," or "conspiracy theory," or even just plain "crazy" to suggest that the distant past and the present are fundamentally connected and controlled. Yet the more you dig, the more evidence there is that supports an intentional "social engineering" version of a "business cycle," going on for millennia. This has been accomplished by a continuous control of both sides of every narrative.

I suggest you take a relook at history without assuming the disconnect we are taught. For example, just take a look at the "fall of the Roman Empire." Nothing matches the standard narrative. Even the concept of a Roman Empire "fall" has no real evidence to support it. It never fell at all. Even at the time when it was in power it wasn't the "biggest empire in the world." Rather, the Scythians were, and had been for from hundreds to thousands of years before the Romans were even a thing (they were likely originally a Scythian outpost). The Scythians retained power for millennia afterwards, all the way up until the 17th century or so, when the Moscovy (or Rus) Khanate drove them out of most of what is now Russia. Still, they remained a nation until finally, in the 20th century when the USSR wiped them out of history (see pages 31 to 41). You may have heard of the Scythians called the "Mongols" or the "Tartarians," but they were the Scythians, a continuity of culture and government that ruled most of the Euro-Asiatic world for millennia. The Khazarians, btw were nothing more than a Scythian tribe, but then again, so were the Moscovians.

Regarding the "hidden hand", look at the special privileges given to the Jews in the Roman Empire "because of the respect for their religion." Look at the economic influence they had both before and after they were "persecuted." Look at the parallels in their special privileges in the Catholic world. Look at their involvement in the creation of the Christian religion. NOTHING is what we have been taught, or rather, the common narrative in all of those areas does not match with all of the evidence. The more you dig, the more evidence you find that fits a "hidden hand" theory, where it is the exact same hidden hand as that which controls the voices that sit at the top of "both sides" of our morality in the "modern era."

It goes back all throughout recorded history.

I completely agree that the cyclical nature of morality goes back throughout recorded history. However, there is substantial evidence that suggest that all of what we call "recorded history" (the parts we are generally taught) have been controlled by the same entity for all that time.

You seem to be assuming that the flow from one "power" or empire to another is organic. Maybe it is, maybe it is not completely organic, maybe it isn't organic at all. I have found a fair bit of evidence that suggests the last case, and the more I dig, the more I find. At best the "it's all organic' theory does not account for all of the evidence and is almost certainly not true. Yet people truly believe in the organic thing.

We have been taught to not look at the connections, specifically the money connections. We have been taught to not look at the evidence of a continuity of control. It's "anti-Semetic," or "conspiracy theory," or even just plain "crazy" to suggest that the distant past and the present are fundamentally connected and controlled. Yet the more you dig, the more evidence there is that supports an intentional "social engineering" version of a "business cycle," going on for millennia. This is accomplished by controlled both sides of the narrative.

I suggest you take a relook at history without assuming the disconnect we are taught. For example, just take a look at the "fall of the Roman Empire." Nothing matches the standard narrative. Even the concept of a Roman Empire "fall" has no real evidence to support it. It never fell at all. Even at the time when it was in power it wasn't the "biggest empire in the world." Rather, the Scythians were, and had been for from hundreds to thousands of years before the Romans were even a thing (they were likely originally a Scythian outpost). The Scythians retained power for millennia afterwards, all the way up until the 17th century or so, when the Moscovy (or Rus) Khanate drove them out of most of what is now Russia. Still, they remained a nation until finally, in the 20th century when the USSR wiped them out of history (see pages 31 to 41). You may have heard of the Scythians called the "Mongols" or the "Tartarians," but they were the Scythians, a continuity of culture and government that ruled most of the Euro-Asiatic world for millennia. The Khazarians, btw were nothing more than a Scythian tribe, but then again, so were the Moscovians.

Regarding the "hidden hand", look at the special privileges given to the Jews in the Roman Empire "because of the respect for their religion." Look at the economic influence they had both before and after they were "persecuted." Look at the parallels in their special privileges in the Catholic world. Look at their involvement in the creation of the Christian religion. NOTHING is what we have been taught, or rather, the common narrative in all of those areas does not match with all of the evidence. The more you dig, the more evidence you find that fits a "hidden hand" theory, where it is the exact same hidden hand as that which controls the voices that sit at the top of "both sides" of our morality in the "modern era."

It goes back all throughout recorded history.

I completely agree that the cyclical nature of morality goes back throughout recorded history. However, there is substantial evidence that suggest that all of what we call "recorded history" (the parts we are generally taught) have been controlled by the same entity for all that time.

You seem to be assuming that the flow from one "power" or empire to another is organic. Maybe it is, maybe it is not completely organic, maybe it isn't organic at all. I have found a fair bit of evidence that suggests the last case, and the more I dig, the more I find. At best the "it's all organic' theory does not account for all of the evidence and is almost certainly not true. Yet people truly believe in the organic thing.

We have been taught to not look at the connections, specifically the money connections. We have been taught to not look at the evidence of a continuity of control. It's "anti-Semetic," or "conspiracy theory," or even just plain "crazy" to suggest that the distant past and the present are fundamentally connected and controlled. Yet the more you dig, the more evidence there is that supports an intentional "social engineering" version of a "business cycle," going on for millennia. This is accomplished by controlled both sides of the narrative.

I suggest you take a relook at history without assuming the disconnect we are taught. For example, just take a look at the "fall of the Roman Empire." Nothing matches the standard narrative. Even the concept of a Roman Empire "fall" has no real evidence to support it. It never fell at all. Even at the time when it was in power it wasn't the "biggest empire in the world." Rather, the Scythians were, and had been for from hundreds to thousands of years before the Romans were even a thing (they were likely originally a Scythian outpost). The Scythians retained power for millennia afterwards, all the way up until the 17th century or so, when the Moscovy (or Rus) Khanate drove them out of most of what is now Russia. Still, they remained a nation until finally, in the 20th century when the USSR wiped them out of history (see pages 31 to 41). You may have heard of the Scythians called the "Mongols" or the "Tartarians," but they were the Scythians, a continuity of culture and government that ruled most of the Euro-Asiatic world for millennia. The Khazarians, btw were nothing more than a Scythian tribe, but then again, so were the Moscovians.

Regarding the "hidden hand", look at the special privileges given to the Jews in the Roman Empire government "because of the respect for their religion." Look at the economic influence they had both before and after they were "persecuted." Look at their involvement in the creation of the Christian religion. NOTHING is what we have been taught, or rather, the common narrative in all of those areas does not match with all of the evidence. The more you dig, the more evidence you find that fits a "hidden hand" theory, where it is the exact same hidden hand as that which controls the voices that sit at the top of "both sides" of our morality in the "modern era."

It goes back all throughout recorded history.

I completely agree that the cyclical nature of morality goes back throughout recorded history. However, there is substantial evidence that suggest that all of what we call "recorded history" (the parts we are generally taught) have been controlled by the same entity for all that time.

You seem to be assuming that the flow from one "power" or empire to another is organic. Maybe it is, maybe it is not completely organic, maybe it isn't organic at all. I have found a fair bit of evidence that suggests the last case, and the more I dig, the more I find. At best the "it's all organic' theory does not account for all of the evidence and is almost certainly not true. Yet people truly believe in the organic thing.

We have been taught to not look at the connections, specifically the money connections. We have been taught to not look at the evidence of a continuity of control. It's "anti-Semetic," or "conspiracy theory," or even just plain "crazy" to suggest that the distant past and the present are fundamentally connected and controlled. Yet the more you dig, the more evidence there is that supports an intentional "social engineering" version of a "business cycle," going on for millennia. This is accomplished by controlled both sides of the narrative.

I suggest you take a relook at history without assuming the disconnect we are taught. For example, just take a look at the "fall of the Roman Empire." Nothing matches the standard narrative. Even the concept of a Roman Empire "fall" has no real evidence to support it. It never fell at all. Even at the time when it was in power it wasn't the "biggest empire in the world." Rather, the Scythians were, and had been for from hundreds to thousands of years before the Romans were even a thing (they were likely originally a Scythian outpost). The Scythians retained power for millennia afterwards, all the way up until the 17th century or so, when the Moscovy (or Rus) Khanate drove them out of most of what is now Russia. Still, they remained a nation until finally, in the 20th century when the USSR wiped them out of history (see pages 31 to 41). You may have heard of the Scythians called the "Mongols" or the "Tartarians," but they were the Scythians, a continuity of culture and government that ruled most of the Euro-Asiatic world for millennia. The Khazarians were nothing more than a Scythian tribe, but then again, so were the Moscovians.

Regarding the "hidden hand", look at the special privileges given to the Jews in the Roman Empire government "because of the respect for their religion." Look at the economic influence they had both before and after they were "persecuted." Look at their involvement in the creation of the Christian religion. NOTHING is what we have been taught, or rather, the common narrative in all of those areas does not match with all of the evidence. The more you dig, the more evidence you find that fits a "hidden hand" theory, where it is the exact same hidden hand as that which controls the voices that sit at the top of "both sides" of our morality in the "modern era."

It goes back all throughout recorded history.

I completely agree that the cyclical nature of morality goes back throughout recorded history. However, there is substantial evidence that suggest that all of what we call "recorded history" (the parts we are generally taught) have been controlled by the same entity for all that time.

You seem to be assuming that the flow from one "power" or empire to another is organic. Maybe it is, maybe it is not completely organic, maybe it isn't organic at all. I have found a fair bit of evidence that suggests the last case, and the more I dig, the more I find. At best the "it's all organic' theory does not account for all of the evidence and is almost certainly not true. Yet people truly believe in the organic thing.

We have been taught to not look at the connections, specifically the money connections. We have been taught to not look at the evidence of a continuity of control. It's "anti-Semetic," or "conspiracy theory," or even just plain "crazy" to suggest that the distant past and the present are fundamentally connected and controlled. Yet the more you dig, the more evidence there is that supports an intentional "social engineering" version of a "business cycle," going on for millennia. This is accomplished by controlled both sides of the narrative.

I suggest you take a relook at history without assuming the disconnect we are taught. For example, just take a look at the "fall of the Roman Empire." Nothing matches the standard narrative. Even the concept of a Roman Empire "fall" has no real evidence to support it. It never fell at all. Even at the time when it was in power it wasn't the "biggest empire in the world." Rather, the Scythians were, and had been for from hundreds to thousands of years before the Romans were even a thing (they were likely originally a Scythian outpost). The Scythians retained power for millennia afterwards, all the way up until the 17th century or so, when the Moscovy (or Rus) Khanate drove them out of most of what is now Russia. Still, they remained a nation until finally, in the 20th century when the USSR wiped them out of history (see pages 31 to 41). You may have heard of the Scythians called the "Mongols" or the "Tartarians," but they were the Scythians, a continuity of culture and government that ruled most of the Euro-Asiatic world for millennia.

Look at the special privileges given to the Jews in that government "because of the respect for their religion." Look at the economic influence they had both before and after they were "persecuted." Look at their involvement in the creation of the Christian religion. NOTHING is what we have been taught, or rather, the common narrative in all of those areas does not match with all of the evidence. The more you dig, the more evidence you find that fits a "hidden hand" theory, where it is the exact same hidden hand as that which controls the voices that sit at the top of "both sides" of our morality in the "modern era."

It goes back all throughout recorded history.

I completely agree that the cyclical nature of morality goes back throughout recorded history. However, there is substantial evidence that suggest that all of what we call "recorded history" (the parts we are generally taught) have been controlled by the same entity for all that time.

You seem to be assuming that the flow from one "power" or empire to another is organic. Maybe it is, maybe it is not completely organic, maybe it isn't organic at all. I have found a fair bit of evidence that suggests the last case, and the more I dig, the more I find. At best the "it's all organic' theory does not account for all of the evidence and is almost certainly not true. Yet people truly believe in the organic thing.

We have been taught to not look at the connections, specifically the money connections. We have been taught to not look at the evidence of a continuity of control. It's "anti-Semetic," or "conspiracy theory," or even just plain "crazy" to suggest that the distant past and the present are fundamentally connected and controlled. Yet the more you dig, the more evidence there is that supports an intentional "social engineering" version of a "business cycle," going on for millennia. This is accomplished by controlled both sides of the narrative.

I suggest you take a relook at history without assuming the disconnect we are taught. For example, just take a look at the "fall of the Roman Empire." Nothing matches the standard narrative. Even the concept of a Roman Empire "fall" has no real evidence to support it. It never fell at all. Even at the time when it was in power it wasn't the "biggest empire in the world." Rather, the Scythians were, and had been for from hundreds to thousands of years before the Romans were even a thing (they were likely originally a Scythian outpost). The Scythians retained power for millennia afterwards, all the way up until the 17th century or so, when the Moscovy (or Rus) Khanate drove them out of most of what is now Russia. Still, they remained a nation until finally, in the 20th century when the USSR wiped them out of history. You may have heard of them as the "Mongols" or the "Tartarians," but they were the Scythians, and they ruled most of the world for millennia.

Look at the special privileges given to the Jews in that government "because of the respect for their religion." Look at the economic influence they had both before and after they were "persecuted." Look at their involvement in the creation of the Christian religion. NOTHING is what we have been taught, or rather, the common narrative in all of those areas does not match with all of the evidence. The more you dig, the more evidence you find that fits a "hidden hand" theory, where it is the exact same hidden hand as that which controls the voices that sit at the top of "both sides" of our morality in the "modern era."

It goes back all throughout recorded history.

I completely agree that the cyclical nature of morality goes back throughout recorded history. However, there is substantial evidence that suggest that all of what we call "recorded history" (the parts we are generally taught) have been controlled by the same entity for all that time.

You seem to be assuming that the flow from one "power" or empire to another is organic. Maybe it is, maybe it is not completely organic, maybe it isn't organic at all. I have found a fair bit of evidence that suggests the last case, and the more I dig, the more I find. At best the "it's all organic' theory does not account for all of the evidence and is almost certainly not true. Yet people truly believe in the organic thing.

We have been taught to not look at the connections, specifically the money connections. We have been taught to not look at the evidence of a continuity of control. It's "anti-Semetic," or "conspiracy theory," or even just plain "crazy" to suggest that the distant past and the present are fundamentally connected and controlled. Yet the more you dig, the more evidence there is that supports an intentional "social engineering" version of a "business cycle," going on for millennia. This is accomplished by controlled both sides of the narrative.

I suggest you take a relook at history without assuming the disconnect we are taught. For example, just take a look at the "fall of the Roman Empire." Nothing matches the standard narrative. Even the concept of a Roman Empire "fall" has no real evidence to support it. It never fell at all.

Look at the special privileges given to the Jews in that government "because of the respect for their religion." Look at the economic influence they had both before and after they were "persecuted." Look at their involvement in the creation of the Christian religion. NOTHING is what we have been taught, or rather, the common narrative in all of those areas does not match with all of the evidence. The more you dig, the more evidence you find that fits a "hidden hand" theory, where it is the exact same hidden hand as that which controls the voices that sit at the top of "both sides" of our morality in the "modern era."

It goes back all throughout recorded history.

I completely agree that the cyclical nature of morality goes back throughout recorded history. However, there is substantial evidence that suggest that all of what we call "recorded history" (the parts we are generally taught) have been controlled by the same entity for all that time.

You seem to be assuming that the flow from one "power" or empire to another is organic. Maybe it is, maybe it is not completely organic, maybe it isn't organic at all. I have found a fair bit of evidence that suggests the last case, and the more I dig, the more I find. At best the "it's all organic' theory does not account for all of the evidence and is almost certainly not true. Yet people truly believe in the organic thing.

We have been taught to not look at the connections, specifically the money connections. We have been taught to not look at the evidence of a continuity of control. It's "anti-Semetic," or "conspiracy theory," or even just plain "crazy" to suggest that the distant past and the present are fundamentally connected and controlled. Yet the more you dig, the more evidence there is that supports an intentional "social engineering" version of a "business cycle," going on for millennia. This is accomplished by controlled both sides of the narrative.

I suggest you take a relook at history without assuming the disconnect we are taught. For example, just take a look at the "fall of the Roman Empire." Nothing matches the standard narrative. Look at the special privileges given to the Jews in that government "because of the respect for their religion." Look at the economic influence they had both before and after they were "persecuted." Look at their involvement in the creation of the Christian religion. NOTHING is what we have been taught, or rather, the common narrative in all of those areas does not match with all of the evidence. The more you dig, the more evidence you find that fits a "hidden hand" theory, where it is the exact same hidden hand as that which controls the voices that sit at the top of "both sides" of our morality in the "modern era."

It goes back all throughout recorded history.

I completely agree that the cyclical nature of morality goes back throughout recorded history. However, there is substantial evidence that suggest that all of what we call "recorded history" (the parts we are generally taught) have been controlled by the same entity for all that time.

You seem to be assuming that the flow from one "power" or empire to another is organic. Maybe it is, maybe it is not completely organic, maybe it isn't organic at all. I have found a fair bit of evidence that suggests the last case, and the more I dig, the more I find. At best the "it's all organic' theory does not account for all of the evidence and is almost certainly not true. Yet people truly believe in the organic thing.

We have been taught to not look at the connections, specifically the money connections. We have been taught to not look at the evidence of a continuity of control. It's "anti-Semetic," or "conspiracy theory," or even just plain "crazy" to suggest that the distant past and the present are fundamentally connected and controlled. Yet the more you dig, the more evidence there is that supports an intentional "social engineering" version of a "business cycle," going on for millennia.

I suggest you take a relook at history without assuming the disconnect we are taught. For example, just take a look at the "fall of the Roman Empire." Nothing matches the standard narrative. Look at the special privileges given to the Jews in that government "because of the respect for their religion." Look at the economic influence they had both before and after they were "persecuted." Look at their involvement in the creation of the Christian religion. NOTHING is what we have been taught, or rather, the common narrative in all of those areas does not match with all of the evidence. The more you dig, the more evidence you find that fits a "hidden hand" theory, where it is the exact same hidden hand as that which controls the voices that sit at the top of "both sides" of our morality in the "modern era."