Ancient Romans built the General Post Office of Dublin


I wasn't planning on writing this article, but figured why not. The article will cover a bit more than just the Dublin Post Office building, for the issue we're facing is somewhat more serious. Looks like the so-called "ancient Rome" is involved in this story. Several SH Blog articles could serve as a semi-mandatory prerequisite to understand what I'm about to present to you.

Buildings do not come from nowhere, but to understand who could build a specific structure during a specific time frame, we would need to understand what system of governance was in place in Dublin between 1814 and 1818. This is when our Post Office was allegedly built.

I will present for your judgement a theory, where this Dublin Post Office (as well as many other buildings in the world) was built by:
  • The Roman Corporation
  • aka Roman League (it was either very similar to the Hanseatic League, or we are talking about one and the same League, split in many pieces by the PTB presented version of history)
    • The Hanseatic League was a commercial and defensive confederation of merchant guilds and market towns in Northwestern and Central Europe.
    • Growing from a few North German towns in the late 1100s, the league came to dominate Baltic maritime trade for three centuries along the coasts of Northern Europe.
    • Hansa territories stretched from the Baltic to the North Sea and inland during the Late Middle Ages, and diminished slowly after 1450.
  • aka Ancient Rome
  • aka Holy Roman Empire
KD: In simple terms, our "ancient Rome" was a commercial and defensive confederation of merchant guilds and market towns. It was present in various parts of the world, including Mexico City (and possibly many other American towns and cities).
  • There was nothing ancient about this "ancient Rome" because we are talking about 1400-1840 time frames here.
Dublin Corporation
Dublin Corporation known by generations of Dubliners simply as The Corpo, is the former name given to the city government and its administrative organization in Dublin between 1661 and 1 January 2002.
  • Dublin Corporation first came into being under the Anglo-Normans in Dublin in the late 13th century.
  • For centuries it was a two-chamber body, made up of an upper house of 24 aldermen, who elected a mayor from their number, and a lower house, known as the "sheriffs and commons", consisting the 48 sheriff's peers and 96 representatives of guilds.
  • The modern Dublin Corporation was restructured by late 19th-century and 20th-century legislation, particularly, the Municipal Corporations Act 1840.
    • We are not interested in the period after 1840. Our Post Office was built prior to 1840. Additionally, I believe that the political setup became drastically different after 1840.
The Coat of Arms and motto of Dublin Corporation, from a floor mosaic in City Hall. The arms underwent numerous revisions but always (KD: allegedly) featured the original 13th-century image of three burning castles on its shield.
  • Original text: Obedientia Civium Urbis Felicitas
  • Translation from Latin: The Obedience of the citizens produces a happy city.

KD: I think we all know what "ancient" culture was allegedly playing with mosaics.

The Statue of George II
To be honest, I did not know about this Dublin Corporation. It was the statue dedicated to George II, the King of Great Britain and Ireland (Hibernia), that pointed me in the direction of the said Dublin Corporation.
  • He was also a prince-elector of the Holy Roman Empire from 11 June 1727 (O.S.) until his death in 1760.

By the way, the equestrian statue of King George II, along with Nelson's pillar and the equestrian statue of William the Orange (wearing Roman attire as well) were destroyed. All three were obviously in Dublin.
This "freely translated" was translated way too freely for my liking, because from what we understand, the well known S.P.Q.R is an emblematic abbreviated phrase referring to the government of the ancient Roman Republic. Therefore, S.P.Q.D. can mean only one thing:
  • Senātus Populusque Dublinis (or Dublinium)
    • I am not positive on the proper Latin spelling of Dublin.
    • This source suggests that it could be one of the above two versions.
  • The Senate and People of Dublin
KD: The above excerpt was taken from a book published in 1850. As you can see, there is a certain amount of verbal wiggling around, to justify certain letters, words and clothing we should not have had in 1758.
Roman Corporation aka Roman League
IMHO, in this case, "league" and "corporation" could mean the exact same thing. I did not think it was gonna be so easy to find a direct reference to both the Roman Corporation and the Roman League.

In the below example, we have this "Colony of Heraclea in the Great Magistrate of Naples".


This is our Herculaneum, covered in the below articles:

And while the above is clearly a smoking gun confirming that the PTB Pompeii and Herculaneum narrative is full of holes through which we can see the light of truth, it's the below statement we are interested in (for the purposes of this article).

I think the below 1663 excerpt referencing "Roman Corporation" is magnificent due to it being a possible example of the early altered historical narrative, produced by the contemporary PTB.


So, was it a Roman Corporation or a Roman League? I think it was a League, where town corporations (including Dublin, and Rome itself) were a part of. But to become a part of the Roman League, the region had to get accepted, or received.
  • Not conquered, but received into...

What's funny, we somehow know what this Massinissa guy who died in 148 BC looked like.


KD: Anyways, these were just a few examples. If you need more, please help yourself by visiting the below links.
Legion vs Leagion
Could it be that our understanding of the word "legion" is totally off due to certain adjustments made by the PTB. I'm referring to "leagion" being possibly related to the word "league". As it stands we have the following etymological explanation for "legion".
  • Attested (in Middle English, as legioun) around 1200, from Old French legion, from Latin legiō, legionem, from legō (“to gather, collect”); akin to legend, lecture.
I don't know, may be so, but we do have a few interesting texts suggesting that may be we should question even the most obvious of things.


I65I Source


I633 Source

Roman Titles
One of the greatest misrepresentations introduced by the PTB was the so-called Renaissance. That is if they did not outright invent it. One way, or another, it allowed to indoctrinate many of the so-called "ancient Roman" things into the contemporary world. And boy, did they convolute this "Renaissance" period.
One of such indoctrinated "ancient Roman" things were Roman Titles. Let's see how our Georgio Secondo/George II was titled.



As you can see, our Georgius Augustus was the princeps of Wales, then, after a comma we see "Electoratus Runswick-Lüneburg Haeres" and bla-bla-bla. Even if we consider, that "Haeres aka Heir" does mean a successor, there is still a humongous difference between prince and princeps.
  • Meanwhile, the narrative compliant etymological explanation wants us to think that at a specific moment in time (1727-1760 in this case), these two words meant the exact same thing.
At the same time, the PTB insists that ancient principes and 18th century princes were totally different titles.

A prince is a male ruler (ranked below a king, grand prince, and grand duke) or a male member of a monarch's or former monarch's family. Prince is also a title of nobility (often highest), often hereditary, in some European states.
Princeps is a Latin word meaning "first in time or order; the first, foremost, chief, the most eminent, distinguished, or noble; the first man, first person".
  • As a title, "princeps" originated in the Roman Republic wherein the leading member of the Senate was designated princeps senatus.
  • It is primarily associated with the Roman emperors as an unofficial title first adopted by Augustus (reigned 27 BCE – 14 CE) in 23 BCE.
  • Its use in this context continued until the reign of Diocletian (r. 284 – 305 CE) at the end of the third century.
  • He preferred the title of dominus, meaning "lord" or "master".
  • Princeps
In our case, the PTB suggests that George II was a prince-elector of the Holy Roman Empire from 11 June 1727 until his death in 1760.
  • The prince-electors, or electors for short, were the members of the electoral college that elected the emperor of the Holy Roman Empire.
Coincidentally during the same period (11 June 1727 until his death in 1760) he was the King of Great Britain and Ireland (aka Hibernia). You have to love the creativeness of our PTB. They found how to divert our attention from the Roman title of Princeps.

What about the "Augustus" portion of Georgius Augustus?
  • Augustus -The title given to the ruling emperor as being the senior ruler of the empire.
    • Abbreviations like AVG could have multiple G's (AVGG) which would indicate a joined rulership of the empire.
  • Augustus "majestic", "great" or "venerable") was an ancient Roman title given as both name and title to Gaius Octavius (often referred to simply as Augustus), Rome's first Emperor.
    • On his death, it became an official title of his successor, and was so used by Roman emperors thereafter.
KD: This "Augustus" title/name is next to impossible to figure out, for, no matter what we read, we simultaneously get a portion of truth and a portion of BS, imo.

And, I wanted to use this image one more time, for we do have two titles to cover.


As we can see, mayor Thomas Mead is being referred to as Praetore Urbano, and two other dudes are described as Vice Comitibus. Let's see what Academickids.COM has to say.
  • The Praetor Urbanus was specially named Praetor, and he was the first in rank. His duties confined him to Rome, as is implied by the name, and he could only leave the city for up to ten days at a time. It was part of his duty to superintend the Ludi Apollinares.
    • He was also the chief magistrate for the administration of justice, and to the Edicta of the successive praetors the Roman Law owes in a great degree its development and improvement.
  • Vice Comitibus took me a few minutes to figure out. I will just live it at that.​

Of course, the PTB want us to think that role playing was just a popular thing at the time.



Dublin vs Eblana vs Auliana vs Ascheled
Sounds like we do not even know whether Dublin is the proper name for this city. Of course we are positive that we do know. After all, what else is new?
  • Please help yourself to see what the PTB has to say about the history of Dublin. How many times did they mention Ascheled?
The below info comes from this 1786 book.
  • Weird, they were finally able to use an actual "1" instead of "I" in 1786.

And while the above 1768 text is interesting, due to showing us what was considered "narrative compliant" in 1768, the below 1802 one is straight up puzzling.


Tell me if Sean-Ghaing does not sound like Shanghaiing.
  • The verb "shanghai" joined the lexicon with "crimping" and "sailor thieves" in the 1850s, possibly because Shanghai was a common destination of the ships with abducted crews.
Additionally, we have this "Ath" which could be singular form of Æsir.
  • Æsir is thus the plural of áss, ǫ́ss "god"
  • The Æsir are the gods of the principal pantheon in Norse religion. They include Odin, Frigg, Höðr, Thor, Baldr and Týr.
Older Maps
I am not sure where I got the below map of Ireland aka Hibernia from. As far as I remember it was dated with either 17th or 16th century.


The below image was allegedly produced in 1607.



Maps of this nature are multiple. The below map is taken from this 1835 book. This book was scanned by Google upside down.


I don't think maps can be tremendously useful in this case. After all, this is Europe we are talking about. Its narrative was the first one to get cleaned up and adjusted.

Fully Developed Government
It looks like we do not want to admit how developed, and sophisticated governments of that time were. After reading the below document (published in 1808) I do not think their system was any different from our today's bureaucratic setup. Or may be it's the other way around, and we are not too different from them.

poff-2.jpg poff-3.jpg poff-4.jpg poff-5.jpg

Transportation Infrastructure
The main section of the Post Office was allegedly made with Wicklow granite. And while Wicklow Mountains are not that far from Dublin, moving mountains of granite required to build this structure (as well as many other ones they were building) sounds like a pretty serious task. Officially, there were no rail roads yet. Naturally, per the narrative, between 1814 and 1818, they had to use horse buggies to transport all that granite.

But what's interesting, in 1820's, with no recognizable research and development, we have this tremendously downplayed system of motorized public transportation. It came from nowhere, and left in the same direction. The PTB narrative provided a few BS excuses, and that was it. Wanna guess how many years we had to wait for this technology to resurface?
Walter Hancock carriage.jpg

KD: I think there was research, and there was development. Unfortunately, our narrative was adjusted and things like this are dismissed as oddities.

I'm a firm believer that palaces do not get built without everything else being on par. IMHO, their real infrastructure was omitted from our narrative.

The General Post Office of Dublin
The matter at hand is the The General Post Office of Dublin. I question its history, and as far as I understand @Oisín thinks that the PTB provided history of this building is pretty spot on.

General Post Office, Dublin3.jpg

Here is a short synopsis based on the traditional narrative.
  • The foundation-stone of the building, which was designed by Francis Johnston, was laid by the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Charles Whitworth, 1st Earl Whitworth, on 12 August 1814, attended by the Post-Masters-General, Charles O'Neill, 1st Earl O'Neill and Laurence Parsons, 2nd Earl of Rosse.
  • The structure was completed in the short space of approximately three years at a cost (depending on sources) of between £50,000 and £80,000.
  • The front, which extends 67.1 metres (220 ft), has an Ionic portico (24.4 metres (80 ft) wide), of six fluted Ionic columns, 137.16 centimetres (54 inches) in diameter.
  • The frieze of the entablature is highly enriched, and in the tympanum of the pediment were the royal arms until removed following restoration in the 1920s.
  • On the acroteria of the pediment are three statues by John Smyth. When facing the building:
    • Mercury on the left, with his Caduceus and purse;
    • Fidelity on the right, with a hound at her feet and a key held in her right hand;
      • due to these features it is argued that the statue is in fact of Hecate
    • Hibernia in the centre, resting on her spear and holding a harp
  • With the exception of the portico, which is of Portland stone, the main building is of mountain granite.
  • The elevation has three stories, of which the lower or basement is rusticated.
Some additional GPO details:
The Three Statues
In my opinion, this is where the entire history of this building starts and ends, for there is not a single reason for these statues to be on this building.

General Post Office, Dublin4.jpg

These statues allegedly represent:
  • Mercury on the left, with his Caduceus and purse;
  • Fidelity on the right, with a hound at her feet and a key held in her right hand;
    • due to these features it is argued that the statue is in fact of Hecate
  • Hibernia in the centre, resting on her spear and holding a harp.
Irish Immigration to America
Before we talk about the statues, let's see who (and why) was immigrating to America from Ireland around 1810-1815, for this is when this building was allegedly built.
  • In the 18th century, emigration from Ireland to the Thirteen Colonies shifted from being primarily Catholic to being primarily Protestant, and with the exception of the 1790s it would remain so until the mid-to-late 1830s, with Presbyterians constituting the absolute majority until 1835.
  • Religious freedoms and economic hardship?
What does America have to do with this Dublin Post Office? Nothing, I just wanted to see if any pagan worshippers were running from Europe. The below map (from here) of the 18th century European religions is clear about what the dominant religions were, and where.


I chose the 18th century map, because 1815 is closer to the 18th century then let's say 1890s.

Christianity in Ireland
Christianity is, and has been the largest religion in Ireland since the 5th century. After a pagan past of Antiquity, missionaries most famously including Saint Patrick converted the Irish tribes to Christianity in quick order, producing a great number of saints in the Early Middle Ages, and a faith interwoven with Irish identity for centuries since− though much less so in recent times. -
Conclusion: I think it is fair to say that ancient Roman/Greek pagan religions were not predominant ones in Ireland when this Post Office was being built. It is also fair to say that the narrative fails to mention that these ancient religions even existed in Ireland during this particular time frame.

Back to the Statues
Let's take three countries and three statues, and see what these three countries could have in common as far as statues go. Well, may be we should call statues for what they are - pagan Goddesses. These countries and Goddesses are:
We can obviously argue about semantics, but there is very little left for imagination here.


Below we have Hibernia and Britannia hanging out together. Where is Jesus?

But it's not really important that Hibernia, imo, was supposed to represent the goddess of war Athena aka Minerva, for we have two more statues mounted on top of the Post Office, presumably, designed and built by Christians.
  • Mercury is a major god in Roman religion and mythology, being one of the 12 Dii Consentes within the ancient Roman pantheon. He is the god of financial gain, commerce, eloquence, messages, communication, travelers, boundaries, luck, trickery and thieves; he also serves as the guide of souls to the underworld.
Note: the kicker in the below image of the so-called Mercury is... well, neither the caduceus nor the cup appear to belong to this statue. The shaft and his hand do not exactly match. Looks like the cup was added later as well.


Fidelity - could be Fides.
  • Fides was the goddess of trust and good faith in Roman paganism. She was one of the original virtues to be considered an actual religious divinity. Fides is everything that is required for "honour and credibility, from fidelity in marriage, to contractual arrangements, and the obligation soldiers owed to Rome."
  • Can't find a good quality image, but chances are, that key does not belong there either.
Could be Fides, but...


... but she is holding a key. Which Goddess had a key? Hecate did, and this is why some thought that this statue was of Hecate.
  • Hecate is a goddess in ancient Greek religion and mythology, most often shown holding a pair of torches or a key and in later periods depicted in triple form. She is variously associated with crossroads, entrance-ways, night, light, magic, witchcraft, knowledge of herbs and poisonous plants, ghosts, necromancy, and sorcery.
Hecate was quite a character.


Or like this...

To be honest, I did not find an image of Hecate with a key. Wiki description says she had one. But who I did find with a key was
  • Cybele - In Rome, Cybele became known as Magna Mater.

Of course, Cybele, being our good old Magna Mater can also look like this.

Oh, and by the way, find "ten differences".
  • Why did they mess with the statues?



Whoever can find a better quality image of the below pediment art, please share.


Questions: How come in a Christian country of Ireland, in a Christian city of Dublin two Christians installed three pagan Gods on top of the Post Office?
  • Was their Dublin church and church members like... yup, go ahead, and worship pagan Gods in our Christian city of Dublin?
  • Or, were they sold the exact same BS we have to consume, where these are just symbols of nothingness?
KD: I understand that Irishmen are not Israelites, but Moses probably turned in his grave just for fun. Moses probably said, "It's ok, many places are in the same boat" with you, Irishmen (and women).
Oh, and wouldn't that be something, if the above gods were not Roman gods at all? How about Malacbal and Agaibal, whoever they were?

The Creators
As we know, Francis Johnston "architected" the Post Office and John Smyth, allegedly created pagan statues to install on top of the Post Office. Apparently, Christian Francis Johnson thought it was alright, and may be was even the one to request these pagan statues made and installed. It looks like there was noone objecting these pagan deities being installed on top of the Post Office.
  • Meanwhile, some Irishmen were seeking religious freedoms on the other side of the Atlantic ocean.
I did not find any image of Mr. Smyth, but we have this one of Mr. Johnston.


What did they all know, that we do not?
  • Washington - Mozart - Napoleon - Wellesley


Some say this has something to do with freemasonry, but do we really know?


With new generations coming up, we can rest assured that the knowledge will not get lost.


Mr. Johnston's bio contains our regular mambo-jumbo. You are welcome to see it here and here.

O'Connell Street
They sure did like renaming things back in the day. On 6 January 1818, the new post-office in Sackville Street (now O'Connell Street) was opened for business.

Drogheda History
As we can see, the Drogheda street was named after Henry Moore, the 1st Earl of Drogheda. I find it interesting that this esteemed Irish gentleman with the last name of Moore had a coat of arms looking like this.
  • Escutcheon: Azure on a chief indented Or three mullets pierced Gules.
  • Crest: Out of a ducal coronet a Moor’s head Proper wreathed about the temples Argent and Azure.
  • Supporters: Two greyhounds Argent.
  • Created: 1661
  • First Holder: Henry Moore
  • Earldom of Drogheda

Meanwhile, our Henry Moore (died 1676) allegedly looked something like this.
  • In other words, we do not appear to know what he looked like.

Where did I see a similar Moor's head or two. I think it was:

By the way, here is the PTB way to cover BS with BS:
  • BS #1: Despite the common misconception that Moor's heads are representations of unknown Muslims defeated in battle,
  • BS #2: evidence suggests most known Moor's heads are representations of specific Africans in honor of their contributions to Catholics in Europe.
  • Source
Question: Was Henry Moore black?

The Drogheda Town

As you can see, Drogheda is also a town located 25-30 miles north of Dublin. I did not look into its hidden history yet, but on the surface we have this nice crescent moon.

And while the PTB would want us to think that this particular crescent moon is an Islamic symbol, we should definitely question this claim, for it has just about as much of Islamic in it, as this symbol in Moscow.


Or these two symbols:
Oh, and who said that it was a star accompanying the crescent moon?


And if the star was supposed to symbolize our Sun, then who knows where the limits of lies are?

Back to the Post Office
As we know, the Post Office was allegedly built between 1814 and 1818. The street where the Post Office stands today was renamed from Drogheda street to Sackville street some time after 1750-60, and in 1924 from Sackville to O'Connell street. This is what the area supposedly looked like in 1750-60's.


The following description of the Sackville street was provided in a publication issued in 1790.


In 1841 we will have the same street looking something like this.


In 1916 (and just prior to being damaged), our Sackville street was supposed to have the following appearance.
  • As you can see, our Post Office is not that far from the River Liffey.
  • This should help you out to imagine the general location of the Post Office on the above images.

I just mentioned 1916 damages to the Post Office building. The reason for the damages was the Easter Uprising. Sounds like "with much greater numbers and heavier weapons, the British Army suppressed the Rising."
  • Members of the Irish Volunteers, led by schoolmaster and Irish language activist Patrick Pearse, joined by the smaller Irish Citizen Army of James Connolly and 200 women of Cumann na mBan, seized strategically important buildings in Dublin and proclaimed the Irish Republic.
  • The main rebel positions were gradually surrounded and bombarded with artillery.
Here are the consequences.

These two pictures allow for a lot of questions.

A detailed inspection of the above images suggests that our "shell of the G.P.O." could be a brick building covered in granite veneer blocks.


And whatever you feel like calling this portion of the contraption, it was clearly made of brick.


Per the narrative:
  • With the exception of the portico, which is of Portland stone, the main building is of mountain granite.
  • Did the PTB forget to mention mountains of bricks used?
If these here are indeed the damaged insides of the 1916 Dublin General Post Office, then the narrative appears to be missing some info on iron/steel being used during its construction.


Ruins of the interior of the General Post Office following the 1916 Rising.
  • Concrete pillars and metal reinforcement beams?

Today, the courtyard area walls of the Dublin Post Office are clearly made of brick, whatever that means.

Construction Documentation
Our professional historian @Oisín, claims that a certain Murray Collection 93/46.661 located at the Royal Institute of the Architects of Ireland contains tons of relevant construction related docs pertaining to the Dublin GPO building. I did request digital access to the records. We'll see if they ever reply.

Royal Irish Engineers.jpg

Meanwhile, this here is all we appear to have available on the internet.

As it stands, this is laughable. These are copies of the original 1930 blueprints for the main building of the Lew Wallace School. Really, who needed something like that in 1814?


When was the GPO of Dublin built?
Well, the narrative suggests that it was built some time between 1814 and 1818. Built of granite and Portland stone. I, honestly do not know when it was built, because we have plenty of reasons to question the history of this building. One thing appears fairly certain - it was not built between 1814 and 1818.
  • There are several linked maps on this page. May be you can figure out when this building first pops up on the maps.
1883 map.jpg


1798 map.jpg



1797 map.jpg


1782 map.jpg


1780 map.jpg


It sure looks like in 1756 the future Dublin General Post Office building was already there.



KD: The PTB had between 400 and 600 years to iron their historical narrative out. Some of the narrative compliant things of 1600's were no longer narrative compliant in 1700s, hence you won't see them in the books produced in 1700's. Same goes for 1800's, 1900's and 2000's. Today's version of history is reasonably polished, and allows for a much easier and rather smooth delivery of the narrative. Governments maintain a pretty tight grip on their curriculums.
  • IMHO, the moment our contemporary historians accepted those three pagan statues, their credibility has ended.
So... who and when built this Dublin General Post Office? I honestly do not know. May be the original brick building was built by Moors when the name of the street was still Drogheda. Or, May be it was built by the Dublin branch of the Roman League.
  • Chances are, between 1814 and 1818, the older brick building received a granite veneer face lift.
  • May be this is when those columns and other Roman architectural attributes were added.
Did they use real granite and Portalnd stone? I do not know, that would require certain tests. Could they use artificial granite and Portland stone? I think they could.
It appears that they indeed purchased a pre-existing building in order to "enlarge" the General Post Office in Dublin. At least, this is how I understand the below 1814 information.

The definition of premises:
  • In real estate, land and the improvements on it, a building, store, shop, apartment, or other designated structure
  • Premises are land and buildings together considered as a property
  • A house or building, together with its land and outbuildings, occupied by a business or considered in an official context
Bottom line: In my opinion, this building was already there in 1814 (just like it was there in 1756). There were no 100% brand new structures built in that spot between 1814 and 1818.
  • That means that the Dublin General Post Office building is at least 58 years older than we are told.


New member
Jan 31, 2021
Reaction score
Your timeline for "ancient" Rome at 1400-1840 is correct - this is the same timeline for "ancient" Egypt, "ancient" Greece, "ancient India, "ancient" China and so on... the "ancient" Hebrews... "ancient Babylonia" ...

The true timeline for our human history is documented in hundreds of historic documents and corroborated by thousands of other independent sources - this includes over a dozen independent sources that tell us General Ptolemy lived in the 1400's and 1500's - this includes the records that place the "ancient" city of Alexandria in this same timeline - along with Alexander the Great, Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, Pythagoras, Ovid, Homer, Euripides, Hippocrates and so on.

The true timeline for our human history includes Abraham and Sarah, Noah, etc., who also lived hundreds of years ago - not thousands of years ago.

The true timeline for our Earth's continents, oceans, mountains, Earth's expansion, Earth's cataclysms, etc., is also documented by our ancestors who tell us the geological timeline of millions and billions of years is a psy-op of epic proportions - our ancestors tell us the historical timeline of thousands and thousands of years is intentional disinfo and that the fake biblical timeline of nearly 6,000 years is also intentional disinfo.

In hundreds of historic documents, our ancestors tell us the ice ages are fiction, pangaea is fiction, continental drift and continental collision are fiction, the timeline from carbon dating is intentional disinfo, the timeline from ice cores is intentional disinfo, the timeline from Egyptology is intentional disinfo, etc.

Since our ancestors tell us the timeline for our broken and subducted tectonic plates, since our ancestors also tell us the timeline for our ocean trenches and archipelago islands, since they tell us the timeline for the boot of Italy, the timeline for the Arabian and Iberian Peninsulas, the timeline for the Yucatan and Olympic Peninsulas, the when and why of the Grand Canyon, the when and why of the Siberian and Deccan Traps, the when and why of the cataclysms known as Eltanin and Nuuanu, since they also tell us the timeline for Vesuvius, Santorini, Yellowstone and the eruption of dozens of supervolcanoes in North America and thousands of smaller volcanoes that erupted across three continents - all in one night - to believe published reports that "scientists say... chemical analysis proves"... prompts us to ask, "What corroborates the timeline for their "chemical analysis"? The answer to that is "nothing" - nothing corroborates their timeline lies.

For over 50 years, I have studied thousands of independent sources which tell us the true timeline for our human history and the true timeline for our Earth's continents, oceans, mountains, our Earth's expansion, Earth's cataclysms, etc. - it's all documented and it is all being made public.

When the public sees the lies that they've been forced to pay for - and the price that their parents, grandparents, great grandparents and their children have been forced to pay - in schools and in universities, in books and magazines - when the public realizes the lies they've been told about history, geology, chemistry, glaciology, physics, botany, astronomy, and astrophysics, along with the full spectrum of lies in politics, economics, justice, healthcare and nutrition, business and banking, the thievery in the stock markets, etc., massive upheaval is expected.

May all the deceivers be eradicated for their crimes against humanity.
The "1758 A.D." quoted in the book about the statue honoring King George II comes across as a fraud - their very desperate attempts to reinforce their timeline lies which cloak the true timeline which exposes the ancestry and lineage of the pedovore overlords that control our world. Jesus did not live nearly 2,000 years ago - he was reportedly born when Caesar Augustus ruled Rome - which was in the late 1500's and early 1600's.
When I read this quote: "The treasury of all lands, the common castle of the earth, the head of Dominion and of the world, the Centre and Academy of arts, the sanctuary of Justice, the Orb of eloquence... " I paused there and thought, "This sounds like the language of the devil ... and then you went on to explain the references to "legions of demons" in the New Testament.

How would I know what the "language of the devil" sounds like?

That's a whole other topic -

scary sh*t.
Some researchers speculate that George Washington was actually King George II and that his "madness" was a way to explain his absence ... Or was George Washington the SON of King George III? Look at the similarities:
Last edited:
  • A Avatar

  • Triskell

    New member
    Feb 8, 2021
    Reaction score
    What an amazing piece of research. Well done KD
    In my opinion, this is where the entire history of this building starts and ends, for there is not a single reason for these statues to be on this building.
    Several things come to mind regarding a possible "true timeline"

    Perhaps these statues are indeed not gods, but something similar to the 200 fallen / rebel angels mentioned in the Old Testament and more specifically in the book of Enoch. Enoch precisely enumerates the names of the angels and the various sciences they teached men.
    This would perhaps explain the large variety of "Roman / Greek gods" and the presence of winged deities next to them on engravings and paintings.

    The Roman Empire, or "Roman League", would then simply refer to an Old World global Government system led by "fallen angels / gods" before the cataclysmic events of the last centuries we’re studying here.

    Chronologically, we would move from the biblical period to our present day with no real transition. Which would corroborate the 1,000-year-old ghost of Anatoly Fomenko.

    Perhaps this is a bit off topic and deserves a separate thread, but among the many gates of Paris, the « Porte de Saint-Denis » has a Latin inscription that has always intrigued me.


    Governor and Aedilie
    about 200
    Year of the Lord 1672


    (Street view)

    This triumphal arch is dedicated to Louis XIV and built in 1672 (or i672). The main inscription is "Ludovico Magno" = Luis the High

    Most interesting for me is the use of the term "ÆDILES"

    Here is the official definition of a ÆDILES:
    Aedile was an elected office of the Roman Republic. Based in Rome, the aediles were responsible for maintenance of public buildings (aedēs) and regulation of public festivals. They also had powers to enforce public order and duties to ensure the city of Rome was well supplied and its civil infrastructure well maintained, akin to modern local government
    Aedile was assigned two lictors when in office. One more than a Quaestor.


    What an Aedile supposed to look like

    The question for me is : What did an officer of the Roman Republic do in France in 1672?
    The only logical answer for me would be that France was part of this Roman League in 1672.

    So yes, maybe this ancient roman world was still living until the 19th century...
    Last edited:
    Oct 29, 2020
    Reaction score
    Personally, I’d like to know more about this Henry Moore 1st Earl of Drogheda. His involvement appears to be one of the anchor points in this entire story. Prior to 1750s, his name is all over that city block.

    We can see that the building appears to exist as early as 1756, if we were to believe this map. (didn't see this map before. will add to OP)
    • Sackville and Drogheda streets co-exist. This appears to contradict the narrative too.


    New member
    Jan 31, 2021
    Reaction score
    The old maps are TREMENDOUSLY useful, however, since the public is told the old maps are "artistic" and "inaccurate", few realize the massive volumes of evidence that is documented for us.
    As for the "salmon eggs", my immediate reaction was to look again at the early 1600's illustration of Neptune/Poseidon, god of the seas ...
    As for your question about why a "christian" land with "christian" people would erect pagan statues, this is a echo of why the "catholic" popes of the city of Rome would erect a colossal monument of pagan gods which is known as the Trevi Fountain - the answers to both these questions are obvious: the early catholics worshiped thousands of hybrid descendants of the fallen angels which includes Neptune/Poseidon ... who were not "mythological" or "fiction".

    Right Arm

    Jan 8, 2021
    Reaction score
    There is something fishy in Denmark/Dublin. I started looking after the first Dublin PO thread at the Magazine Fort on the outskirts of Dublin and was surprised to find that it was located next to a bigger star fort that has since been erased from the landscape, I mean completely gone, usually there are some remnants left that are visible from the air on maps but there is nothing.

    Also lots of SH trigger words here, Phoenix park, Phoenix Lodge, Knight Hospitaller and the obligatory obelisk,

    A second notable monument is the "Phoenix Column" (shown in the header photograph above), a Corinthian column carved from Portland Stone located centrally on Chesterfield Avenue, the main thoroughfare of the park, at the junction of Acres Road and the Phoenix, the main entrance to Áras an Uachtaráin. A contemporary account described it in the following terms:
    Here is what apparently was and what is not now.
    Screenshot 2021-02-23 at 02.47.42.jpg

    Screenshot 2021-02-23 at 02.52.10.jpg

    There are many buildings in Dublin that do not make any sense but there are some clues.

    The sphere within a sphere is one such clue.
    There are many paths on the mountain but they all lead to the top, Rome!

    Why would they remove such a fort so completely and also why was the fort on this side of the city, surely the best defensive position would be the seaward side, makes no sense!
  • A Avatar

  • Joined
    Oct 29, 2020
    Reaction score
    For those who don't know, portico is a porch leading to the entrance of a building, or extended as a colonnade, with a roof structure over a walkway, supported by columns or enclosed by walls.
    • In our case it's the thing I outlined in red.

    Some 1853 civil engineer, who appeared to know a whole lot about architecture, spotted this fake without even realizing it. Well, it's either he did not know, or wanted to make it look like he did not know.



    Could it be that in 1815 there was still a bunch of parts to kit houses available, and they used those to "decorate" older buildings?


    Active member
    Feb 4, 2021
    Reaction score
    I'll be interested to read any response given to this from a mainstream perspective. Especially the maps cited. Though I suspect it'll be something along the lines of "my old documents are better than your old documents!"

    From my experience, it appears that the "elite" have always (and currently) "worship" a different set of gods from the common folk. Give monotheism to the masses, because as great as their one God might be, it's always been more practically beneficial in this realm to make deals with specific "devils". Put 'em on your buildings to enhance, protect, and distract from your storytelling. It's all magical spells, in different forms, and again, it's not hard to see this play out in the modern world.

    Along those lines, I do want to briefly touch on how KD uses "TPTB" throughout this article, in reference to rewriting the timeline. I do believe that "elite" powers have often dictated history... but it's likely not them writing it down. They make the plebes do that, so it's written in the tongues of the masses and provides plausible deniability in the event the narrative requires shifting. To draw a comparison, it's the same reasoning why NASA doesn't really officially answer any questions about hoaxes, they let their fanboys fill in the plot holes. I also just want to make my usual caveat too that "TPTB" does not need to mean "secret society that spans generations, controlling everything", it could just mean whatever sociopathic elite vultures are currently at the top of the hill at that time, and changing with generations. Basically, there's always manipulation but it's rarely playing the long game (because individual mortals are self-absorbed). That's why I think you can have a website like this one with exceptional amounts of data that clearly contradict the mainstream narrative. The stealing of history isn't a well-controlled, wide-reaching conspiracy, it's the history of human greed and lust for power. And things simply get omitted eventually because people forget and the "common sense" of the era takes over.

    Anyway, that might seem a little bit generalized for the thread, but I do think it's a major stumbling block for professional historians. They cannot conceive how our fundamental premises could be mistaken if they aren't well-coordinated lies spanning centuries, which to them stretches credibility (to me too, really). But it only takes one person to tell a lie and it can often be for their own personal benefit. Whoever then win the PR campaign sets the narrative, and many isolated events like this can eventually form a meta-narrative that is complete garbage and also not a grand conspiracy.
    Oct 29, 2020
    Reaction score
    From my experience, it appears that the "elite" have always (and currently) "worship" a different set of gods from the common folk. Give monotheism to the masses, because as great as their one God might be, it's always been more practically beneficial in this realm to make deals with specific "devils". Put 'em on your buildings to enhance, protect, and distract from your storytelling. It's all magical spells, in different forms, and again, it's not hard to see this play out in the modern world.
    It also encompasses other things. I would love to find out when the very first "ancient" Roman bust was discovered.
    • If you have an answer, please consider sharing it in the comments section of this article.

    Looks like I got a response from The Royal Institute of Architects of Ireland.


    Now will e-mail the Irish Architecture Archives to see if they are as helpful as claimed. I'm not sure why a bookshop manager for the RIAI was the one to answer my request, but hey... beggars can't be choosers.


    Update from 04/25/2021 - there was no reply from the Irish Architecture Archives.
    I'll be interested to read any response given to this from a mainstream perspective.
    Well, I wish @Oisín was still around to address the OP. Unfortunately, it does not look like he wants to share his opinion on the matter.


    New member
    May 9, 2021
    Reaction score
    Although not technically Irish history, in order to understand more about the big picture of the history of the British Isles, I'd recommend reading "The History of the Kings of Britain" translated by Geoffrey of Monmouth in about 1136.

    It's considered a psuedo history because of the Giants and account of Merlin.
    But I can't seem to find any historical or geographical inconsistencies and believe me I looked for them very thoroughly.

    The original Britons came from Brutus of Troy. London used to be called New Troy and if I'm not mistaken, the Trojans culture was similar to the Greeks in religion, architecture and culture and the Romans copied much of the Greek culture themselves.

    Anyways, you can draw your own conclusions if you'd like to read it. It helped me make sense of things from the strange account of Julius Caesar's attacks on Britain to where Stonehenge came from.

    Here's the free download - History of the Kings of Great Britain

    Similar articles