2005 -- 2019  AbundantHope.net
Phoenix Journal Selections 
param>Google Translate param>
The Khazars, part 12 [Yes, readers, this is the second time you have seen this. The message is important enough to bear repeating]. You can obtain this booklet in point for $5.00 each from: Pro-American Press, P.O. Box 41, Gering, NE 69341. You next inquire, "Why do 'they' continue to use the incorrect identification if 'they' are actually speaking of "Elite", "Khazars", etc.". BECAUSE THEY DON'T KNOW THE HISTORY, EITHER! How many of you who have not read the Journals, know that the Jonestown massacre was a military mass murder operation involving these very people and that Jim Jones was actually taken to Israel (Khazar)? By the way, he has since been murdered, also--EVERYONE is expendable to this dragon. I gave you a blow by blow scenario of exactly what happened at Jonestown, Guyana and yet, it has been published elsewhere as well and all the surveillance Elite know it, in fact, planned and orchestrated the whole maneuver. How many good Americans know that Pearl Harbor was an intentional massacre of your own people? Ah so--then do not expect the very ones who thought they were finding the glory land to think otherwise for they know no difference--their media is even more controlled than is yours! The grandest thing you can do for your Judean brother is giye him Truth for he can see it is NOT that which has been PROMISED--but he neither knows WHY! -- PJ 28 -- pag. 146 HISTORY A ninth-century Arab historian, Yakubi, traces the origin of the Khazars back to Japheth (and thus back to Cain), third son of Noah. The Japheth motive recurs frequently in the literature, while other legends connect them with Abraham or Alexander the Great. One of the earliest factual references to the Khazars which you will find, occurs in a Syriac chronicle by "Zacharia Rhetor" (It was actually penned by an anonymous compiler and named after an earlier Greek historian), dating from the middle of the sixth century. When the student is ready the truth and the teacher appear--remember? It mentions the Khazars in a list of people who inhabit the region of the Caucasus. Other sources indicate that they were already much in evidence a century earlier, and intimately connected with the Huns. In AD 448, the Byzantine Emperor Theodosius II sent an embassy to Attila which included a famed rhetorician by the name of Priscus. He kept a minute account not only of the diplomatic negotiations, but also of the court intrigues and goings-on in Attila's sumptuous banqueting hall--he was, in fact, the perfect gossip columnist, and is still one of the main sources of information about Hun customs and habits. But Priscus also has anecdotes to tell about the people subject to the Huns whom he calls "Akatzirs"--that is, "Khazars--Ak-Khazars", or "White" Khazars (and please remember what I said about historical verbiage of "White" and "Black" for it has nothing to do with "color" (as distinct from the "Black" Kara-Khazars). The "Akatzirs" were also known as a nation of warriors. This is accepted by modern authorities--and it is further recognized that the pronunciation and spelling actually follows the Armenian and Georgian: Khazir. The Byzantine Emperor tried to win this warrior race over to his side, but the greedy Khazar chieftain, named Karidach, considered the bribe offered to him inadequate (sound familiar?), and sided with the Huns. Attila defeated Karidach's rival chieftains, installed him as the sole ruler of the Akatzirs, and invited him to visit his court. Karidach thanked him profusely for the invitation, and went on to say that "it would be too hard on a mortal man to look into the face of a god. For, as one cannot stare into the sun's disc, even less could one look into the face of the greatest god without suffering injury". (Also sound familiar?) Attila was pleased, at least, for he confirmed Karidach in his rule. Khazars appeared on the European scene about the middle of the fifth century as a people under Hunnish sovereignty, and are basically regarded, together with the Magyars and other tribes, as a later offspring of Attila's horde. HUN EMPIRE COLLAPSE The collapse of the Hun Empire after Attila's death left a power-vacuum in Eastern Europe, through which once more, wave after wave of nomadic hordes swept from east to west, prominent among them the Uigurs and Avars. The Khazars during most of this period seemed to be pretty happily occupied with raiding the rich trans-Caucasian regions of Georgia and Armenia, and collecting precious plunder. During the second half of the sixth century they became the dominant force among the tribes north of the Caucasus. A number of these tribes--the Sabirs, Saragurs, Samandars, Balanjars, etc.--are from this date onward no longer mentioned by name: they had been subjugated or absorbed by the Khazars. The toughest resistance, apparently, was offered by the powerful Bulgars. But they, too, were crushingly defeated (circa 641), and as a result the nation split into two: some of them migrated westward to the Danube, into the region of modern Bulgaria, others north-eastward to the middle Volga, the latter remaining under Khazar suzerainty (sic, sic, Dharma) Suzerainty: the dominion of a suzerain: OVERLORDSHIP. It is alright, I have to give her a bit of -- PJ 28 -- pag. 147 “proof” from time to time so that she can understand that I am writing and it is quite fine if she is not familiar with words. As we go along we shall frequently encounter both Danube Bulgars and Volga Bulgars. But before becoming a sovereign state, the Khazars still had to serve their apprenticeship under another short-lived power, the so- called West Turkish Empire, or Turkut kingdom. It was a confederation of tribes, held together by a ruler: the Kagan or Khagan (or Chagan)--a title which the Khazar rulers too were subsequently to adopt. Know that the orientals have strong idiosyncrasies about spelling but Kagan is the least offensive to "Western" eyes. I suggest you ones of the so-called Mormon "faith" take note that the term Mormon is not even allowed usage in the oriental countries such as Japan, etc. Mormon in their language--MEANS EVIL SATAN--DEVIL. Catches in your throat doesn't it? How many discoveries have you to make? Zillions! Truth becomes almost too painful at times, to endure--and that is exactly that upon which the evil brotherhood depend. They have taken everything sacred and caused it to be defiled. The first Turkish State--if one might call it that--lasted for a century (circa 550-650) and then fell apart, leaving hardly any trace (as is always the methods of the Khazars). However, it was only after the establishment of this kingdom that the name "Turk" was used to apply to a specific nation, as distinct from other Turkic-speaking peoples like the Khazars and Bulgars. This did not prevent the name "Turk" from being applied indiscriminately to any nomadic tribe of the steppes as a euphemism of Barbarian, or a synonym for "Hun". It led to much confusion in the interpretation of ancient sources but again, it is typical of the workings of your adversary to God. The Khazars had been under Hun tutelage, then under Turkish tutelage. After the eclipse of the Turks in the middle of the seventh century it was their turn to rule the "Kingdom of the North", as the Persians and Byzantines came to call it. According to one tradition, the great Persian King Khursraw (Chosroes) Anushirwan (the Blessed) had three golden guest-thrones in his palace, reserved for the Emperors of Byzantium, China and of the Khazars. No state visits from these potentates materialized, and the golden thrones served a purely symbolic purpose. TRIANGLE OF POWER During the first few decades of the seventh century, just before the Muslim hurricane was unleashed from Arabia, the Middle East was dominated by a triangle of powers: Byzantium, Persia, and the West Turkish Empire. The first two of these had been waging intermittent war against each other for a century and both seemed on the verge of collapse; in the sequel, Byzantium recovered, but the Persian kingdom was soon to meet its doom, and the Khazars were actually in on the kill. They were still nominally under the suzerainty of the West Turkish kingdom, within which they represented the strongest effective force, and to which they were soon to succeed; accordingly, in 627, the Roman Emperor Heraclius concluded a military alliance with the Khazars--the first of several to follow--in preparing his decisive campaign against Persia. There are several versions of the role played by the Khazars in the campaign--which seems to have been somewhat inglorious--but the principal facts are well established. The Khazars provided Heraclius with 40,000 horsemen under a chieftain named Ziebel, who participated in the advance into Persia, but then--presumably fed up with the cautious strategy of the Greeks--turned back to lay siege on Tiflis; this was unsuccessful, but the next year they again joined forces with Heraclius, took the Georgian capital, and returned with rich plunder. Gibbon has given a colourful description (based on Thophanes) of -- PJ 28 -- pag. 148 the first meeting between the Roman Emperor and the Khazar chieftain and I think you will find it interesting. "...To the hostile league of Chosroes with the Avars, the Roman emperor opposed the useful and honourable alliance of the Turks (Khazars). At his liberal invitation, the horde of Chozars transported their tent from the plains of the Volga to the mountains of Georgia; Heraclius received them in the neighbourhood of Tiflis, and the khan with his nobles dismounted from their horses, if we may credit the Greeks, and fell prostrate on the ground, to adore the purple of the Caesar. Such voluntary homage and important aid were entitled to the warmest acknowledgements; and the emperor, taking off his own diadem, placed it on the head of the Turkish prince, whom he saluted with a tender embrace and the appellation of son. After a sumptuous banquet, he presented Ziebel with the plate and ornaments, the gold, the gems, and the silk, which had been used at the imperial table, and, with his own hand, distributed rich jewels and earrings to his new allies. In a secret interview, he produced the portrait of his daughter Eudocia, condescended to flatter the barbarian with a promise of a fair and august bride, and obtained an immediate succor of forty thousand horse..." Eudocia (Epiphania) was the only daughter of Heraclius by his first wife. The promise to give her in marriage to the "Turk" indicates once more the high value set by the Byzantine Court on the Khazar alliance. However, the marriage came to naught because Ziebel died while Eudocia and her suite were on their way to him. There is also another twist which you might find interesting: Ziebel "presented his son, a beardless boy" to the Emperor--as quid pro quo. IF MAN LEARNS NOTHING FROM HISTORY--HE IS DESTINED TO REPEAT IT. PERSIAN STATE NEVER RECOVERED The Persian state never recovered from the crushing defeat inflicted on it by Emperor Heraclius in 627. There was a revolution; the King was slain by his own son who, in his turn, died a few months later; a child was elevated to the throne, and after a decade of anarchy and chaos the first Arab armies to erupt on the scene delivered the coup de grace to the Sasanide Empire. At about the same time, the West Turkish confederation dissolved into its tribal components. A new triangle of powers replaced the previous one: the Islamic Caliphate--Christian Byzantium--and the newly emerged Khazar Kingdom of the North. It fell to the latter to bear the brunt of the Arab attack in its initial stages, and to protect the plains of Eastern Europe from the invaders. In the first twenty years of the Hegira--Mohammed's flight to Medina in 622, with which the Arab calendar starts--the Muslims had conquered Persia, Syria, Mesopotamia, Egypt, and surrounded the Byzantine heartland (present-day Turkey) in a deadly semi-circle, which extended from the Mediterranean to the Caucasus and the southern shores of the Caspian. The Caucasus was a formidable natural obstacle, but no more forbidding than the Pyrenees; and it could be negotiated by the pass of Dariel (now called the Kasbek pass) [go look up these things, chelas, and get your proof of this truth] or bypassed through the defile of Darband, along the Caspian shore. This fortified defile, called by the Arabs Bab al Abwab, the Gate of Gates, was a kind of historic turnstile through which the Khazars  and other marauding tribes had from time immemorial attacked the countries of the south and retreated again. Now it was the turn of the Arabs. Between 642 and 652 they repeatedly broke through the Darband Gate and advanced deep into Khazaria, attempting -- PJ 28 -- pag. 149 to capture Balanjar, the nearest town, and thus secure a foothold on the European side of the Caucasus. They were beaten back on every occasion in this first phase of the Arab-Khazar war; the last time in 652, in a great battle in which both sides used artillery (catapults and ballistae). Four thousand Arabs were killed, including their commander, Abdal-Rahman ibn-Rabiah; the rest fled in disorder across the mountains. For the next thirty or forty years the Arabs did not attempt any further incursions into the Khazar stronghold. Their main attacks were now aimed at Byzantium. On several occasions they laid siege to Constantinople (Istanbul) by land and by sea; had they been able to outflank the capital across the Caucasus and round the Black Sea, the fate of the Roman Empire would probably have been sealed. The Khazars, in the meantime, having subjugated the Bulgars and Magyars, completed their western expansion into the Ukraine and the Crimea. But these were no longer haphazard raids to amass booty and prisoners; they were wars of conquest, incorporating the conquered people into an empire with a stable administration, ruled by the mighty Kagan (and guess who the Kagan is in America?), who appointed his provincial governors to administer and levy taxes in the conquered territories. At the beginning of the eighth century their state was sufficiently consolidated for the Khazars to take the offensive against the Arabs. (Anybody getting a bad case of "hives" yet? How about bird mites)? From the distance of more than a thousand years (they don't care about "time" or how long a thing takes if they go after it), the period of intermittent warfare that followed (the so-called "Second Arab war", 722-37) looks like a series of tedious episodes on a local scale, following the same, repetitive pattern: the Khazar cavalry in their heavy armour of stolen weaponry breaking through the pass of Dariel or the Gate of Darband into the Caliph's domains to the south; followed by Arab counter-thrusts through the same pass or the defile, towards the Volga and back again. Looking thus through the wrong end of the telescope, one would be reminded of the old jingle about the noble Duke of York who had ten thousand men; "He marched them up to the top of the hill. And he marched them down again". In fact, the Arab sources (though they often exaggerate) speak still, of armies of 100,000, even of 300,000 men engaged on either side--probably outnumbering the armies which decided the fate of the Western world at the battle of Tours about the same time. The death-defying fanaticism which characterized these wars is illustrated by episodes such as the suicide by fire of a whole Khazar  town as an alternative to surrender; the poisoning of the water supply of Bab al Abwab by an Arab general; or by the traditional exhortation which would halt the rout of a defeated Arab army and make it fight to the last man: "To the Garden, Muslims, not the Fire"--the joys of Paradise being assured to every Muslim soldier killed in the Holy War. (Do you still wonder WHO planned the Iraqi War? Do you still quander as to WHO continues to run it)? At one stage during these fifteen years of fighting the Khazars overran Georgia and Armenia, inflicted a total defeat on the Arab army in the battle of Ardabil (AD 730) and advanced as far as Mosul (ouch, that name again just as TODAY) and Dyarbakir, more than half-way to Damascus, capital of the Caliphate. But a freshly raised Muslim army stemmed the tide, and the Khazars retreated homewards across the mountains. The next year Maslamah ibn-Abd-al-Malik, most famed Arab general of his time, who had formerly commanded the siege of Constantinople, took Balanjar and even got as far as Samandar, another large Khazar town further north. But once more the invaders were unable to establish a permanent garrison, and once more they were forced to retreat across the Caucasus. The sigh of relief experienced in the Roman Empire assumed a tangible form through another dynastic alliance, when the heir to the throne was married to a Khazar princess, whose son was to rule Byzantium as Leo the Khazar. -- PJ 28 -- pag. 150 If you are not beginning to get the picture, I sincerely pity that which will come upon you for you are repeating and repeating and repeating. The beast dragon has you in his clutches and you are supplying all the weapons, resources and financing to assure that this dragon devours the world--BUT--the dragon still has enemies, dear ones--and he who is in the cage with the dragon shall also be slain--must I remind you? So be it and may the grace of understanding rest upon you. Hatonn to clear. -- PJ 28 -- pag. 151 --- SERIALIZED SAGA OF THE KHAZARS We left off yesterday with Leo the Khazar and there is where we shall pick up the narrative. The last Arab campaign was led by the future Caliph Marwan II, and ended in a Pyrrhic victory. Marwan made an offer of alliance to the Khazar Kagan, then attacked by surprise through both passes (pass of Draiel [Kasbek pass] and defile of Darband along the Caspian shore [Bab al Abway, Gate of Gates]). The Khazar army, unable to recover from the initial shock, retreated as far as the Volga. The Kagan was forced to ask for terms; Marwan, in accordance with the routine followed in other conquered countries, requested the Kagan's conversion to the True Faith. The Kagan complied, but his conversion to Islam must have been an act of lip- service for no more is heard of the episode in the Arab or Byzantine sources--in contrast to the lasting effects of the establishment of Judaism as the state religion which took place a few years later (around AD 740). Content with the results achieved, Marwan bid farewell to Khazaria and marched his army back to Transcaucasia--without leaving any garrison, governor or administrative apparatus behind. On the contrary, a short time later he requested terms for another alliance with the Khazars against the rebellious tribes of the south. -- PJ 28 -- pag. 156 It had been a narrow escape. The reasons which prompted Marwan's apparent magnanimity are a matter of conjecture--as is so much else in this bizarre chapter of history. Perhaps the Arabs realized that, unlike the relatively civilized Persians, Armenians or Georgians, these ferocious Barbarians of the North could not be ruled by a Muslim puppet prince and small garrison. Yet Marwan needed every man of his army to quell major rebellions in Syria and other parts of the Omayad Caliphate, which was in the process of breaking up. Marwan himself was the chief commander in the civil wars that followed, and became in 744 the last of the Omayad Caliphs (only to be assassinated six years later when the Caliphate passed to the Abbasid dynasty). Given this background, Marwan was simply not in a position to exhaust his resources by further wars with the Khazars. He had to content himself with teaching them a lesson which would deter them from further incursions across the Caucasus. Thus the gigantic Muslim pincer movement across the Pyrenees in the west and across the Caucasus into Eastern Europe was halted at both ends about the same time. As Charles Martel's Franks saved Gaul and Western Europe, so the Khazars saved the eastern approaches to the Volga, the Danube, and the East Roman Empire itself. (If, of course, you can call hopping from the pan in which you are frying into the fire all covered with grease--so be it). "Well, Hatonn," you now say to me, "the Muslims and Islams of TODAY just don't pose that kind of threat, and it is not nice to blame those nice "Jews" who just want a homeland, peace and love ever-after." Oh?? Let us share a bit of blood-curdling insight-- right from the past few YEARS of announcing right up through NOW! The Ayatollah Khomeni: “The governments of the world should know that Islam will be victorious in all the countries of the world, and Islam and the teachings of the Koran will prevail all over the world. We have in reality, then, no choice but to destroy those systems of government that are corrupt in themselves and also entail the corruption of others, and to overthrow all treacherous, corrupt, oppressive and criminal regimes. This is the duty that all Muslims must fulfill, in every one of the Muslim countries, in order to achieve the triumphant political revolution of Islam” . YOU--AMERICA AND WESTERN WORLD, ARE INCLUDED, FIRST, IN THOSE "SYSTEMS OF GOVERNMENT" TO WHICH HE JUST ALLUDED? It might also bring a bit more balance into your understanding to remember that right up until recent historical times, IRAN WAS PERSIA. The Islamic crusade is a REVOLUTION and the greatest single threat to the status quo in the regions that the Western powers rely on as strategic positions with mineral resources. Keep in mind that in various forms, this revolution is widespread, stretching from Saudi Arabia on the Persian Gulf into Lebanon and Tunisia on the Mediterranean, and on through North Afnca to Morocco on The Atlantic; it is wider still, as indicated by more recent meetings of Muslim leaders in Pakistan, which is east of the Gulf. Muezzins cry the call to prayer from minarets throughout the world these days. Oh, by the way--these nice Revolutionaries despise, abhor, hate and loathe those nice self-styled Khazars!! who took Palestine! The Islamic Republic of Iran has played a major role and inspired those who have seen themselves as underdogs and victims at the hands of other Muslims as well as foreign ideologies. The faith of most Shia and many Sunni has been strengthened. The Soviet Union, which has the world's fifth largest Muslim population, and China (ouch), where there are three times as many Muslims as in Saudi Arabia, have felt spillover from the Iranian revolutionary experience. -- PJ 28 -- pag. 157 Iran has played on the anger and frustration of one small group of Shiites who have launched a very vicious protest against their regional rivals and the Western countries. They are few. About 20% of the world's population is Muslim. Roughly 10% of these are Shia, and only a tiny percentage of those are now violent extremists. These last, who call themselves "soldiers of God", while only part of a multi-faceted movement, are symbolic of the Islamic crusade not only because they have succeeded in extreme forms of violence, but also because they are the most visible and vivid. Their actions are a protest against what they feel are injustices; first from other Muslims, beginning shortly after the faith was founded in the seventh century. That bitterness has built up for more than a millennium, accented during confrontations with the West over the past two centuries since Napoleon conquered Egypt, making France the first Western power to control a Muslim country. Western dealings with and attitude toward the Islamic bloc since World War II have been the final straw. But Shia extremists are by no means alone. Sunni fundamentalists, although most of them do not have the same motives as the downtrodden Shia minority, have also responded to Islamic re-awakening symbolized by Iran. The explosion of Muslim fervor could herald Armageddon and Apocalypse, dear friends. The Koran says: "War comes to provide martyrs that God may prove those who believe. Paradise can only be attained when God knows who will really strive and endure". Martyrdom is a ticket to heaven. What the West calls terrorism is honorable in war against "Satan". If this doesn't chill your heart, America--nothing can! Back to Khazaria and another opinion, that of "Artamonov". "Khazaria was the first feudal state in Eastern Europe, which ranked with the Byzantine Empire and the Arab Caliphate...It was only due to the powerful Khazar attacks, diverting the tide of the Arab armies to the Caucasus, that Byzantium withstood them..." Lastly for this writing, the Professor of Russian History in the University of Oxford, Dimitry Oblensky (this is given for you researchers): "The main contribution of the Khazars to world history was their success in holding the line of the Caucasus against the northward onslaught of the Arabs". Marwan was not only the last Arab general to attack the Khazars, he was also the last Caliph to pursue an expansionist policy devoted, at least in theory, to the ideal of making Islam triumph all over the world. With the Abbasid caliphs the wars of conquest ceased, the revived influence of the old Persian culture created a mellower climate, and eventually gave rise to the splendors of Baghdad under Harun al Rashid. How about a break, Dharma. If we rest more frequently, we can write an additional chapter today. If man doesn't wise up quickly, chela, just that which is transpiring THIS DAY can finish your day in the sun of freedom. Baker, representing the Elite, is giving away the rest of your nation to your KhazarianKhazar "allies"--may God have mercy for you precious children need it. Salu, I shall just step aside until we can sit again. Thank you. Hatonn to clear. -- PJ 28 -- pag. 158 ---  NEXT PAGE