SH Archive Napoleonic Oddities

[Archive]

Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: Recognition
Date: 2019-06-29 20:46:25
Reaction Score: 1

They neglected to mention that Napoleon was an egomaniacal self-promoting liar that lost half his battles and willingly sacrificed his men if needed to promote his self-aggrandizement. They did mention that he poisoned his sick soldiers in order to be rid of the burden of them. What was surprising is that the narrator declares that Napoleon is some sort of idol to him. How could anyone think that sort of character is praise-worthy?

'he poisoned his sick soldiers in order to be rid of the burden of them' holy moly!

 

[trismegistus]

Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: trismegistus
Date: 2019-06-30 17:25:15
Reaction Score: 2

I was paging through some old books in a bookstore yesterday and I came across this interesting photo inside. The book is some sort of monthly magazine (an encyclopedia of sorts) from 1887.

 

[AthroposRex]

Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: AnthroposRex
Date: 2019-07-01 16:42:14
Reaction Score: 1

I was paging through some old books in a bookstore yesterday and I came across this interesting photo inside. The book is some sort of monthly magazine (an encyclopedia of sorts) from 1887.

View attachment 24803

I was curious as to the five armed Maltese cross around his neck.
I dug a bit and found that it is referred to as "French Legion of honor medal"

I want to assume they mean a medal of honor for the French Legion, but maybe it says what it says.

It's interesting how the logo on the main medals looks like a sun with rays. Like the Japanese battle flag. Then they make the honor cross by isolating certain rays.

 

[Timeshifter]

Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: Timeshifter
Date: 2019-07-01 17:38:52
Reaction Score: 1

I was paging through some old books in a bookstore yesterday and I came across this interesting photo inside. The book is some sort of monthly magazine (an encyclopedia of sorts) from 1887.

View attachment 24803

Is it just me, or does that portrait look like every other one of, Napoleon?....

 

[Archive]

Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: Red Bird
Date: 2019-07-05 14:18:42
Reaction Score: 6

http://mileswmathis.com/napoleon.pdf
Napoleon was Jewish
Everyone was/is Jewish according to miles Mathis, but his evidence is compelling.
It’s a great article debunking the Napoleon story.


Notice his hand. He is doing the Napoleon thing there, isn't he? Why? Well, we know Marx was Jewish. Might this be some sort of signal? He is keeping something “close to the vest” there. Might it be the same thing Napoleon is keeping close to his vest?
Before you dismiss this as ridiculous, you should know that many famous people have thought Napoleon is Jewish. So I am not the first to suggest it. Benjamin Disraeli, the only Jewish Prime Minister of England, implied Napoleon was Jewish. Disraeli wrote fiction, and in his book Tancred, (published in 1847—note the date), he said through his narrator Sidonia that crypto-Jews were everywhere in positions of power, as generals, academics and statesmen. He said that not only was Napoleon a Jew, but that Mozart, Beethoven, and Haydn were Jewish also. As a Jew, Disraeli would know. In his next book, Lord George Bentinck, Disraeli went further, telling us
The first Jesuits were Jews; that mysterious Russian diplomacy which so alarms western Europe is organized and principally carried on by Jews. . . . men of Jewish race are found at the head of every one of these [Communist and Socialist] groups.
Hmmm. Seems to confirm what I found in recent papers, doesn't it?
...

Since the same group of people own the entire world now, they can't allow their fake wars to actually damage their important properties. They can't allow the bombs to destroy anything of real value. This

is why you never see a firebombing of Paris or London or Vienna, and why I think even the firebombing of Dresden was faked. This is why Napoleon never attacked England, and why Hitler pretty much spared her as well. This is why Japan never attacked Los Angeles or San Francisco. And it is why Germany never bombed the East Coast of the US. If the US could fly across the Pacific to bomb Tokyo, why couldn't Germany just as easily fly across the much smaller Atlantic and bomb New York or DC? Funny how no one ever asks that question.
...

For instance, in Napoleon's Italian campaign, the main goal seems to have been looting. He didn't need to defeat Austria to do that. In fact, France was outnumbered 4 to 3 by Allied troops. Despite that, and despite the fact that France had been at war with Piedmont for over three years, we are told Napoleon defeated Piedmont in two weeks. We are told Allied losses numbered 25,000. In two weeks? You have to be kidding me! The only way Napoleon could have killed 25,000 in two weeks is if he had been armed with nuclear weapons. Plus, that number is supposed to be half the Allied total troops. The paragraph before, we are told Napoleon had 37,000 troops and his enemy 50,000. So the Allies lost half that in two weeks!
We are told Napoleon lost 6,000 in this exchange, so that takes the French army down to about 31,000.

But after fighting the major battle of Lodi, Napoleon suddenly has 50,000 men. Where did the reinforcements come from? We were just told the paragraph before that
Bonaparte had no chance of gaining reinforcements as the Republican war effort was being concentrated on the massive offensives planned on the Rhine....(ON AND ON IT GOES)
...

Since all of this reads like bad fiction, my assumption is France and Austria huddled and decided to loot Italy between them.
(This was my theory. Same as Alexander the Great- groups conspired to asset strip certain countries that were ripe for picking and the legends built around the ‘heroes’, also to capture the Holy Roman Empire which he covers a bit)
...

Addendum April 25, 2017: Not many people now know that Napoleon's younger brother was Jerome Bonaparte, and his grandson was a man named Charles Joseph Bonaparte. This Bonaparte was Theodore Roosevelt's Secretary of the Navy and later Attorney General. In this capacity, he founded the Bureau of Investigation in 1908, which became the FBI. So, like his great-uncle, this Bonaparte was Prince of the Spooks. Remember, Military Intelligence at that time was led by Naval Intelligence. ONI was created in 1882 by William H. Hunt, also Secretary of the Navy, probably an ancestor of E. Howard Hunt. These Hunts were also Sears, Palmers, Clarkes, Tripps, Ayres, Paines, Potters and Moshers, giving them Jewish roots like the Bonapartes...

 

[asatiger1966]

Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: asatiger1966
Date: 2019-08-17 06:10:39
Reaction Score: 8

http://mileswmathis.com/napoleon.pdf
Napoleon was Jewish
Everyone was/is Jewish according to miles Mathis, but his evidence is compelling.
It’s a great article debunking the Napoleon story.

Notice his hand. He is doing the Napoleon thing there, isn't he? Why? Well, we know Marx was Jewish. Might this be some sort of signal? He is keeping something “close to the vest” there. Might it be the same thing Napoleon is keeping close to his vest?
Before you dismiss this as ridiculous, you should know that many famous people have thought Napoleon is Jewish. So I am not the first to suggest it. Benjamin Disraeli, the only Jewish Prime Minister of England, implied Napoleon was Jewish. Disraeli wrote fiction, and in his book Tancred, (published in 1847—note the date), he said through his narrator Sidonia that crypto-Jews were everywhere in positions of power, as generals, academics and statesmen. He said that not only was Napoleon a Jew, but that Mozart, Beethoven, and Haydn were Jewish also. As a Jew, Disraeli would know. In his next book, Lord George Bentinck, Disraeli went further, telling us
The first Jesuits were Jews; that mysterious Russian diplomacy which so alarms western Europe is organized and principally carried on by Jews. . . . men of Jewish race are found at the head of every one of these [Communist and Socialist] groups.
Hmmm. Seems to confirm what I found in recent papers, doesn't it?
...

Since the same group of people own the entire world now, they can't allow their fake wars to actually damage their important properties. They can't allow the bombs to destroy anything of real value. This

is why you never see a firebombing of Paris or London or Vienna, and why I think even the firebombing of Dresden was faked. This is why Napoleon never attacked England, and why Hitler pretty much spared her as well. This is why Japan never attacked Los Angeles or San Francisco. And it is why Germany never bombed the East Coast of the US. If the US could fly across the Pacific to bomb Tokyo, why couldn't Germany just as easily fly across the much smaller Atlantic and bomb New York or DC? Funny how no one ever asks that question.
...

For instance, in Napoleon's Italian campaign, the main goal seems to have been looting. He didn't need to defeat Austria to do that. In fact, France was outnumbered 4 to 3 by Allied troops. Despite that, and despite the fact that France had been at war with Piedmont for over three years, we are told Napoleon defeated Piedmont in two weeks. We are told Allied losses numbered 25,000. In two weeks? You have to be kidding me! The only way Napoleon could have killed 25,000 in two weeks is if he had been armed with nuclear weapons. Plus, that number is supposed to be half the Allied total troops. The paragraph before, we are told Napoleon had 37,000 troops and his enemy 50,000. So the Allies lost half that in two weeks!
We are told Napoleon lost 6,000 in this exchange, so that takes the French army down to about 31,000.

But after fighting the major battle of Lodi, Napoleon suddenly has 50,000 men. Where did the reinforcements come from? We were just told the paragraph before that
Bonaparte had no chance of gaining reinforcements as the Republican war effort was being concentrated on the massive offensives planned on the Rhine....(ON AND ON IT GOES)
...

Since all of this reads like bad fiction, my assumption is France and Austria huddled and decided to loot Italy between them.
(This was my theory. Same as Alexander the Great- groups conspired to asset strip certain countries that were ripe for picking and the legends built around the ‘heroes’, also to capture the Holy Roman Empire which he covers a bit)
...

Addendum April 25, 2017: Not many people now know that Napoleon's younger brother was Jerome Bonaparte, and his grandson was a man named Charles Joseph Bonaparte. This Bonaparte was Theodore Roosevelt's Secretary of the Navy and later Attorney General. In this capacity, he founded the Bureau of Investigation in 1908, which became the FBI. So, like his great-uncle, this Bonaparte was Prince of the Spooks. Remember, Military Intelligence at that time was led by Naval Intelligence. ONI was created in 1882 by William H. Hunt, also Secretary of the Navy, probably an ancestor of E. Howard Hunt. These Hunts were also Sears, Palmers, Clarkes, Tripps, Ayres, Paines, Potters and Moshers, giving them Jewish roots like the Bonapartes...

History as we were taught is mostly bogus period.

The military bases in Europe taught a different history in their high schools than what we got, during the 50s,60s and 70s.

Example:
The Europeans thought that there were only two geniuses during the Civil War. Abraham Lincoln and Nathan Bedford Forrest. In my thinking they were fifty percent right.

Napoleons father was from Corsica , the island and was born there the same year that France conquered the island 1769.

The images below, from letters and despatches of the First Napoleon were published by Captian D. A. Bingham in 1884.
On page three it is stated that his father Charles Bonaparte was the last of his race?

After reading the dispatches of the First Napoleon you will undoubtedly understand that Napoleon hated Rome, Jesuits and all whom would deprive liberty to their people. War and the destruction of empires was very personal to him. He actually despised and hated them.

 

[KD Archive]

Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: KorbenDallas
Date: 2019-08-17 14:24:39
Reaction Score: 2

On page three it is stated that his father Charles Bonaparte was the last of his race?

Wondering what the meaning of this could be.

 

[Archive]

Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: Red Bird
Date: 2019-08-17 14:42:52
Reaction Score: 1

When googling Nabuleon only Napoleon came up with no mention why this would be in the descriptions. It’s not that close. This also came up

Napoleon definition, a pastry consisting of thin layers of puff paste interlaid with a cream or custard filling.

After reading the dispatches of the First Napoleon you will undoubtedly understand that Napoleon hated Rome, Jesuits and all whom would deprive liberty to their people. War and the destruction of empires was very personal to him. He actually despised and hated th

This may be true but it seems to me he was another actor and didn’t go farther than was told. I think the whole revolution may have been to loot the Vatican, and put them back in line. Or SOMETHING to do with the Vatican.

 

[Archive]

Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: Apollyon
Date: 2019-08-17 17:12:32
Reaction Score: 2

What do you guys think about this? left "Emperor Norton" right son of Napoleon 3

came to this just by looking at their images but i found wiki had this to say.
Norton was the subject of many tales. One popular story suggested that he was the son of Emperor Napoleon III and that his claim of coming from South Africa was a ruse to prevent persecution.

also

Napoleon and the Greek Myth of Perseus

Sometimes our lives follow archetypal patterns, and these archetypes are often spelled out in myths. Myths reveal hidden spiritual truths in a symbolic way. In this way, myths can in some ways be somewhat prophetic. Take for example, the life of Napoleon Bonaparte, a brilliant military leader, and the Greek myth of Perseus.

Most know Perseus as the Greek hero who beheaded Medusa, one of the Gorgons whose look could turn people into stone. She was once a woman who was punished for her vanity in her looks, especially her hair: Athena punished her by turning her hair into snakes. In a certain sense, its an archetype for one who is born beautiful becomes vain in their looks, would like others to look at them, and ignores the inner development of the soul. Perseus was able to defeat Medusa by looking at her through a mirrored shield, and using that was able to cut off her head.



So what does this have to do with Napoleon, a French leader who was born many centuries after the original myth? Napoleon setup a new dynastic empire after the fall of the French monarchy: in the French Revolution, both King Louis XVI and his wife Marie Antoinette were beheaded in 1793, giving Napoleon his opportunity to rise to power afterwards:





There are differing accounts concerning how Marie Antoinette's hair had turned white: one account states that her hair turned white when the King and his family failed to flee from France at the beginning of the revolution.

But returning to the myth of Perseus: the name Perseus most probably means "destroyer". The name Napoleon means "new destroyer", derived from the Greek word Apollyon. Perseus was cast out from the mainland and grew up on the island of Seriphos, raised by a fisherman; Napoleon did not grow up on mainland France but instead was born on the island of Corsica. Later Napoleon was exiled to the island of Elba, and after that, the island of St. Helena in the Atlantic.

In order to complete his quest to kill the Gorgon, Perseus had to seek out the golden apples of Hesperides, an island far to the west. The nymphs who guarded the apples gave Perseus the location of the Gorgon Medusa. Likewise, Napoleon sold much of America to Thomas Jefferson in the Louisiana Purchase, in order to have enough money to finance his wars in Europe.

Once Perseus killed Medusa, he stopped by the Phoenician kingdom in Ethiopia and Egypt, which was ruled by King Cepheus and Queen Cassiopeia. There he rescued their daughter Andromeda, who was chained to a rock at the modern city of Jaffa as she was to be sacrificed to the sea monster Cetus. Likewise Napoleon, after he invaded Italy, set out on an expedition to Egypt, and from there laid siege to the city of Jaffa in Palestine.



Both Perseus and Napoleon were sent on a quest so that a ruler could be rid of them; both returned to defeat that ruler and to setup their own new dynasty. It is quite an odd coincidence, in how Napoleon followed the myth of Perseus: both were involved with the city of Jaffa in Palestine. Once Perseus rescued Andromeda he made her his queen; once Napoleon departed from Palestine he returned to France, overthrew the Directory, and became Emperor.

This was somewhat of an odd observation, I dont know quite what to make of it. It could be entirely coincidence. However in the ancient world there were many prophecies described in a mythological manner: many myths mention a god-man born of a virgin, who would die and then rise from the dead and ascend to the stars. Apparently the Jews were not the only ones to have recorded the prophecies of their visionaries: even in pagan myths, there are gems of truth.

 

[KD Archive]

Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: KorbenDallas
Date: 2019-08-17 17:32:13
Reaction Score: 3

Could we please upload all images instead of copy-pasting them from the outside sources. Unless uploaded, they tend to disappear with time.

Thank you.

 

[asatiger1966]

Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: asatiger1966
Date: 2019-08-18 05:16:26
Reaction Score: 2

When googling Nabuleon only Napoleon came up with no mention why this would be in the descriptions. It’s not that close. This also came up

Napoleon definition, a pastry consisting of thin layers of puff paste interlaid with a cream or custard filling.

This may be true but it seems to me he was another actor and didn’t go farther than was told. I think the whole revolution may have been to loot the Vatican, and put them back in line. Or SOMETHING to do with the Vatican.

These are the dispatches referred to.
The dispatches fill 386 pages, no way to download.
The 386 pages are divided into seven years of communications.

I found the below online and it does include the 386 pages. After reading what Napoleon said versus what other people said, Napoleon will leave you bemused, astounded, confused and with a lot of questions.

: A selection from the letters and despatches of the first Napoleon. With explanatory notes. By Captain the Hon. D. A. Bingham.
Author: Napoleon I, Emperor of the French, 1769-1821.
Collection: Digital General Collection

Good luck

 

[Archive]

Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: Bear Claw
Date: 2019-08-22 12:02:57
Reaction Score: 2

Yeah, I would too but when you click on the highlighted word "uncle" it just defines what an uncle is. Wiki gives us this: Napoleon's maternal grandmother had married into the Swiss Fesch family in her second marriage, and Napoleon's uncle, the cardinal Joseph Fesch, would fulfill a role as protector of the Bonaparte family for some years. (I fail to see how he got "Napoleon" out of "Joseph Fesch").

Wiki contradicting itself: Napoleon Bonaparte (15 August 1769 - 5 May 1821), namesake of his deceased older brother and Emperor of the French. (Of course they may be talking about Napoleon III, instead of Napoleon I). *shrugs*

Reddit has looked at the name.
dhmontgomery
Napoléon was not a completely unique name, but everything I've read has suggested that it was quite uncommon before Napoleon Bonaparte's rise to fame. (After that, he sparked lots of imitators, especially as part of a longer hyphenated name.) u/kieslowskifan brings my attention to Napoleon's namesake, St. Neopolus, whose saint's day, Aug. 15, was celebrated as a sort of national holiday by Bonaparte regimes throughout the 19th Century. But as u/kieslowskifan notes, "Saint Neapolus was an incredibly minor and obscure Egyptian martyr."

According to Wiki he was known as Bonaparte, until he turned "33" then he became known as Napolean - this is 1802. I am sure I don't need to mention that Christ was 33 when he was born reborn...

 

[JWW427]

Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: JWW427
Date: 2019-08-28 02:21:48
Reaction Score: 3

Napoleon was said to have uttered for posterity: "History is a foul set of lies agreed upon."
He also put out a dictum that said to find a way to preserve food for his troops on the way to Moscow. A champagne maker boiled stew inside huge bottles. Thus came into being canned food.

The other oddity is that his cannon crews called him "The little corporal" out of respect for his hands on leadership in artillery. He was really a young lieutenant.
At school, he organized snowball wars as a boy, himself as a Marshal.
In the Revolution, he fired cannons and grape shot en masse on the people of Paris. Only later did he join the cause.

In Egypt, he brought scientists and historians to study the ancient treasures that lay everywhere, thats the reason for the invasion. The Rosetta Stone was but only one discovery. Its said he was looking for ancient high technology and wisdom to further his power and conquests, the Holy Grail if you will. Atlantis stuff by the score. His many victories may be a clue.

The Nazis were after all that with the Ahnenerbe Society in the 1930's, as in the film The Lost Ark, which seems silly now to us in the know, but Spielberg did base it on some truth.
Obelisks in Paris? Plenty. How did they get them there?
I wonder what else they may have found?

JWW

 

[Archive]

Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: Red Bird
Date: 2020-05-08 00:48:26
Reaction Score: 3

I just cleared the browsing history on my iPad, then put in the search ‘stolen history’. The second link was to here, but the first link was the following for some reason. Is it a hint of the past reset, or of the current reset? is the year 1802 by definition stolen history?

1802 - Wikipedia

1802 (MDCCCII) was a common year starting on Friday of the Gregorian calendar and a common year starting on Wednesday of the Julian calendar,
The 1802nd year of the Common Era (CE) and Anno Domini (AD) designations, the 802nd year of the 2nd millennium, the 2nd year of the 19th century, and the 3rd year of the 1800s decade. As of the start of 1802, the Gregorian calendar was 12 days ahead of the Julian calendar, which remained in localized use until 1923.

Lots of info here but pages won’t load right now. The biggest news was about Napoleon as far as I can tell right now. Sort of weird, don’t you think?

 

[DanFromMN]

Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: DanfromMN
Date: 2020-05-08 01:15:35
Reaction Score: 5

I dont buy Napoleon one bit.

Here. Bonus Lincoln and Kennedy synchronicity....

Is this for real?

"Napoleon was born in 1760; Hitler was born in 1889 (a difference of 129 years)
The French Revolution occurred in 1789; the German Revolution occurred in 1918 (a difference of 129 years)
Napoleon came to power in 1804; Hitler came to power in 1933 (a difference of 129 years)
Napoleon took Austria in 1809; Hitler took Austria in 1938 (a difference of 129 years)
Napoleon attacked Russia in 1812; Hitler attacked Russia in 1941 (a difference of 129 years)
Napoleon's Waterloo was in 1815; Hitler's D-Day was in 1944 (a difference of 129 years)
Napoleon lost the war in 1816; Hitler lost the war in 1945 (a difference of 129 years)
When the revolutions started when then were 29.
Both came to power when they were 44.
Both attacked Russia when they were 52.
Their critical defeats came when the were 55.
Both lost the war when they were 56.
UN F**king REAL!

The are a number of eerie parallels between the assassinations of Abraham Lincoln and John F. Kennedy ...
The last name of Lincoln's secretary was Kennedy; the last name of Kennedy's secretary was Lincoln.
Lincoln was shot at Ford's Theatre; Kennedy was shot in a Ford-built limousine called a Lincoln.
Booth shot Lincoln in a theatre and fled to a warehouse. Oswald shot Kennedy from a warehouse and fled to a theatre.
John Wilkes Booth, Lincoln's murderer, was born 1839. Lee Harvey Oswald, Kennedy's murderer, was born 1939.
Abraham Lincoln was elected to congress in 1846; John F. Kennedy was elected to congress in 1946.
Abraham Lincoln was elected president in 1860; John F. Kennedy was elected president in 1960.
Both presidents were shot in the back of the head, on the Friday before a major holiday, while seated beside their wives, neither of whom were injured.
Both were in the presence of another couple, and in each case that man was also wounded by the assassin.
After both assassinations there were claims that the fatal shot must have come from a different direction.
Both were succeeded by vice-presidents named Johnson: Andrew born in 1808 and Lyndon in 1908, both of whom had 13 letters in their names.
Both assassins have fifteen letters in their names.
Both assassins were in their turn assassinated by shooters who used a Colt revolver and fired only one, fatal shot.
One year before Lincoln was assassinated by John Wilkes Booth, his brother, Edwin Booth, saved Lincoln's son after he had fallen in front of an oncoming train.

The assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria led directly to World War I. The car the archduke was shot in had the license plate number "AIII118." World War I officially ended on Armistice Day: November 11, 1918 (11/11/18)."

 

[Archive]

Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: Red Bird
Date: 2020-05-08 02:02:04
Reaction Score: 1

Sequel
John Kennedy: Vampire Hunter

 

[Archive]

Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: Starmonkey
Date: 2020-05-08 03:55:51
Reaction Score: 1

Sequel
John Kennedy: Vampire Hunter

Nah. It'll be zombies this time.
John (or Jack) Kennedy: Killer of Zombies
Killer and Hunter have the same number of letters and so do vampire and zombies!

Don't forget the old Louisiana under the table Purchase deal in 1803!!!

 

[asatiger1966]

Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: asatiger1966
Date: 2020-05-08 07:30:06
Reaction Score: 3

I dont buy Napoleon one bit.

Here. Bonus Lincoln and Kennedy synchronicity....

Is this for real?

"Napoleon was born in 1760; Hitler was born in 1889 (a difference of 129 years)
The French Revolution occurred in 1789; the German Revolution occurred in 1918 (a difference of 129 years)
Napoleon came to power in 1804; Hitler came to power in 1933 (a difference of 129 years)
Napoleon took Austria in 1809; Hitler took Austria in 1938 (a difference of 129 years)
Napoleon attacked Russia in 1812; Hitler attacked Russia in 1941 (a difference of 129 years)
Napoleon's Waterloo was in 1815; Hitler's D-Day was in 1944 (a difference of 129 years)
Napoleon lost the war in 1816; Hitler lost the war in 1945 (a difference of 129 years)
When the revolutions started when then were 29.
Both came to power when they were 44.
Both attacked Russia when they were 52.
Their critical defeats came when the were 55.
Both lost the war when they were 56.
UN F**king REAL!

The are a number of eerie parallels between the assassinations of Abraham Lincoln and John F. Kennedy ...
The last name of Lincoln's secretary was Kennedy; the last name of Kennedy's secretary was Lincoln.
Lincoln was shot at Ford's Theatre; Kennedy was shot in a Ford-built limousine called a Lincoln.
Booth shot Lincoln in a theatre and fled to a warehouse. Oswald shot Kennedy from a warehouse and fled to a theatre.
John Wilkes Booth, Lincoln's murderer, was born 1839. Lee Harvey Oswald, Kennedy's murderer, was born 1939.
Abraham Lincoln was elected to congress in 1846; John F. Kennedy was elected to congress in 1946.
Abraham Lincoln was elected president in 1860; John F. Kennedy was elected president in 1960.
Both presidents were shot in the back of the head, on the Friday before a major holiday, while seated beside their wives, neither of whom were injured.
Both were in the presence of another couple, and in each case that man was also wounded by the assassin.
After both assassinations there were claims that the fatal shot must have come from a different direction.
Both were succeeded by vice-presidents named Johnson: Andrew born in 1808 and Lyndon in 1908, both of whom had 13 letters in their names.
Both assassins have fifteen letters in their names.
Both assassins were in their turn assassinated by shooters who used a Colt revolver and fired only one, fatal shot.
One year before Lincoln was assassinated by John Wilkes Booth, his brother, Edwin Booth, saved Lincoln's son after he had fallen in front of an oncoming train.

The assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria led directly to World War I. The car the archduke was shot in had the license plate number "AIII118." World War I officially ended on Armistice Day: November 11, 1918 (11/11/18)."

I do not believe in coincidences but I believe in lies.
Oswald did not kill Kennedy. Oswald did not kill Officer Tippit.
The 6.5 Italian rifle POS could not perform in such a manner. The FBI tried numerous test firings on that rifle, it failed miserably.

With my upbringing in a WWII combat veteran enclave and my access to the weapons used : that Italian rifle might have been the worst manufactured and the bullet was crap. The weapon in question was openly available in monthly magazines for as little as $7.99 plus tax. Others were also but at higher prices.

Try asking the ghost of President H.W. Bush what happened. He was at the time a CIA agent standing close to the doorway of the book depository when the shots were fired. He was standing in a very strategic spot, if you learn why it will totally bum you out.

Unfortunately I was not alive when Lincoln was killed. But if you knew the open military secret of who killed Kennedy you would slap yourself silly.

"All the world is a stage, And all the men and women merely players," The whole quote is more reveling. One should read it.

 

[Archive]

Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: Bear Claw
Date: 2020-05-08 20:52:49
Reaction Score: 1

I dont buy Napoleon one bit.

Here. Bonus Lincoln and Kennedy synchronicity....

Is this for real?

"Napoleon was born in 1760; Hitler was born in 1889 (a difference of 129 years)
The French Revolution occurred in 1789; the German Revolution occurred in 1918 (a difference of 129 years)
Napoleon came to power in 1804; Hitler came to power in 1933 (a difference of 129 years)
Napoleon took Austria in 1809; Hitler took Austria in 1938 (a difference of 129 years)
Napoleon attacked Russia in 1812; Hitler attacked Russia in 1941 (a difference of 129 years)
Napoleon's Waterloo was in 1815; Hitler's D-Day was in 1944 (a difference of 129 years)
Napoleon lost the war in 1816; Hitler lost the war in 1945 (a difference of 129 years)
When the revolutions started when then were 29.
Both came to power when they were 44.
Both attacked Russia when they were 52.
Their critical defeats came when the were 55.
Both lost the war when they were 56.
UN F**king REAL!

The are a number of eerie parallels between the assassinations of Abraham Lincoln and John F. Kennedy ...
The last name of Lincoln's secretary was Kennedy; the last name of Kennedy's secretary was Lincoln.
Lincoln was shot at Ford's Theatre; Kennedy was shot in a Ford-built limousine called a Lincoln.
Booth shot Lincoln in a theatre and fled to a warehouse. Oswald shot Kennedy from a warehouse and fled to a theatre.
John Wilkes Booth, Lincoln's murderer, was born 1839. Lee Harvey Oswald, Kennedy's murderer, was born 1939.
Abraham Lincoln was elected to congress in 1846; John F. Kennedy was elected to congress in 1946.
Abraham Lincoln was elected president in 1860; John F. Kennedy was elected president in 1960.
Both presidents were shot in the back of the head, on the Friday before a major holiday, while seated beside their wives, neither of whom were injured.
Both were in the presence of another couple, and in each case that man was also wounded by the assassin.
After both assassinations there were claims that the fatal shot must have come from a different direction.
Both were succeeded by vice-presidents named Johnson: Andrew born in 1808 and Lyndon in 1908, both of whom had 13 letters in their names.
Both assassins have fifteen letters in their names.
Both assassins were in their turn assassinated by shooters who used a Colt revolver and fired only one, fatal shot.
One year before Lincoln was assassinated by John Wilkes Booth, his brother, Edwin Booth, saved Lincoln's son after he had fallen in front of an oncoming train.

The assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria led directly to World War I. The car the archduke was shot in had the license plate number "AIII118." World War I officially ended on Armistice Day: November 11, 1918 (11/11/18)."

Damn that's hot stuff. Reminds me of Fomenko's Babylonians vs Romans. What is this ride? Is it a pre-planned out cyclical programme? Is it just a symptom of history being written using bespoke proforma templates?

 

[wild heretic]

Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: wild heretic
Date: 2020-05-08 22:28:08
Reaction Score: 2

Wondering what the meaning of this could be.

I suspect it is to do with being direct descendants of noah.

Damn that's hot stuff. Reminds me of Fomenko's Babylonians vs Romans. What is this ride? Is it a pre-planned out cyclical programme? Is it just a symptom of history being written using bespoke proforma templates?

sounds like we could be getting into phillip k dick territory here and westworld when the head writer was too lazy to make different templates for westworld and japan world.