Has the United States always been something of a principality of the old world order ?

a reply to: nOraKat

Furthermore, where do you think the Red and White stripes come from?

Wrong.

The Red & White Stripes come from George Washington's English Family Coat Of Arms as illustrated below.



www.revolvy.com...

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
The other thing he needs to consider is that the HRE existed before European heraldry ..

That is incorrect.

(Herzog Leopold I of Austria, 976 AD)


What do you see there inside the lower center of the circle?

That is heraldry, and that is during the time of the HRE.

a reply to: dfnj2015

I find the London Times comment to be little far fetched. Is there a link to publication?

If being wealthy was just a matter of printing money and issuing it to people, every country in the world would be doing it.

House of Windsor together with the Venetian banking families and Vatican have been ruling the western world for a long time.

House of Windsor are direct descendents of the Duke of Normandy aka William the Conquerer who is also a descendant of Charlamagne.

These bloodlines rule most of Scandanavia and Europe. The Vatican has the Swiss as a vessel ans private banking empire thats used to finance war and control politics in the west.

The Vatican has been in control of the world establishing networks of intelligence through the church globally.

I wish I knew more about Chinese history but I dont

a reply to: alldaylong

The East India flag complete with it's 13 Red and White stripes already existed by at least 1600 AD as Buckminster Fuller has pointed out in his book Critical Path. George Washington had not been born yet. He was born in 1732.

P 78. is important to note that, while the British Empire as a world government lost the American Revolution, the power structure behind it did not lose the war. The most visible of the power-structure identities was the East India Company, an entirely private enterprise whose flag as adopted by Queen Elizabeth in 1600 happened to have thirteen red and white horizontal stripes with a blue rectangle in its upper lefthand corner. The blue rectangle bore in red and white the superimposed crosses of St. Andrew and St. George.

By pure chance I happened to uncover this popularly unknown episode of American history. Commissioned in 1970 by the Indian government to design new airports in Bombay, New Delhi, and Madras, I was visiting the grand palace of the British fortress in Madras, where the English first established themselves in India in 1600. There I saw a picture of Queen Elizabeth I and the flag of the East India Company of 1600 a.d., with its thirteen red and white horizontal stripes and its superimposed crosses in the upper corner. What astonished me was that this flag (which seemed to be the American flag) was apparently being used in 1600 a.d., 175 years before the American Revolution.

- Critical Path, Buckminster Fuller

a reply to: nOraKat

The Roman empire had a hard time in Northwestern Europe especially in Norway/Ireland. The Anglo-Saxons of Germany and Britain did become part of the Roman empire and really the Catholic church more than anything.

The church and ruling bloodlines of Europe are what you want to be looking at.

They have beliefs about being from the antideluvian empires. They believe they are Devine beings who the god(s) have chosen to rule over humanity.

a reply to: toysforadults

Who exactly in the Vatican do you think has this control ? The elected Pope? Cardinals?

How do they interface with governments, banking etc, or exert their influence?

----

Coincidentally, I was in Manhattan when a cardinal or some religious figure was visiting a church there and I saw police guards with the most unbelievable body armor and massive guns. They looked like guns that should be placed on a turret. I couldn't believe the defense there. I was wondering - why would a religious figure / representative need so much security?


----

Also found this interesting article:

In Europe, as it became common for younger sons of dynastic houses to seek careers in the church hierarchy, especially when they were expected to be excluded from the succession, members of royal families and the aristocracy began to occupy many of the highest prelatures; examples include Henry, Cardinal-Duke of York, the second grandson of James II of England, and Henry, Cardinal-King of Portugal, the fifth son of Manuel I of Portugal. Even popes openly created Cardinal nephews from their own family. However, these are individual cases; the term Prince of the church applies rather to the following institutionalised cases.

- article

originally posted by: nOraKat
It sure is, its hidden under his cloak, not in the open.

If something were hidden you wouldn't be able to see it.

We're not talking about just any eagle, its this particular eagle in the same orientation, with the details I pointed out - talons holding something on each leg, etc.

Just like a Roman standard. Look on the attic of the arch of Trajan.

a reply to: nOraKat


Dude, that was painted in 1489, it's not contemporaneous. European heraldry didn't arise until the 9th century, Charlemagne, the founder of the HRE, lived in the 6th and 7th centuries.

As I said in my post the HRE existed without heraldry for centuries before borrowing from the Romans. You do know what the 'R' in 'HRE' stands for, right?

originally posted by: nOraKat
Germany was also a part of the Holy Roman Empire and many figures associated with the development in America through various agents come from there; in particular Hesse-Kassel.

Wow is that right? From Hesse? That just blew my mind. One of the main British developers of southern Africa was actually also from Hesse.......................... Lord Afred Milner. A coincidence or what

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: nOraKat
It sure is, its hidden under his cloak, not in the open.

If something were hidden you wouldn't be able to see it.

You know what I'm saying. It's partly hidden. Its conveying that it is hidden.. I shouldn't even respond to you.

originally posted by: nOraKat
You know what I'm saying. It's partly hidden.

Oh, now it's 'partly hidden'. Can you still see it? Yeah? Then what's your point.

I shouldn't even respond to you.

But you will.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

And anyway, putting all connections of symbolism aside, there are real connections of power structures (people) stemming from the late HRE, to Europe (in the days of colonization and development of USA), to the USA

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Now your just being a jerk.

I already stated my point. You can go back and read.

a reply to: nOraKat


So? What does that have to do with you conflating symbols and purposefully misrepresenting their origins?

originally posted by: nOraKat
I already stated my point. You can go back and read.

Your point is irrelevant, if the sculpture wanted to hide something it wouldn't be a foot and a half tall and highly visible to anyone who isn't legally blind.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
a reply to: nOraKat

..that was painted in 1489, it's not contemporaneous.

That's a good point, we don't know if what is depicted in the painting and flags was ever used. Even if I were right, it doesn't negate your statement, I think I interpreted it (your statement) wrong.

Here are some early origins of heraldry from an article on heraldry:

("Shields from the "Magister Militum Praesentalis II". From the Notitia Dignitatum, a medieval copy of a Late Roman register of military commands")

I guess from ancient Rome (?).. hey look at that, its the symbol from Conan the Barbarian.

Anyway I don't think anyone can say definitively when heraldry (i.e. using images of symbols on shields to represent themselves as a lineage or dynasty) was first used.

I forgot why I got into this discussion in the first place.. anyway have nothing more to say on the subject.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Ok, I'll repeat myself.

I said that I believe the statue is conveying something (making a statement) by representing a Fasces half hidden under his cloak.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

How am I "conflating symbols and purposefully misrepresenting their origins"?

originally posted by: nOraKat
I said that I believe the statue is conveying something (making a statement) by representing a Fasces half hidden under his cloak.

Conveying what?