Tone

This blog deals with ongoing lexicon loading work, including some thoughts on learning difficulty. Before that, more updates to the Qu Map and BRB. Finally, a headline review.

Qu Map

The link here is to the front of the Qu Map app. Ryan has again been busy with this app. He has been working on app wide notes for the various versions of the Qu Map.

This week he added a composite map. You can reach it at the bottom of the pull down menu at the top of the app. This page allows study of how the various maps in the app compare to each other. This ranges across various topics, from the elders to especially main geographic locations in the USA. Very interesting to see the summary.

We had a long discussion about city pairs, especially for the USA map. There are such pairs all over the map following especially the River Pairing system for the alphabet.

Our problem is how to do justice to those pairs since they are best explained by someone who has robust knowledge of localized American history. For now, we are going to leave city pair data out of that app.

BRB

Ryan is generally working on the Story Grid. He is working across the various systems that inform story placement. One of those systems are the 70 books that contain the stories in the grid. There are 2 places in the text where enumerated lists of 70 names can be found. By matching list lengths we know these internal lists of 70 names are in some way related to the list of 70 books.

These 2 internal enumerated lists of 70 name are 1) the names given in the Table of Nations after the flood, and 2) The names of Jacob's heirs that went down to Egypt.

So this week's update to the BRB (and TT) has had attention put into these lists. The text as given by history disputes the number that went down to Egypt. That dispute can be shown to be an edit, 70 is the proper number. So the filter tags are now used for showing the tampering in Jacob's name list.

The formatting of these lists has been changed to make them easier to follow. The lists are now in an outline style format. There are also now list enumerations in order to easily map names from those lists into numbers working down those lists. Those enumeration numbers allow easier mapping across the lists of 70.

Presumably there is some meaningful linkage between the 70 books and these lists of 70 names. These names, in some fashion, are also likely names for years in a 70 year cycle. We also expect the 70 books to be the units used for cipher work. In any case, new mark up makes this easier to study.

For readers who may want to look more closely at this, the Nations name list is Genesis 10. The Jacob heir name list is in Genesis 46.

Lexicon Loading Progress

I am spending most of my time working on loading a Paleo lexicon. This is so interesting I am spending most of my waking hours loading the lexicon. Nearly every day I am learning something new.

I keep wanting to go faster and get this done quickly. Ryan keeps reminding me to take my time and learn as much as I can along the way. There have been several lessons this past week which are interesting enough to share. Let me take you through some interesting new insights that I learned this week.

Fun With Numbers

I was asked recently why Paleo doesn't just use digits. Most modern writing uses digits instead of long form written numbers. Most of the digits we use today with numbers can be shown to be devolved forms of the first letters of the Paleo alphabet. Since digits are fast and easy to read, why would the text not use that system?

There are 2 evident answers to this question. The first is that spelled out words are less likely to be mixed up during manuscript copying. Modern legal documents, like checks and contracts, still spell out numbers for this reason.

For a document written for the purpose of long term transmission this is a good feature. The second evident answer is that long form writing of numbers also allows numbers to play nicely with Paleo grammar, especially the Paleo prefixes and certain suffixes.

The less evident answer is that because the manuscript must survive audit and because it eventually goes through ciphers, the choice of how words are spelled is driven in part by the needs of proofs of inspiration. Long form writing for numbers is presumably better for those aspects of inspired text.

So this week I was able to load most of the words for numbers into the lexicon. As timelines numbers are another important project. This was a particularly fun set of words to get my head around.

It turns out that the system of writing numbers in English appears to be based on the system used in Paleo. So our current modern system of writing numbers has been in use since before Noah. Let me explain the principles.

There are paleo words for each number, one through nine. Then there are paleo words for ten, hundred and thousand.

With those 12 words alone, it is possible to express any number from 1 through 999,999. Pretty good coverage.

Paleo numbers get expressive power by using certain normal grammatical endings, same as English. In English, thirty is just a grammatical form of three.

Numbers in the tens, so teens, are just compound words with the base number's word combined with the word for ten. In this case, Paleo is more rigorous that English and does not misspell ten.

With these rules all numbers to ninety and nine are expressed like in English. The Paleo word for hundred kicks in at that point. To reach multiplies of a hundred the Paleo system just compounds the single digit words with hundred. So the teens does addition in the compounding, the 100s does multiplication.

There are some irregular forms, which look to be dialectic issues that the audit will need to sort through. In particular Ta, so a plus sign, is placed in the middle of a few of the compounded words.

Vocabulary words for numbers are an interesting example of the expressive efficiency that I am seeing across the lexicon. Very few root words are combined with suffixes, and occasionally compounded, in order to create a very expressive language system.

Stephen's Speech

We currently use digits in the BRB, which is nice for numeric studies. But consider Stephen's speech in Acts 7. The link here is to the specific verse 14 where he claims 75 went down to Egypt.

Given the list of 70 names as marked up this week, there appears to be a contradiction. Or, there has been manuscript tampering.

Once you know that the text writes numbers like on a check, the actual Paleo for 75 is going to be "seventy and five." The "and" being a prefix on the word for five.

With digits used in the BRB the likely Ananias edit cannot be easily seen. With written out words, the word "five" must have been added by Ananias in order to hide the use of 70 which has meaning Ananias would want to cover up. So the word five should sit under an FA tag.

Ultimately the use of digits needs to be under option control, where they can be displayed for fast numeric studies, or where the long form can be spelled out for study of possible manuscript tampering.

I am setting up the new Paleo lexicon to cover both forms of writing for numbers so this becomes easy to setup in the future Paleo Bible app and related lexicon.

Prefix Mo

The paleo letter Mo is a picture of water. One of the meanings of water shows up in the standalone word for "from" spelled "Mo-Ne." Water of seed, so it speaks to the water of a womb, where we are all from. Thus for a very long time we have listed "from" as key meaning of "Mo."

So the Mo letter is showing up as a prefix on a limited number of paleo root words. Mo is NOT a common prefix. "From" as an idea in a sentence is usually just Mo-Ne as a stand alone word.

So I have been watching to see if I could figure out the normal but obviously rare grammatical use for Mo.

Frequently, a prefix Mo does not get translated into English at all. It seems to add something that is not needed by the English ear. "From" is important, so our assumed meaning becomes very suspect for this letter.

I finally ran into a example where it was being translated and it finally broke open the conceptual space for this letter in word definitions. It helps to see this problem by stepping through the exact root where this was found, and where Mo creates an important variant to the meaning.

Love: Re-Ha-Mo

The root word that I was entering into the lexicon was "Re-Ha-Mo." The most frequent English translation is some variation on the English word "love."

Depending on how you count, there are perhaps 200+ different variations as found in our reference text. This is an important word because love is an important concept in scripture.

This word is not always translated into English as "love." Selecting of certain other English words was triggered by a "Mo" prefix. As I was searching trough examples of the uses of this word, one of the Mo prefix examples was translated into English as "show love." The "show" being triggered by the "Mo."

In English "show" is the root word for "shower." Of course a shower of rain involves water. These are a concept match that still shows in English. So what does water have to do with our normal English word "show?"

We bathe for various reasons, but the key reason is to become presentable to others. So we can "show" ourselves to others. Thinking of bathing for the purpose of hygiene and health probably comes with germ theory around 200 years ago.

So then I went back to the other English words that were combining Mo with Love. Other than the Mo, these used the normal grammatical suffixes.

On the English side of the translation, adding Mo to love creates either "mercy" or "compassion." These are obviously more technical English language terms than the word "love."

Are mercy and compassion examples of showing love? Yes. Of course.

It looks like we have the solution to the word definition meaning of Mo.

Prefix Mo or Root Mo?

There remains an open question that the audit must solve. Is the Mo at the front of "Re-Ha-Mo" an actual prefix or are we looking at a 4 letter root word which is built upon a 3 letter root for love? If the Mo needs a punctuation before the rest of the root, then "show love" would the correct translation. If there is no punctuation, then "mercy" would be correct.

Audit work comes soon, and will sort this detail out.

As I continue work on loading the lexicon, I will be watching for more examples where this is going on. I don't yet know if this is particular to the word love, or if this is really a general pattern. But, it is explaining the Mo based on the 3d system, so I would expect it to work in similar ways with other root words.

Power of Translators

Ryan and I have known for a long time that translators carry a lot of power over organized church based on how they translate the text. King James himself was involved in the KJV translation because he wanted final say on word selection for that translation team.

History often says he was an ancient language scholar. That is utter nonsense. In reality he was a propagandist of the most vile form. He really did know of secrets in the text which he did not want revealed to his English speaking public. To prevent this class of criminal behavior, English language translations need to be word-for-word whenever possible.

The BRB has been our general platform for experimenting with word choices. In an ideal world we would have a 1 to 1 map between a Paleo root and a matched English root. This cannot be done perfectly because English is irregular. But outside of English language issues, this would be the goal.

Perhaps even better would be to teach everyone to read paleo. The exhibits exist for that purpose. In that case even English irregularity would go away as a problem for learning the inspired text.

My Work Flow

My lexicon loading process is to start with the most frequently occurring whole word found in the inbound text which has not yet been loaded into the lexicon. This is usually a specific combination of prefix letters, a root word and a suffix. My goal is to remove all variations of the root from my inbound list of words not current in the lexicon. In one case there was over 175 different variations on the root. These variations all go into the lexicon as a block under the shared root.

I know the common prefixes. Our shepherd staff work suggests these will always become stand alone, single letter, words. The prefixes almost always get translated exactly as stated. So I am not putting in English for the prefixes. The Du prefix is irregular in English, but I am still not entering specific English for that prefix.

I am quickly learning what are ultimately more complex suffixes. I can recognize all of them. But the English is still strange and hard for me to predict with accuracy.

Then, for each new root, I must look up and figure out what English is typically used. This can be tricky at times because the edges between prefix, root and suffix are not always clear, though this is getting easier.

I also need to be careful of cases where there is more than 1 English word for a given root. So I need to find and check a few different suffixes in order to make sure I understand the typical variety of English. Sometimes I reference our interlinear bible app to see how this has been translated by others.

At this point I have turned this into a game. The most common forms of most new roots either have no suffix, or else have Wa, so "the" as the suffix. So I am usually starting there, and can find the simple English for the root in question.

Then I guess the expected English for the less common suffixes for that root. Then I look up examples of the variant forms to check my guess.

I am playing this game better each day. In most cases I am correctly working the grammatical forms and my guesses are reasonable when coming into English. But I still get tricked.

Paleo roots can also be used for both nouns and verbs. So English may not use a single root for the verb as well as the noun. This is a common problem, but I can deal with that too. This problem is on the English side.

But then I saw an example this week where this principle of 1 to 1 mapping from Paleo to English was being utterly ignored. Something else entirely was going on. This is interesting enough that I need to share it here for the record.

Take: Ne-Sa-Ba

So "Ne-Sa-Ba" is fairly common. It has around 70 different inbound forms. (This including prefixes and suffixes which increase the raw forms.)

As I was checking the English for this root it was apparent that the most common English choice, for stand alone uses of this root, was the English word "take."

I know from earlier work, primarily the commandments, that "Ge-Ne-Ba" is the criminal form of taking. You can see the Ne and Ba are shared. So these are in a similar concept space. "Take" seemed reasonable.

So I played my game. The "Ta" ending on a verbs usually pushes the verb to past tense. So I would guess "Ne-Sa-Ba-Ta" should be the English "took."

I searched my reference, ultimately an Aramaic based translation, and found what I expected. "Ne-Sa-Ba-Ta" was "took" instead of take. All was well.

I was showing that I could anticipate the English. This meant I should be able to guess the other suffix based word forms, "he takes," "they take" "he took" and so on. I did spot checks to make sure I was understanding this root in these other forms. Most of the time my guesses were correct.

But in several places I started finding "receive" as the English for certain uses of this root. Take and receive are opposite sides of the same action, so this made some sense.

So I looked to see if either certain suffixes or perhaps even certain prefixes were changing the meaning. I have seen this many times before. I wanted to know what causes this change in English word choice.

If there is a clear spelling based reason, then I can adjust the lexicon entry for that spelling. I do occasionally need to use different English for different suffixes, this is not all that strange.

Not A Grammar Problem

I also checked some sample sentences. Could the translator have used "take" in English without changing the fundamental meaning of the sentence?

This is an important test because the teaching and learning process is much easier if we agree on the common English meaning for any given Paleo root. I am starting to mentally call this the "flash card problem."

If we can agree on a common English translation for a Paleo root then we can build a deck of flash cards. We can use them to learn to recognize Paleo roots as certain English roots. We can do this as a game. We can play the game collectively. We can learn to recognize Paleo at speed.

It turns out "take" would work in English just as well as "receive" in every example that I surveyed. "Take" would work in all cases that I surveyed, while "receive" would not.

What I found with this example is that the topic of the sentence was being used to change the English word choice. This was being done by translator's theological choice. It was exactly the kind of tampering that King James himself would be proud of.

So when this root shows up in sentences dealing with things like "offering" then the English gets flipped from "take an offering" to "receive an offering."

Because of this translation convention, what nobody reading English knows is that places in the text where this practice is described always seems to use "take" as the verb. The paleo spelling implies a softer form of the criminal form of taking.

Where?

This word game was only being played in sentences surrounding topics of the temple and tabernacle. Otherwise, "take" was the normal translation of this root.

The normal tone for "take" is related to the English word "nab." Taking is some action that is similar to what is done by a thief.

So in places that are priest friendly the translator flipped the English to favor the taker instead of the giver.

Concepts like how it is better to "give than to receive" are now made by the translator to apply to passages which involve "taking." This does not fundamentally involve giving nor receiving. But now, by translator word choice, it looks to involve this higher concept.

This seems to be an example of a translator managing down the tone of the translation. The text appears to tell readers that offerings are something "taken." Offerings are not something "given." Just like "entering the temple" has a verb that shares spelling with "evil," in this case we find strange things going on around the temple.

I assigned this Paleo root the English word "take." As we work through more steps in the recovery process we will see what is actually inspired. We will also look for any other word that actually means "receive." At this point, there is no defensible language reason why this root should not come into English as "take" in various forms.

Garment: Mo-Wa-Ne

The final new vocabulary word that caused some discussion around here this week was Mo-Wa-Ne. This word is commonly translated as "garment." The secondary paleo word definition is "Yo-Ta-The." Hand-Cloth-Wheel. I take cloth as cloth. I take Wheel as when traveling, and Hand as something like mine, as dealing with me. So a rough cut at the Paleo secondary word definition would be "my-cloth-[for]-travel." So a different English word choice would be coat or overcoat or similar. This word is not regular house clothing. It is not underwear.

This term was being translated pretty commonly as "garment." It had all the normal forms, including common plural forms. Most actual forms in the text are plural, which makes sense. All was fine, the word was working normally. It was within my understanding of the grammar and common meaning.

But there were a few places, again especially around religious locations, like the tabernacle and temple, where this was coming out as "vessel."

I should at least note that an overcoat, or raincoat, is a type of vessel for a person. So there is some sense of shared meaning.

But, this variation in English word choice was more like what was going on with the English from the root word for "take." There was no particular reason from the spelling alone to expect such a difference.

Exhibits?

As I surveyed uses, there were a few places where I could have translated "vessel" back to "garment" and in that word choice I could easily think I was reading about the wall hanging exhibits of the Tent of Time. Those exhibits may actually be called out in the text, and called "garments." The skill used to make fancy outer garments would be the same for making wall hangings. So they might be the same vocabulary word.

Finally, this term may have been repurposed to mean vessels, since post Solomon, the gold and silver vessels of the temple may have become important. So far, there are no important "vessels" in the set of exhibits. There are chests, but those have yet another vocabulary word still to be loaded.

There will be chests for the gold and silver series of items, so we have yet another case. Gold and silver to normal readers make no sense as types of garments. But they do make sense as exhibit identifiers. Readers for most of the history of the edited text have no idea what the text might really be about. Gold and silver garments tells me wall hangings for those series of items.

Dialect?

I discussed this with Ryan. He immediately pointed out that my examples of where this word is coming out as "vessel" are are almost certainly not inspired. Even more specifically, he would suggest these examples are from Ezra's era.

If that is true, then we may have a first example of looking at a dialect change. So "garment" came to also mean "vessel" at the hand of some future editor.

Ryan has better working familiarity with the text since he has been working with it for 20 years. He had good reason to think this word came to mean vessel across time. The early uses seem to indicate garment, or precisely coat as the main meaning.

So the meaning for "vessel" probably marks an Ezra era edit. It suggests Ezra was inventing temple service in his day, and adding the references to vessels as part of that editing pass. So seeing a meaning where vessel is the implied meaning in the context of the temple is a give away of a dialectic change at the hand of a later editor.

Notice how we are collecting vocabulary word issues that show up around the temple and tabernacle. These were areas where inspired writers would have not done much writing. But where editors were making stuff up, including repurposing vocabulary.

All of this, of course, waits for audit. But, this week we added yet another reason why an English word for a given Paleo root might not match what would be expected by simple inspection of the simplest grammatical forms that otherwise suggest the English meaning.

Ryan has continued to remind me to take my time on this lexicon loading process. I still don't know what I don't know. I continue to learn important lessons nearly every day. The whole tool chain will get much better once there is a complete lexicon. By putting time in now, the future steps become much easier to work on without needing to come back later and fill in missing lexicon values.

Language Learning Times

The link here is to a recent article on Zero Hedge dealing with the time it takes for English language speakers to learn various other languages from around the world. There is an important graphic that sorts languages by difficulty. The farther down the list, the harder the target language is to learn given a starting point with English.

This was interesting to me because I think about the problem of learning Paleo all the time. Will I be able to do it myself? I am getting old. How hard will it be for others?

The article linked above is in the context of diplomats needing to learn a foreign language, so their skill level needs to be fairly high. In the diplomatic world this means enough skill at writing, or at least reading, international agreements. It also means being able to speak the language with diplomats from other countries.

Inspired scripture would be of that class of document, but our vocabulary word set is going to not include modern technical terms like "phones" and country names and so on. So our language scope is less burdensome.

That article explains the issues that matter to the difficulty involved. Some examples include the set of pronounced sounds, and how different the script/alphabet may be compared to English. We learned to pronounce sounds for English when we were quite young. Learning them as adults is more difficult.

Differences in grammar also matter. A language with a similar grammar to English is obviously easier to learn. For English speakers, other northern European languages are the easiest to learn. This because these languages are similar to English.

In the list given in that article, Hebrew and Greek cluster together around half way down the list. Russian is listed as more difficult, but not that much more time to learn. The languages at the very bottom are the most difficult to learn. Those most difficult languages are Arabic, the 2 main dialects of Chinese, then Japanese and Korean.

These most hard languages vary from English along all the interesting parts that make up human speech. Their sound systems are different. Their script is different and their grammar is different.

What About Paleo?

Paleo has an alphabet that is nearly the Latin alphabet. So there is not really a new script. The only totally new drawn form is the Sha. In terms of pronunciation, only the Oo sound is particularly new.

There is nothing irregular in the sound system of Paleo, so it is fundamentally simpler. Vowels are fixed to the consonants, without any serious variation. Punctuation suppresses vowel sounds, but does not introduce anything tricky. So the Paleo sound system is very much simpler than the easiest languages on that list.

When we first worked out the Paleo keyboard I was basically an instant Paleo touch typist. Paleo really is quite familiar.

In terms of grammar, there are 4 common prefixes which are easy. These become stand alone words which are even easier to learn. Normal vocabulary always starts with roots. Most of these are new. But they often map to known English words.

Then there is the problem of suffixes. Working on the lexicon this past week I came to suspect that several of the long form suffixes will become trailing stand alone words. Certain of the suffixes are now also listed in the Lexicon as stand alone roots. The audit will confirm if suffixes need to be broken up. If so, reading Paleo will get even easier.

Basic Paleo sentence structure is also quite similar to English. We do no see serious change in word order when looking at Paleo with English interlinear. English is capable of a more diverse structure. So someone who knows English is already mostly ready for Paleo sentences.

I would guess that the learning time for Paleo will be less than the times listed at the very top of the chart in that article. It will be easier to learn than any current national language.

Match Dates

We were not expecting significant headlines this week. Most of the common war fronts were more or less back to normal.

At the beginning of the week the USA and Iran announced they had reached agreement on a Memorandum of Understanding. This allowed Trump to boast about ending the war. It allowed the Iranians to boast they were now about to start negotiating with the USA. The 2 sides view this very differently. Trump ultimately admitted the west was running out of oil, so he needed this agreement.

This week's document was a "Memorandum of Understanding." This is a technical term which means it has no legal sanding whatsoever. It is just political theater. Links for the MoU signing are given below. It was signed on Wednesday.

By the end of the week, Iran had declared the USA had violated the MoU by allowing Israel to attack targets in Lebanon. Iran declared Hormuz closed again. All Iran really needs are reasons to keep Hormuz closed in order to starve the USD based financial system of the wealth needed to pay interest. Time is on Iran's side.

Watch Dates

Peeking ahead, the next watch date is 2026-07-13 when we watch the replay of the last year of Joash's life and reign. More on this as we get closer.

Shop Work

This week we did another software update to the search function in the BRB app. There were certain odd cases where the code thought it needed to search again, even though there had been no change in the search string. That bug is now fixed.

It is now possible to run a word search and then move back and forth between the search dialog and the list of answers across various sections in the text. It is a nice new system for searching.

The lexicon now has 227 unique root words. There are 5813 individual word entries in the lexicon. There remains 45,100 unique words in the manuscript which are not yet loaded.

Lexicon Progress

The lexicon can explain 320,623 words in the running text. There remains 215,397 words that cannot yet be looked up in the lexicon.

I am continuing to run this process by hand because I am learning so much as I go along. I have given some examples above. There are some very VERY strange words in this system. I will return to more examples in future blogs.

For reference, when I passed the 200 root point there were 4817 entries in the lexicon, with 46,096 words still to enter. With 200 roots the lexicon could explain 301,882 words, with 234,138 that could not yet be looked up in the lexicon.

Note the exact math changes some from week to week because there are empty words that are being removed as I go. The Aramaic to Paleo conversion process has trouble with strange apparently decorative runs of Aramaic punctuation. I need to do some rewriting of the code for that problem.

There was a conceptual problem with thinking 200 roots are a magical point for coverage. In Greek text books 200 roots are the MOST COMMON roots. I don't yet know that number for Paleo as I am entering roots based on the most common FORMS of roots. The whole Paleo lexicon will need to be loaded before we know with certainty what the 200 most common roots might be.

There are spelling variations on roots that I would expect the audit to drive out. There are, for example, 2 different spellings of the root word for Israel. Currently these 2 forms of Israel count as 2 different roots in the lexicon. One of them is almost certainly a dialectic based difference in spelling. It may also be a scribal mark, so "prisoner speech," where they are telling us they knew a different inspired word lurks at that location.

These are the problems that I am learning. The code for recovery needs to be designed so that it can handle all the problems that lurk in the text.

Headline Review

The following headlines caught my attention this week.

Trump's Brain

Most everyone watching Trump knows something is wrong. An interesting joke captures the idea. Is he stupid? Or does he just play so on TV? In any case, the link above suggests the Iranians had to deal with this problem too, calling in experts to diagnose what might be wrong.

Stopping Land Sales

Seems someone is selling Palestinian land at a secret London expo. 100 lawmakers are trying to get it stopped. What city hosts the current head of the Zionist empire?

Hagia Sophia Construction

This link is to a Youtube video documenting current construction work that is attempting to keep the dome of that church from caving in. This is an important prophetic building, running on the 500 year temple cycle. There is a major project going on to make the building able to stand in an earthquake.

Romeo, Juliet and a Cat

On the same subject as Turkey... Cats are common across Turkey. The clip here is of a stage play where a cat walked on, apparently concerned for one of the actors who was playing dead. These types of videos are on my de-stress list.

Grok Against Iran

The link here is to a long form article on The Cradle dealing with an admission by the US military that they used Grok to help select targets in Iran. AI being used to kill is NOT a good thing. Ultimately, AI is an advanced munition and will not probably be left in the public's hand. On the other hand Grok did not ultimately help the US win. Grok ends up in trouble either way.

Tank Bottom at Cushing

The link here is to a long form Zero Hedge article that details how the Cushing oil storage tank farm is reaching tank bottom. Ryan and I drove that area a few years ago. We saw crews at Cushing building quite a few new tanks. A graph in that article suggests Cushing is drawing down to 2005 levels.

There is a problem with that article. With new tanks at Cushing since 2005, and many more actual tank bottoms, the unrecoverable bottom is much higher than it was in 2005.

That article does graph out new well production in the USA as having buffered some of the impact of the war. That does not appear to be all that meaningful to the overall problems in the USA. Any MoU breaches will transmit into the availability of oil in the USA.

Trump is on record saying the USA runs out of gas in 4 weeks. This is why he signed the MoU with Iran. Just by travel time, Iranian oil is more than 4 weeks from the USA. See the Trump's Brain link above. Trouble with gas station supply will still come in parts of the USA starting in early July.

Integrated chip manufacturing is expected to go offline here soon too because of certain chemicals that only come from the Persian gulf. So supplies of computers and related electronics are also expected to be disrupted here soon. Apple, for example, is raising prices. They say to cover rising supply prices, but in reality to shed demand for Apple products.

2022 Double Cross against Putin

The link here is to a post on Telegram detailing the events in 2022 when Russia pulled out of Kiev. Putin was tricked into thinking the west was agreeing to a peace agreement. Not so.

As the link hints, the European leaders are playing a high stakes religious game. The post, citing sources, indicates it was Israel that wanted the war to continue. This is more strong evidence that there is only 1 war with only 1 aggressor. Russia is just the victim. Eventually, the obedience of the nations is Russia's. See the promises over Russia that begin at Genesis 49:8. The Jews stole the name in order to claim those promises. Jebusites are a better term for Jews.

MoU Details

The link here is to a post on Telegram by The Cradle listing off the 14 points of the MoU with Iran signed on Wednesday, June 17, 2026. By late Thursday, so the following day, the Iranians had cleared airspace and declared the cease fire broken by the western side, this because of bombing in Lebanon.

Trump: 4 Weeks of Oil

This post on Telegram has the clip of Trump saying the USA has 4 weeks of oil stocks remaining. See the first link above on Trump's mental capacity.

Parallels to 1956

The link here is to a post on Telegram were Tucker Carlson catalogs the parallels between the current Iran war and the war in Suez from 1956. I covered this in a recent blog. The USA is now prophetically playing the part of the British. Like the British, the USA is now loosing control of empire.

An exact 70 year offset would want this to happen more severely later this year. But to anyone educated in history, current events so far are enough to draw the prophetic match. Generally speaking, the 70 year offset would expect Israel to be on the loosing side this time around. We haven't really seen that yet.

Versailles Signing

1918 Versailles Treaty

The top link is to Alex Christoforou's daily news briefing for Thursday, June 18, 2026. In the first part of this video he goes into detail of the significance of the location where Trump signed the MoU with Iran. Trump could not have picked a worse place. See the link above on Trump's Brain.

Turns out this is where Germany capitulated at the end of World War I. That treaty set the seeds for World War II. Trump appears to have set the seeds for yet another world war.

This was done while Trump was at a G7 meeting, with most of the other European leaders at the same table at the same time.

The other folks at the table in the room where Trump was seated were planning war with Russia, which is also a very bad parallel. Nazis against Russia both times. This is how obedience of the nations is eventually given to Russia.

Remember, we are on a prophetic replay of Resurrection Day. Joshua demanded a recounting of events from the previous week. The main event, in a prophetic sense, is now known as World War I and World War II. We expect a conceptual replay of those world wars to follow soon. Passion Week will itself be seen again in some prophetic sense on the current timeline in 2028. Then we see Noah in 2029, so we are only just beginning the full war.

A Versailles treating signing by Trump is a strong hint at where we are in a replay of those wars. Future timeline work may moderate this some, but this headline speaks to anyone with a eye to history. Alex Christoforou does a nice job of picking up on the symbolic meaning of what just happened, even if he does not know the prophetic meaning.

The second link above is to the Wikipedia article that covers the details of the June 24, 1918 treaty that was signed in Versailles at the end of World War I.

More Later,

Phil