O.I Commanders

(One Perimeter to (Mab Perimeter,


'you are not to take any actions on behalf of (Sampson Onwuka or (Iroabuchi Onwuka under any circumstances, especially for issue of property...either in Travis, Harris or Hayes, or so quarterly, actions in Round Rock, Pflugerville, and Georgetown.


If there are I.O Commissioners still in Aust., or (O.I Commanders still Wilco., they must disregard any pretension to the documents regarding the television groups and the few hospitals....(?, homeless covenant, Ship, and other....   

history a.n.oghi II -- MESOPOTAMIA ATAGBUGHI

Sampson nyurur

Much of what is now Mesopotamia, or land of the two Rivers, offer the rest of us a cognizable insight into the history of the world and the languages. It is not co-incidence that is Mesopotamia and the Near East, especially Near East which is fancy term for Egypt or Africa, that hold the key to understanding our world from its ancient and humble beginnings to the present when we now see the totality of the world in part.

The area is riddled in flood and flood story, and at least, enough evidence exist to suggest that the flood incident that sink much of the older worlds occurred every so often, and then it gradually toned down to possibly every 2000 years or thereabout, and each time, the flood dislocate people from their roots, and from that demarcation they inbreed, reproductively isolate from others, become lighter with time or physically different, survive or perish with time, but essentially disconnected from others. It appears that the process led to various departures from Africa or Nearby indigenes such that the people with a new language may only remember what their ancestors said about them, that they came from lands far away and where only separated from the from the main source of their language tree because of the flood. Now they speak a new dialect or even newer dialect which led to a language and newer versions of spoken world. As such the stories that become popular among these people are usually stories about their triumph over the bellows of waters, usually achieved by some divine means, through series of natural occurrences personified as gods of thunder and lightning, Baal and mut, of light and darkness. But the main event of these floods was called the Great Flood, which took place 2010-1990 Bce, which was also alluded to by Egyptians most popular of whom was a certain Manetho.

The Great flood was the flood of Noah of the Bible and possibly (Gilgamesh) Gilgameshu who was saved from the flood. But at this time, the world was essentially aged and the rest of world history was based on the impressions from the flood. Fore we see the stories concerning Gilgamesh in Epic of Gilgamesh as part of the tradition that is essentially Babylonian, and this practice was eventually recorded in what would yield the Babylonian Epic of Creation 'Enuma Elise', Epic of and other Epic as Artrahas and Epic of Appada. But these stories evolved gradually but owes a great deal to the incidents of flood around the Mesopotamia and it was almost always about the survivors of the flood and the intervention of natural or unnatural forces. Yet these stories of people far and away become muddled up and so do the people who gradually become a different and go on to invent their own stories about the flood and the past. In time these places are forgotten and perhaps perish from memory and it was only a matter of time that the record of the places where people lived or live became essential, so essential that new forms of indication and recording were needed. We go the higher distance in noting that they may have the need to protect these hard discovered areas largely due to the impressions from years ago, where new and dislocated people.

"The Babylonians were the best benefactors in that assert concentric, since much of them were easily traveling around the so called Great Trail. But the argument that Columbus used East Africa, it is only true that to a certain degree, since we have to be questioning the successes of the successes of Portuguese and how do we begin with the history concerning Africa and the rest of the world? Perhaps we have to refer to the themes of civilization and what Archeology tells about Ancient History. We have the Ubaid, Uruk, and Jamdat Nasr, as comparative rate of successive history of Ancient Civilization. This group of civilization is ultimately based on what was perhaps evident from the years from the arrangement of works of art, ceramics, funerary architecture, house types, building architecture, bones and other human remains, palaces, and evidence of the writing in these places and in the culture. While on the surface these cultures are mainly different and essentially derived from each other, the Ubaid, Uruk, Jamdat Nasr, are said to be precursors to what happened to the Egypt, essentially in the generation leading to Saqqara burial grounds. In many sense therefore, there is enough to suggest that the culture that can be referred to Egypt, especially pre-monarch Egypt is more or less inherited from Asia and parts of Europe. Egypt is the cradle of civilization, but the people who began the modern day civilization of Egypt came from elsewhere, from parts of Badarian I and II which is not that far from the First Cataract at Aswan.

 

But these places are not that far from what and where you can Africa that in fact, these places were part of Africa as the very continent. It is only late have we noted significant departure of the Cambridge Ancient History Part 1 Volume 1, early pottery of Mesopotamia and Syria, Ubaid and the beginning of the early dynastic period, 3500-3000 B.C, in the alluvial plain of Sumer, first lower Mesopotamia. Ubaid – Uruk – Jamdat Nasr, based on the ‘discoveries of Seton Lloyd and Fuad Safar’, and it is the issue concerning the incident that we note concerning the Ubaid where ancient Sumer was supposed to have been located in the lower Mesopotamia. .... “One of the Principal reasons against the adoption of this terminology was that the Polychrome pottery so distinctive of Jamdat Nasr was found only at a few sites in Babylonia” but a comparison between evolutionary societies of the Hajj Mohammed and Eridu, that the shift from Uruk-Ubaid-Jamdat Nasr, in illustrating a weaver’s is Uruk, “the more sensitive prehistory excavations which have been undertaken since the conclusion of the dig at the comparatively small site of Al-‘Ubaid, 4 miles West of Ur, have diminished its importance as a point of reference” “But the early Dynastic temple is likely to have been the last of a much earlier series – there was certainly a predecessor in the Uruk-Jamdat Nasr period” How to begin to Navigate between what Egypt is supposed to be and what Egypt may have been. To help our understanding of why the much of the world seem in various ways affected by the work of the Egyptian and so on". This could not have been right....

 

The forward nature of the progress of language or languages dislocated from their origins and then onwards to different languages but part of the same phonology and syntax. In terms of Sargon II of Assyria, we must note quickly that his rise to power is to be taken seriously and at no point for granted. It is not that Sargon is the most important synod of the Assyrian kings but how he features in the events of that 7th century before Christ. Between his rise to power sometime in 722 and his death possible in Egypt in 705 Bce, we must not that he eventually conquered the Northern part of Israel at the time of Isaiah, the Hebrew prophet who inveighed against the wayward Ahaz and eventually Hezekiah and his attempt to form a league against Sargon II. Ahab himself joined forces with renowned coalition against Sargon II, including the Arab Chiefs who were regarded as the 'Chiefs of Arab' headed by a man who some historians claimed to be Hadad and some called him Hazael. But Israel at this point was already divided, between the sons of Rehoboam of the South - eventually Judah, and sons of those who left the House of David in the North. The move by Israelites to fight Sargon was an error that the prophet Isaiah essentially indicated, and after the colossal defeat of North Israel, we heard very little of Isaiah. Enough importance to this era in world history is quite serious since it notes the beginning of the breakdown of other histories of the Israelites on one hand and then the world in general.

 A century later, much of the attention of the Middle East will come down to perhaps the last of the independent nations of old Palestine by name Southern Israel, where the tribes of Judah essentially dwelt. The reign of the Sargon II of Assyrian is also noted in the Annals of the Egypt, since the news of the warring king reached the lord of West Asia and Africa, by Osorkon IV, Pharaoh of the Lower and Upper house of Egypt, from the tribe of Omoeshwa in Libya. We know also that in the 7th and 8th century before Christ, Babylonians were in their transition period and the hegemony of the Khazars was gradually coming to an end. As we noted in time past, the images of Agum I, Agum II, and Agum III of Elam, loom large in the destruction of Khazars as the dynastic over Babylon. It is perhaps the reign of the Ashur-Banipal of Assyria a century later, that may or may not have started the final years of Babylonian independence, since the next arrivals from Uruatu and Medes, became part of the Hegemony that later became Persia. But in the middle 7th century, much of what was Babylon, was almost in the hands of Assyria, much of what was left was held by Urarta. It is also the beginning of the 6th century that History gradually began to indicate the rise of Babylon from the grips of Assyria. Whether or not Essarhaddon contributed to the resettlement of the officials of Babylon in the 7th century seem in many ways irrelevant given the rise of the tribes of Urarta - part loyal to Assyrian - seeing new life in the return to power of the Khazars (Kassite) began their own aspirations against a common enemy.

 We may land out the fact that the rise of the new Dynastic in Babylon, and the rise of Assyria in 7th century under Sargon II, was led and enjoined by a bunch of priestly class who call themselves 'Magi'. The Magis were experts on Astrology and wrote their books mainly about Astrology and use of shapes and figures. There were at the end of 6th oppressed by several forces making their way back to Assyrian domination, and from within Babylon, the Magi were also under attack. The Magi followed the Star of Redemption, and where at time of their struggle waiting for a Messiah who Nebu or Nabu has chosen. What we have said in the past may be confirmed that Nebuchadnezzar is in that 6th century the man by name that Nebu has chosen. His name refers to his position as the chosen one by Nebu, - the Babylonian God of destiny - a name that some believe to be different from Nabu, a supposed God of writing. But the name and the title, Nebu and Nabu, may be a matter of dialectic than anything, for sure these names Nebu or Nabu, refer to the one above. In many ways than one, it is the incident of the Nebu as merely a reference to the 'Stars Above' or 'God of the Heavens', whose star patterns are said to be revealed to the Magi, who in turn reveal the deep meaning of the stars to the world, that the very close meaning of the name of Nebu essentially appeal. But in reflection to the world 'exulted' or the word 'glorious', which we have noted in Igbo as ebube, as in Hebrew Zerubube for Zerubbabel, meaning King of Glory or King of Babylon, can additional reason inspire about the two types of Babylonian god in terms of names.

If in the previous writings we have noted that in Igbo, the statement 'King of Glory' literarily means 'Eze Ebube', a statement that is closer to Ze-bube as in Zeru-bube (Zerubabel) in Hebrew, we can be firm in saying that it has nothing to do with stars, for as much as we can still say that Onye-Ebube (N - ebube), which is Igbo for Glorious One, may also be used as a high one, Onye-Elu as in the word 'Elu' for Babylonian 'High One' and 'El' in English, the Igbo word ebube (glory) and Babylonian Nebu, may in fact result from some similar which has to do with origins of the Babylon. The ancient name of Babylon is Byblos, which is Greek for a word that appear as Babilum, Babulim, supposedly meaning 'gate of the deities' 'land of Babylon' as so on, it is only with clear knowledge of the processes involved in the name can we see Babylon/Babulim as two words, mainly in Igbo as Land of Glory or Simply High Ground, where the later can be placed in context of the former as Elish, which may reflect the very older years of the Babylon as a mountainous site where the Rasin bearing Cedar trees for big Egyptian Ships were made, that is to say a ship building industry, leading to the colonizing of the place by Pharaohs and their Priesthood. In essence, Byblos is just the same Big, a term that does fail to chime with another English word 'glory', a place that was cornered by human beings and for human purpose, for its natural trees by Egyptian priest were used in Ship building, where the likes of Fenkhus as they called the wood cutters with their axes made their home. It is Babylon that holds the better understanding of even nature of Sumer writing, itself rich in mineral resources, relating to Babylonian writing.... nation of navigators essentially arose some 3, 100 years before Christ.

 

It is this history about the people and their origin can we find a form of explicating that favors the fact that Nebu may in fact mean Destiny or Glory, where Nabu may refer to something relatively same, relatively different with Nebu. In terms of the 'man who Nebu has chosen' or 'who Nabu has chosen', we may have little problems in bringing him to the 6th century. Such a man was either the nearly born son of the Artaxyges family of the Medes, who was later known as Cyrus, or the very Nebuchadnezzar who was also King of Kushan. First, we have to consider the man by name Nebuchadnezzar II, king of Babylonia from 605 - 562. Some has said that the Kushans like the Chaldeans were part of the same Ancient Babylonian tribes, suggesting that the names of the two places and their language are dialects of each other. There is no enough to deny such position given especially the fact that Ancient Babylon was supposed to have at least five separate tribes and five separate dialects. As such Emersal being on the dialects may also feature as one the major tribes of Babylon. Secondly, the Chaldeans as we have noted and we have seen are supposedly located somewhere in Asia, or at least at the Southern part of the Arabian Desert. The Kushans are located in about the same area, saving for the fact that through ancient time and currently, the ancestral home of the Kush are a few hundred miles away from what is now Ethiopia. That the Kushites (Cushites) are themselves Ethiopians is not disputed, that their older language was relative to Chaldean is not disputed, that Chaldeans however are related to Chad in West Africa and to some Libyan Inscription in West Africa, makes a very quick case that Chaldeans are not that far from either Ethiopia, Libya, Cyrene, parts of Sudan, Chad, and whatever lie in the path of the travel from the Southern end of the Red Sea through to the deeper end of the Central and West Africa.

The main point being that the King of Kushan as Nebuchadnezzar was called was a King or a ruler of people or tribe that succeeded the hegemony over Babylon in the 6th century. Of course the incident of the quotation of Nebuchadnezzar as the King of Kushan has being disputed since it mainly appeared in the writings of Flavious Josephus. But no doubt exist that Nebuchadnezzar II was a Chaldean, no doubt exist that he was a kind of messiah set aside from birth for redeeming Babylon from the hands of Assyrians. The problem now comes to the fact that if Nebuchadnezzar II was called the King of Kushan and from the tribe of Chaldeans, was he therefore a Chaldean and a Kushan at the same time? Or is it a matter of confusion as has been the case with much Biblical translation on matters concerning Ancient History where the rest of the society is forced the errors of translation in such a way that now interpret such errors as they see fit. For here of language or system of speaking is of the highest importance. Beginning with an easy by Donald J. Wiseman on Nebuchadnezzar (Nebuchadnezzar), which appeared in the Oxford University's Essential Guide to People and Places of the Bible, edited by Bruce M. Metzer and Michael D. Coogan, Wiseman attempted to translate a 'Biblical variant' form of the name Nebuchadnezzar. The names that he discovered to be very close to Nebuchadnezzar were 'Nabu-Kudurri-usur', which was translated as "the (god) Nabu has protected the succession". The author of the article went ahead to illustrate that Nebuchadnezzar by meaning and translation is probably closer to the above description. Wiseman confirmed that Nebuchadnezzar was of Chaldean descent, and that he inherited the office from his father by name Nabopolassar.

 We are not to certain what these names should mean in the context of the King of Babylon, but it is only with Igbo langauge can we see that both the name Nabu-Kudurri-Usur and the name Nabopolassar is probably the same name and refer to the same person. By that first name, Nabu-Kudurri-usur, we can also say that the interpretation in Igbo may be gainfully misleading. It will be unwise to force the reader into a language that he is not very sure of, but we can pretend that at least that the name Nabu-Kudurri-Usur, may mean something of the path, perhaps Nabu is the Path of Life, or Nabu is the path of Salvation, or Nabu is the path that leads (to life). But this interpretation should not occupy the time rather the name Nebuchadnezzar is where the puzzle to the very essence of the messiah and star of redemption essentially apply. In terms of the real meaning of the name of Nebuchadnezzar, we can say at least say with Igbo language that the accounts of Flavius Josephus and Babylonian Chronicles were right in calling him King of Kushan, for his name alone, Nebu-Chad-Nezzer, are three words that can demonstrated in Igbo, where Nebu (Ebube) is Igbo for Glory or Great, where the word Chad is no less Chaldean - no less Chad, and the word Nezzer (Eze) is Igbo word for King or Chief. In essence, if we read the three words together, we easily, very easily arrive at the meaning of Nebuchadnezzar, which is stem from three words and not one, and which is easily, Glorious Chaldean King. In some sense Nebuchadnezzar is a title and by his very title; the King of Chaldean, or King of Kushan, or the Chosen, Divine, Great, or best of all, Glorious King of Babylonians. It is also possible that the Nebuchadnezzar is not his real name, quite possible that he has a name just like his father Nabopolassar, which is a corruption of his actual name.

 In addition to this fact, we may it clearly that Nabopolassar was also called the King of Kushan - Nebuchadnezzar I, and his immortal son who raided Judah and what remains of it, was Nebuchadnezzar II. I must also indicate that the name of his father is such that the 'sight' 'guide' and 'path' may constitute part of the same meaning, which is cannot be that far from the star or imitations of the stars. Above all, Nabopolassar, the father of Nebuchadnezzar II was founding father of the Chaldean dynasty in Babylon. Nebuchadnezzar II may be a redeemer of some sort, and may be the force behind the demise of Assyrians, but he was perhaps not the so called Chosen one who Magi and eventually Isaiah may have preached about. We may indicate that the subject of the Chosen One, the suffering servant, was a theme quite familiar with Egyptians, as much it became from that the fall of Jerusalem to the hands of Nebuchadnezzar on 16th March of 597 BC. Not all Judah at this point fell, and after several wars with people mounting opposition to Assyrian yoke and then Babylon, he came back a decade later to personally supervise the final days of Judah in the years of Jeremiah. Of course the story of the captives in Babylon is well noted through history, immortalized in encomiastic as the Psalms 137. Jeremiah who was the last of the prophets was accused by the remnant of Israelites to be the reason why the hand of God was against them. Jeremiah as Jewish history indicates was led like a 'Sheep' outside the walls of Jerusalem where he was essentially stoned to death. His portion which was inherited from Nebuchadnezzar II as a prophet was taken away. But captives and priests sold into slavery gradually began to see the images of Jeremiah as the suffering servant, a theme that was personalized in another conqueror by name Cyrus. The fact remain too clear that Nebuchadnezzar was a redeemer or the star of redemption but he was not the anointed one, or as the case will be, the Messiah that will restore Babylon to its greatness. This theme of restoration on greatness was vigorously pursued by Nebuchadnezzar in his life time, including the famous 'hanging tree' such that he undertook powerful architectural work in his life that ended unfinished in his death. It was his son Evil Merodach who was left to complete some of the works of art and massive building project.

 

Need does not exist to point out that they were following the Behistun Inscription, where Darius described himself as Arian, a term which we will later recognized as badly spelt and completely misleading. As such we can speak of Sampson a Nazareth and not necessarily a messiah, but his name which Jews believe an umbrella for salvation may be incomplete, since the root of Samson or Sampson is Shemshu, which is modern Hebrew is Shimshi, whereas Shemshu Ho-rah is Egyptian, literally meaning 'of the party of Ra' or 'of party of Ho-Ra' or 'follower of Ra' 'son of Ra', which also means son of God. This meaning of Shemshu Ra may better be noted in a name that is quite familiar, the name of an Egyptian pharaoh, Ramses. The name Ramses is English form of the more Egyptian form, Ramesu, which is much the same as Sam-son or Shemshu, much the same as the very name of Jesus. In essence, the man we call Samson can only be compared to a messiah or Asih (Azir), on the account of his devotion from birth as a Nazerith or Nazirith nothing more, as opposed to his name which is closer to Egyptian if not Philistine, and since he was born in the border between Dan and Ashdol, he was not influenced by elements of Egypt. There was hardly anyone in Israel history that answered Samson before Samson, and after Samson, there were few people who answered the very name. The same may in fact be said of other names in the Bible that sound very Egyptian, names such as Moses is for instance for Egypt, and may in fact be close to the period of the Ka-Moses, Ahmose I, and a time when viziers to the Pharaohs answered Moses. Other names such as Isaiah, that is prophet Isaiah, was not even mentioned any other place in the Bible, saving the book of Isaiah and for some brief mention of the name in the now popular 2 Kings 19-20; 2 Chron. 29-32. We can also presume that the name is part human for this interplay on the man or the prophet, but we may also regard the name probably a theme on a savior who Christians faithfully testify as Jesus Christ. As shall also discover, the book of Isaiah covering over 66, are in fact several books with particular themes of Messiah or the Isaiah, whose will be chosen (Isa) or the Christ, for remission of the sins of Israel.

 Even the initial 14 chapters of Isaiah where 'Immanuel' as a theme manifest, may in fact be a testimonial to the promise of savior in the time of Hezekiah. The theme however of a 'son' that will born, will discussed as a promise to the dwindling light of the house of David, a promise that Baruch Spinoza, may have referred to Josiah. We may however compare the statement about the promise of Savior, wwanu-el, with the name of Christ who is also noted as Isa. Jesus or Jesu or Yesu (Yah-eshua), noted as Jesus of Nazareth is a name that means son of God, but it this lamb of God, that will be a fulfilling of a certain portion of the Isaiah, namely Isaiah 53. We will indicate the very presence of the place we called Nazareth in the Bible, but in terms of who Christ was, he was called 'Son of God', only one account that his name Y-esu. Further demonstration of this fact that our concern on this level is that the name Nazi or Nazareth, literally refers to those set aside for a certain period, to suffer the body in order to atone the sins of a certain people. But in matters affecting the much chosen one, he or she has no purpose but one, his destiny is already determined and he may or may not be aware of it. The issue of being the chosen one does not always lead to death of a tree and pouring of blood by a lamb in month of temple dedication. It is sometimes a theme that appears in form of an 'anointed one', who will be chosen to lead his people or their people. In a every bit of sense therefore, the theme of messiah in Isaiah 40-55, that deals with the Babylonians and not Assyrians, and deals with a certain anointed one, is a theme on the name Saris, or in Akkadian Sa-eris, which was taken eventually to mean Cyrus as if he is King of Babylon. The one who Nabu has 'chosen' was a man of affliction and suffering, a king who do the will of Nabu or God, and the fitting of the king and he will be an a Azir or Nazi, a man separated from others at least for a while. This man was the delivery and his reign will bring the restoration of all things. So was Christ in the Bible, so James the brother of Jesus, so was a certain John the Baptist, so was Elijah. In all probability the prophet we call Isaiah was at once a prophet dedicated to God.

State Def.

The interesting in doing STATE house leads to attack on the manure usually through right wing poli-tere

Caution, disclose new upgrade.... 

Mr. Onwuka

Babilum - A history for the weekened

  

S iroabuchi onwuwka 

 

The ancient name of Babylon is Byblos, which is Greek for a word that appear as Babilum, Babulim, supposedly meaning 'gate of the deities' 'land of Babylon' as so on, it is only with clear knowledge of the processes involved in the name can we see Babylon/Babulim as two words, mainly in Igbo as Land of Glory or Simply High Ground, where the later can be placed in context of the former as Elish, which may reflect the very older years of the Babylon as a mountainous site where the Rasin bearing Cedar trees for big Egyptian Ships were made, that is to say a ship building industry, leading to the colonizing of the place by Pharaohs and their Priesthood. In essence, Byblos is just the same Big, a term that does fail to chime with another English word 'glory', a place that was cornered by human beings and for human purpose, for its natural trees by Egyptian priest were used in Ship building, where the likes of Fenkhus as they called the wood cutters with their axes made their home. It is Babylon that holds the better understanding of even nature of Sumer writing, itself rich in mineral resources, relating to Babylonian writing.... nation of navigators essentially arose some 3, 100 years before Christ.

It is this history about the people and their origin can we find a form of explicating that favors the fact that Nebu may in fact mean Destiny or Glory, where Nabu may refer to something relatively same, relatively different with Nebu. In terms of the 'man who Nebu has chosen' or 'who Nabu has chosen', we may have little problems in bringing him to the 6th century. Such a man was either the nearly born son of the Artaxyges family of the Medes, who was later known as Cyrus, or the very Nebuchadnezzar who was also King of Kushan. First, we have to consider the man by name Nebuchadnezzar II, king of Babylonia from 605 - 562. Some has said that the Kushans like the Chaldeans were part of the same Ancient Babylonian tribes, suggesting that the names of the two places and their language are dialects of each other.

 There is no enough to deny such position given especially the fact that Ancient Babylon was supposed to have at least five separate tribes and five separate dialects. As such Emersal being on the dialects may also feature as one the major tribes of Babylon. Secondly, the Chaldeans as we have noted and we have seen are supposedly located somewhere in Asia, or at least at the Southern part of the Arabian Desert. The Kushans are located in about the same area, saving for the fact that through ancient time and currently, the ancestral home of the Kush are a few hundred miles away from what is now Ethiopia. 

That the Kushites (Cushites) are themselves Ethiopians is not disputed, that their older language was relative to Chaldean is not disputed, that Chaldeans however are related to Chad in West Africa and to some Libyan Inscription in West Africa, makes a very quick case that Chaldeans are not that far from either Ethiopia, Libya, Cyrene, parts of Sudan, Chad, and whatever lie in the path of the travel from the Southern end of the Red Sea through to the deeper end of the Central and West Africa. The main point being that the King of Kushan as Nebuchadnezzar was called was a King or a ruler of people or tribe that succeeded the hegemony over Babylon in the 6th century. Of course the incident of the quotation of Nebuchadnezzar as the King of Kushan has being disputed since it mainly appeared in the writings of Flavious Josephus.

But no doubt exist that Nebuchadnezzar II was a Chaldean, no doubt exist that he was a kind of messiah set aside from birth for redeeming Babylon from the hands of Assyrians. The problem now comes to the fact that if Nebuchadnezzar II was called the King of Kushan and from the tribe of Chaldeans, was he therefore a Chaldean and a Kushan at the same time? Or is it a matter of confusion as has been the case with much Biblical translation on matters concerning Ancient History where the rest of the society is forced the errors of translation in such a way that now interpret such errors as they see fit. For here of language or system of speaking is of the highest importance. 

Beginning with an easy by Donald J. Wiseman on Nebuchadnezzar (Nebuchadnezzar), which appeared in the Oxford University's Essential Guide to People and Places of the Bible, edited by Bruce M. Metzer and Michael D. Coogan, Wiseman attempted to translate a 'Biblical variant' form of the name Nebuchadnezzar. The names that he discovered to be very close to Nebuchadnezzar were 'Nabu-Kudurri-usur', which was translated as "the (god) Nabu has protected the succession". The author of the article went ahead to illustrate that Nebuchadnezzar by meaning and translation is probably closer to the above description. Wiseman confirmed that Nebuchadnezzar was of Chaldean descent, and that he inherited the office from his father by name Nabopolassar. We are not to certain what these names should mean in the context of the King of Babylon, but it is only with Igbo langauge can we see that both the name Nabu-Kudurri-Usur and the name Nabopolassar is probably the same name and refer to the same person. By that first name, Nabu-Kudurri-usur, we can also say that the interpretation in Igbo may be gainfully misleading. It will be unwise to force the reader into a language that he is not very sure of, but we can pretend that at least that the name Nabu-Kudurri-Usur, may mean something of the path, perhaps Nabu is the Path of Life, or Nabu is the path of Salvation, or Nabu is the path that leads (to life).

 But this interpretation should not occupy the time rather the name Nebuchadnezzar is where the puzzle to the very essence of the messiah and star of redemption essentially apply. In terms of the real meaning of the name of Nebuchadnezzar, we can say at least say with Igbo language that the accounts of Flavius Josephus and Babylonian Chronicles were right in calling him King of Kushan, for his name alone, Nebu-Chad-Nezzer, are three words that can demonstrated in Igbo, where Nebu (Ebube) is Igbo for Glory or Great, where the word Chad is no less Chaldean - no less Chad, and the word Nezzer (Eze) is Igbo word for King or Chief. In essence, if we read the three words together, we easily, very easily arrive at the meaning of Nebuchadnezzar, which is stem from three words and not one, and which is easily, Glorious Chaldean King. In some sense Nebuchadnezzar is a title and by his very title; the King of Chaldean, or King of Kushan, or the Chosen, Divine, Great, or best of all, Glorious King of Babylonians. It is also possible that the Nebuchadnezzar is not his real name, quite possible that he has a name just like his father Nabopolassar, which is a corruption of his actual name. In addition to this fact, we may it clearly that Nabopolassar was also called the King of Kushan - Nebuchadnezzar I, and his immortal son who raided Judah and what remains of it, was Nebuchadnezzar II. 

I must also indicate that the name of his father is such that the 'sight' 'guide' and 'path' may constitute part of the same meaning, which is cannot be that far from the star or imitations of the stars. Above all, Nabopolassar, the father of Nebuchadnezzar II was founding father of the Chaldean dynasty in Babylon. Nebuchadnezzar II may be a redeemer of some sort, and may be the force behind the demise of Assyrians, but he was perhaps not the so called Chosen one who Magi and eventually Isaiah may have preached about. We may indicate that the subject of the Chosen One, the suffering servant, was a theme quite familiar with Egyptians, as much it became from that the fall of Jerusalem to the hands of Nebuchadnezzar on 16th March of 597 BC. Not all Judah at this point fell, and after several wars with people mounting opposition to Assyrian yoke and then Babylon, he came back a decade later to personally supervise the final days of Judah in the years of Jeremiah. Of course the story of the captives in Babylon is well noted through history, immortalized in encomiastic as the Psalms 137. Jeremiah who was the last of the prophets was accused by the remnant of Israelites to be the reason why the hand of God was against them. Jeremiah as Jewish history indicates was led like a 'Sheep' outside the walls of Jerusalem where he was essentially stoned to death. His portion which was inherited from Nebuchadnezzar II as a prophet was taken away. But captives and priests sold into slavery gradually began to see the images of Jeremiah as the suffering servant, a theme that was personalized in another conqueror by name Cyrus. The fact remain too clear that Nebuchadnezzar was a redeemer or the star of redemption but he was not the anointed one, or as the case will be, the Messiah that will restore Babylon to its greatness. This theme of restoration on greatness was vigorously pursued by Nebuchadnezzar in his life time, including the famous 'hanging tree' such that he undertook powerful architectural work in his life that ended unfinished in his death. It was his son Evil Merodach who was left to complete some of the works of art and massive building project.

Need does not exist to point out that they were following the Behistun Inscription, where Darius described himself as Arian, a term which we will later recognized as badly spelt and completely misleading. As such we can speak of Sampson a Nazareth and not necessarily a messiah, but his name which Jews believe an umbrella for salvation may be incomplete, since the root of Samson or Sampson is Shemshu, which is modern Hebrew is Shimshi, whereas Shemshu Ho-rah is Egyptian, literally meaning 'of the party of Ra' or 'of party of Ho-Ra' or 'follower of Ra' 'son of Ra', which also means son of God. This meaning of Shemshu Ra may better be noted in a name that is quite familiar, the name of an Egyptian pharaoh, Ramses. The name Ramses is English form of the more Egyptian form, Ramesu, which is much the same as Sam-son or Shemshu, much the same as the very name of Jesus. In essence, the man we call Samson can only be compared to a messiah or Asih (Azir), on the account of his devotion from birth as a Nazerith or Nazirith nothing more, as opposed to his name which is closer to Egyptian if not Philistine, and since he was born in the border between Dan and Ashdol, he was not influenced by elements of Egypt. There was hardly anyone in Israel history that answered Samson before Samson, and after Samson, there were few people who answered the very name. The same may in fact be said of other names in the Bible that sound very Egyptian, names such as Moses is for instance for Egypt, and may in fact be close to the period of the Ka-Moses, Ahmose I, and a time when viziers to the Pharaohs answered Moses. Other names such as Isaiah, that is prophet Isaiah, was not even mentioned any other place in the Bible, saving the book of Isaiah and for some brief mention of the name in the now popular 2 Kings 19-20; 2 Chron. 29-32. We can also presume that the name is part human for this interplay on the man or the prophet, but we may also regard the name probably a theme on a savior who Christians faithfully testify as Jesus Christ. As shall also discover, the book of Isaiah covering over 66, are in fact several books with particular themes of Messiah or the Isaiah, whose will be chosen (Isa) or the Christ, for remission of the sins of Israel. Even the initial 14 chapters of Isaiah where 'Immanuel' as a theme manifest, may in fact be a testimonial to the promise of savior in the time of Hezekiah. The theme however of a 'son' that will born, will discussed as a promise to the dwindling light of the house of David, a promise that Baruch Spinoza, may have referred to Josiah. We may however compare the statement about the promise of Savior, wwanu-el, with the name of Christ who is also noted as Isa. Jesus or Jesu or Yesu (Yah-eshua), noted as Jesus of Nazareth is a name that means son of God, but it this lamb of God, that will be a fulfilling of a certain portion of the Isaiah, namely Isaiah 53. We will indicate the very presence of the place we called Nazareth in the Bible, but in terms of who Christ was, he was called 'Son of God', only one account that his name Y-esu. Further demonstration of this fact that our concern on this level is that the name Nazi or Nazareth, literally refers to those set aside for a certain period, to suffer the body in order to atone the sins of a certain people. But in matters affecting the much chosen one, he or she has no purpose but one, his destiny is already determined and he may or may not be aware of it. The issue of being the chosen one does not always lead to death of a tree and pouring of blood by a lamb in month of temple dedication. It is sometimes a theme that appears in form of an 'anointed one', who will be chosen to lead his people or their people. In a every bit of sense therefore, the theme of messiah in Isaiah 40-55, that deals with the Babylonians and not Assyrians, and deals with a certain anointed one, is a theme on the name Saris, or in Akkadian Sa-eris, which was taken eventually to mean Cyrus as if he is King of Babylon. The one who Nabu has 'chosen' was a man of affliction and suffering, a king who do the will of Nabu or God, and the fitting of the king and he will be an a Azir or Nazi, a man separated from others at least for a while. This man was the delivery and his reign will bring the restoration of all things. So was Christ in the Bible, so James the brother of Jesus, so was a certain John the Baptist, so was Elijah. In all probability the prophet we call Isaiah was at once a prophet dedicated to God.

The theme of the suffering servant and the servant of God is best illustrated by these terms. For one thing we may invoke the position of Igbo language to make the problem quite easy. In Igbo at least, while it is up not to us to seek a better knowledge as to why the remaining years of Babylon was spent relating the country and the culture to the people concerned, we are very clear about the fact that the man in question Nebuchadnezzar was the man the Magi was looking for. I shall need to indicate that Cyrus also fit into the picture of the Messiah that will redeem Babylon, the messiah was portion was also taken. The story concerning the persons of Nebuchadnezzar and Cyrus is of great importance, for both of them are quite attested in Ancient History and both of them feature permanently in very vivid matters of world history from around the sixth century.

There are no errors about the connecting tissue between Chaldeans and their Dynasty in Babylon and the Babylonians themselves who were also called Kushans. The Kushans are in fact Chaldeans, and it is the name Nebuchadnezzar that confirms for it. The impact of the brief revolt of the Magi revolt after the death of Smerdi by Cambyses may be exaggerated, but in reality the reasons are quite revealing. For we are to understand the rest.. As we have noted earlier, the Magi were experts in Astrology and in map making. These Magi were also called the Arai, which is not related to the Aram, which has little to offer in terms of the language. These traveling Magi were indeed Syrian merchants, may be related to the Arai of older dynastic of India, and may have composed the Sanskrit around this turbulent period. However, we must quickly note that the error in correlating much of the disfranchised group of people in West Asia bearing the name Arai, which is today's Iran, with those of them found elsewhere in the world may be confusing to the point of accepting that anything such as Indo-European actually existed. I shall hint here that the place and time of Chaldeans, who in the 6th - 8th century transition years of Babylonian dynastic, who were attacked and oppressed by the Assyrians, are by their name and their persons, essentially related to Africans. So many a times, we read of Ramnes, which for instance a certain George Dumezil in his earlier work regarded as strata of Roman society for priest, are no different from the Ras around the temples of Karnak and Amoq in North Africa and in much of Iran. According to Dumezil, there were people also regarded as Tities in Rome, which he incorrectly identified as producers. In as much Rome is unheard off beyond the 3rd century, we have reason to believe that the people may have somewhat existed in the century or so preceding their final overthrown of Etruscans. Much denials about the origins of Rome has been in the context of Indo -Europeanism, whereas Rome in terms of its history, is not that from Phoenicians, not that from Mycenaean, not that far from Etruscans, but ultimately Egyptians or slave thereabout. In some sense or another, the view of Rome as a people from Romulus has not fully challenged, for enough exist to cite the coalition of wealthy land owners, a kind of social strata unlike what we find in many parts of the Phoenicia, societies arranged by common welfare as with Spartans. This effort of involving the Spartan society in comparative relationship with Rome may muddle the water, for we know that at least, a frieze from of the Egyptian Pharaoh Bocchoris, standing in between Egyptian deities Neith and Horus, as conducted by Thot, was discovered in 1979 at Tarquinii in the grave of female from 7th century, demonstrate the caste society of Lucere, under the guild and ownership of the Pharaoh of Egypt. The mistake has been that the priestly classes were all one nation so to speak, were part of the Indo-European continent so to speak, out of whom much of mysterious outcomes of Europe and their tribes essentially if not misleadingly relate. The incidents of Ahura Mazda and the religion called the Zoroastrians, may have also added to this view. We can make the argument that we can throw more light of the Chaldeans and their Magi, we can perhaps see that Babylonians and their Nebuchadnezzar, were not far from the people who managed in the 6th and 7th century, to establish the Napata of Egypt. These people were not different from their kind in major areas of Africa, for instance among the Libyans of the further South was a dynasty coming to an end, and that dynasty deserves a lengthier treatment, and that Dynasty was those of Shoshenq of Omoeshaw tribe of Libu, a tribe that will survive in several incarnation in India and in Iran as Meshaw, Preshaw, and Omo, and that tribe will extend from Africa into Indus valley. It is this group that will noted as Kushan relative, for only in terms of Kushans as same Chaldeans, who are simply Chad in history and language, can anything be said of the later years of Egyptian Ramesside Dynasty which ended with the appointment of Shoshenq as pharaoh, approved by the state God of the Thebes by title Amun Ra. For if we understand the relationship between the Upper and Lower Egypt, between Tanis and Thebes in the years after Pharaoh Psussenen II of Egypt, may we see that the incident of Kashta of Napata in the lower Egypt as a recovery of lower Egypt, as opposed outright conquest by Nubian forces. We may also note that in the reign of Painky or Py as Pharaoh of lower and Upper Egypt may have also added to the luster of the evolution of the new years of Egypt. Above all there is the evident understanding that this age of Napata may start all kinds of disaster where the images of Bophoris, Pharaoh of Egypt, came to signify a departure if not an end of 25th dynasty. This popular Pharaoh The main point of the 7th century before Christ is that Py (Pianky) of Napata, who was Pharaoh of Egypt of the lower and Upper Egypt, was the son of the Magnanimous Kashta, who began the Twenty fifth (25th) dynasty of Egypt.

It was after him that the several problems and civil war between the Theban priest of Upper Egypt and the successors of the lower Pharaohs of Tanis was essentially start cots of the calligraphy of the Medieval ages, Calligraphy, that evolved into several forms by way of the uncials, and shortened use of the drawing of what was only very clearly ABCEDE-rian. In essence, we can entertain the possibility of one language stem of the world, only on the count of the departures of given forms of writing rather than speaking, where speaking (writings main function) would in the end decide the forms of a given language; its future, its life. However, we may say that a possibility exist that the world in the way we understand it today, may be carefully documented in terms of language and evolution of language, by merely the use of the intonations and dialects which the point of say the world map may indicate to use. In many ways than one, enough exist for the claim to have some life that old Alphabets were mere intonation of larger map of the world evolutionary languages, which Egypt and their Africans, were ultimately the source and fulcrum.

My speculations include the very fact that the so called Alphabets Cities which the Phoenicians founded, where perhaps part and parcel of the Cities and their priestly functions and chief minerals, which either the old Egyptians discovered and knew, or the Phoenicians themselves marked as languages or intonations based on other tables of symbols from the 2000 pieces. If the Phoenicians, who hardly went to war with Egypt, are more or less considered Egyptians, and the Babylonians too, then there is enough to indicate that the table of nations, are summarized by the Alphabets of the Ugaritic and Canaan. Canaan or what the Africans called Kanunu or Kaninu, is so forced out of their own Keme and Africa, that the error with world languages has become that significant. It is not without tribute to this departure of Canaan from Africa that the false and engrossing claims about Semitic language or dialectal, may earned the ranks of world confusion. Based on this 'new facility' of African language, we can suggest that it is up to the world to look at the Palermo stone and Rosetta, as last copy of what would have been an African practice preceding Rome and Greek, or that Pilate's attempt to write in Hebrew, Greek, and Latin, 'I am the King of the Jews', in respect to Christ was a very late imitation of a writing career of an the empire and Pseudo empire was already in decay from very Old age. It is however not impossible to indicate that the even the careers of Pontus Pilate as appointed regnal over Judah may even receive more attention than any Africa. Why any language such as English will sound different from its origin is not without reason or explication, for we know that writing and its use exceed the titular of three lines inscriptions of the ascension of Ptolemy V in 196 BC, and the writings in Hieroglyphics, Demotic, Greek, and on the Rosetta, granted to him and his ancestors by the votive Theban (Thebian) priests, indicate that a hint of independence of the part of Thebes, may explain the evolution of Hieratic career of the priest of Thebes, whose form of writing may have yielded the calligraphy in later times. It is only in context of the Calligraphy and the Hieratic forms of writings that reasons arise as to why the cultures of the world gradually broke free from a concise understanding on its roots and origins to other derivative of the same structure and the same writing whose time was already.

No one who will look at the Sanskrit and Arabic will not fail to see the comparative responsiveness to the two forms of language and writing forms for they are supposedly Calligraphic, which is a form of writing that descended from a form that is neither Hieroglyphics, nor Demotic but something in between. A form of writing more like a version of the Egyptian Hieratic whose language is everything Aramaic. In essence therefore, we can say that the initial confusion over the relationship between Sanskrit any other European language, was due to the writing form, where one was retention from standard version of the Latin and Greek, which may developed out of the need to be precise, whereas languages in Sinai in Syria, and in some measure, parts of South Arabic and disfranchised North African dialectal - around the Coast and the Central Africa - used the writing forms that was closer to the Hieratic than the Hieroglyphics, than the broken up version of the Hieratic; the Latin, the Greek, the Phoenician Alphabets. Where were versions of the old in terms of the New? All things considered, the new realized comparison between European languages and Sanskrit was only possible in terms of the IPA format, through which much of the Sanskrit isolated in the 'calligraphic' version of writing, was made accessible and readable in Latin, and when in English form, the meanings of the words of Sanskrit gradually appear.

Basel III -- ReAlt

in

By

 Sampson I. Onwuka

Europe in terms of the International world markets and International banking Standards such as Basel III, are so well trimmed that the even minor economic growth within the West of Europe is not essentially open to new comers let alone others from different ends of the earth. Basel III accord is about several interest points of financial accords, one of which is the theme of lending with 0% expectation in the nearest future, with a minimum requirement of $250 billion by popular sources, with under-listed banks able to periodically demonstrate their ability to withstand a stress test and overcome the poor problems of compensation. Whereas Basel I and II defined European attitude to the American industries, Basel III defines American reaction to questions of over-exposure, especially under the limelight on the last financial crisis in 2008.


If Europe is preparing for new financial millennium by attracting funds for its poorly maintained engineering structures, there are thin lines between separating actions Banks based in Europe and the United States, and the actions by their state and the sovereign nations. There is only area of interest where these two set of information arrears appear to co-inside which is in International Bank and financial institutions for economic policies. One of these is the Basel Accords which influence the decision making process of IMF Banks and banks associated with World Banks.


The other issues associated with these influences are the structure of the international health organization which differs in function from world health organization. The first function mainly as financial institution for financial profit – for instance Banks for profit or private (specie) banks and world based organization are sponsored – policy mediated organizations aimed to interfere and discourage wholesale outbreak of new epidemic.


In terms of world history and banks, certain global behaviors has determined its life-span, in wars and bonds markets, in trade usually following the dictator economy, a role of regional bank for  instance West African  Bank for England - play a useful role in narrating the fiscal responsibilities of the actuary; insurance fidelity, transnational business empire such as Royal Dutch, East English Company, and the functions of the paying Government.  World Banks insist of lending at a lower rate – at some point to poverty driven low economic expectation communities – a quest that is not different from Europe central IMF banks, saving that IMF is a consortia of private banks with as much demands for goodwill interest as investment for profit. All banks are in the business to profit – including World Bank – and the question of Universal Bank is the extent that external factors – primarily financial rating by others can form the basis of the actions by the State or the federal government or by individuals pursuant to wealth.


The role of these banks in helping transform the never ending wishes of the private and the government, and how well or easily this happens proclaims the wealth of information and resources available. Where financial institutions and trade centers or trade fairs around the world, rely on Sovereign wealth and policy, the reasons behind Basel III agreement is the command of attention that the banks engaged in international communities bring to a society such as the United States and Brazil. We can encourage nations of the world to engage with sponsorship, charity, cheap loans to standing international banks and foundations, the actions of the Banks with heavily weighted indexing for investment and risk management must include their plans for penetrating all communities including in this case – African American Communities in U.S and Brazil.


Here’s the conundrum, the poverty rate in Eastern Europe alone is quite comparable to what is available in many third world markets. It is possible to suggest that there are economic reasons why Europe has to censure the attention is getting from Asia, for if these Tariffs and organizations lower the standards as required by world markets, Europe may suffer additional shedding of the Economic maturity preeminent in 2014. Such process limits Europe as a truly International Open markets, and like Asia – who deliberately manipulate their economy and operate all shades of Shadow Banking (Moon-Walking) reverts to U.S and to some degree the British who are not free from the trims of international currency manipulation. Of course the debate over the issues of cultural and national responsibilities, permanent secretary to United Nations, permanent membership of World Health Organizations created the nerve that a society bereft of reasons and authority cannot necessarily tolerate interference of the United Nations or World Organizations aimed at combating epidemic or similar demanding problems of humanity including in recent cases – tyrannical behaviors and arms dealing.


The arguments didn’t survive the examples of WWI and WWII, the problems of the League of Nations and Germany affirmative attitude to restitution. The restitution proved too much for any one state and prepared the false reasons for exerting the ‘living space’. There are questions of Spanish Flu at the turn of the last century and the papered required for International Organization working handling the many deaths against the protective rights of individual nations, but the strange case of Polio and adverse cases of cold viruses in many parts of world proved a strange reason to organize a world health approach.


The examples are not financial and the article does not seem to raise the sustained consequences of WWII and European Colonization of several parts of Africa, but it throws the dart on the possibilities of handling certain levels of financial liability and poverty in many parts of the world. This is where Basel plays a gifted role in arranging to shift the attention of certain international banks to questions of international policies, respecting the vital nerves of the provincial states and their security concerns.


There are changes in the last few years that has taken place in world markets and yes, Americans have gotten richer not poorer but so also the world. Whereas the question of the International Human rights and justice is loosely held in world markets, we can argue that the struggle with shifting attention of free markets from one form to another embraces the larger question of economic advantage and meaning. We need more markets attracting business in all classes of respect, more economic societies looking to sponsor vital nerves of business which includes the middle class and we need to pursue the World Market requirement for lands and seas, for transnational corporations to the banks which do not necessarily secure the magic for economic health without a running currency.


If for instance U.S dollars are hanging there to help the world, it does so out of neutrality or freeze in the policy of expansion which does not necessarily mean policy of contraction.


Several markets that define itself in many ways than one, in Europe, in Asia, and in Africa, can gradually broach the gap. It does not seem to the rest of us, that development banks can function without sovereign attachment. It does seem that the international banks in competitive advantage can choose to relocate their responsibility and expectation in tier 3 economic communities to expectations that require long term strategy without losing the primacy of the investment strategy. These are the areas that IMF and World Banks can decide the fate of many countries, especially those that shift from nationally owned corporations to privatization schemes requiring the heavy weight lifting by Banks. Basel II and its accord does not discourage the debt gap that IMF and World Banks end up with these countries, it disclaims it.


Whereas Basel I boomed around the policies of regional franchise and crude oil companies (sisters) and their OPEC, Basel III may require us to look the penetration of their auction banks in their private communities and in the International markets. Whereas International Banks and Sovereign Wealth govern parts of the mislabeled regional currency floatation, it does not direct the transfer of investment banks to OCD banks, or counter the bank to bank requirement for over-night lending when there are cases of late return of rate as we witnessed in 2008.


If the end of Basel II consists of the damage to the system that can occur over-periods of long term strategy and failures of sovereign banks to state the position of several banks that are too big to fail, the lessons of a misapplied fund rates and diffusion largely based on rate over money storage conceive of a necessity for stress test, and the reaction by the lenders to questions of repay rate. Although the solution by U.S is big banks operate at low percentage, and universal Bank is the school officially open in U.S, the shrinking roles of IMF to ECB establishes a core for Basel Accord requirement for Banks and international exposure.


We compare Canada to U.S, it has limits of its bearing vintage, at least, Canada is toeing a similar line of business practice from United States, but it is a smaller market benefiting the larger franchise of World Market than India many times the size. But in the age increasingly defined by productive aspiration it is perhaps better rehearsed from the shocking lack of consumption economies which are the problems in 2014. It may be equally difficult to escape the limits of Chinese success given the first fact that 80’s could in of itself be called a Japanese decade.


But these period of moderation which the 6% combined conversion of Chinese to US is set in such a way as to project the strength of the Chinese Economy and its future role in the world, is a future whose learning curve is primarily due to U.S Debt to China and also the faith about the future – which in the case holds no pretenses on the conception of U.S as the Major economy power in the world.


The rate of credit determines the future market and positive economy, that the inflation is the root course of some of the problems associated with lending – given perhaps the issue of the rate of return when fixed income no longer guarantee adequate payment of dues. How a Bank reacts to such concern creates the bias for lending therefore Bank’s activity is economic circumstance outside the vintage of national growth. That risk is term policy minus GDP....

A crass of the argument between the risky assets and junks bonds in largely pedestrian in entitlement and international tier 3 dominated economies and the ETF for lousy lending one to two crop economy, constraint by population characteristic or social economies but technological buoyant in many respect will not fail to proclaim that international interest in third world markets explains the investors’ interest - especially in junk bonds.


We shy with argument that Junk Bond expectations are characteristics of a third world markets or an international banter for trades luring investors from U.S for all exposure and guarantee of profit in stable urns, may not necessarily serve the appetite of every day trader saving the institutional traders that dive the market in any direction with large and portentous buying. There are differences between International specie banks and Universal Banks. This important periodic disclosure between Banks and lenders of last resort, between Banks is the better definition of a stress test and forms the reasons for economic corporation between nations, banks and financial institutions and international standards meeting for stocks and bonds.


Their aspects of financial engineering and problems are the alternative that defines financial engineering and mechanism. One of the most enduring cases of inflation or inflationary pressure is the question of adjustment to the international market. There are natural barriers to certain markets in the worlds - some of it is human barriers created from failures to accept certain changes. The other is the repetitive discourse of advantage and competitive disadvantage. Some of the failures in certain world markets is the ability to apprehend the source of much betrayal - some of its share lack of option and others are questions once ability to grasp the irrelevance.


A critical case of world markets is rated through the ability of any financial institution to handle the problems of cyclical market condition endured through the base factors such as development banks or through the growth range of gifted currency.


We can state for instance that at the turn of the last century both the English pounds and French Franc decided the affairs of modern society away from Turkey. By the end of WWI and eventually WWII, these currencies had taken a nose dive from the gold standards to upon the U.S dollars as the market order. The provincialism of the argument concerning world market order is that one institution replaces the order and in recent acceptance of Chinese currency as pro-tem a major currency of the world is not so far a bargaining chip that a possible future await for China than the flaw reasoning that production drives price and price and culture of advantage create its own market.


The argument is flawed for many reasons, one of which is the failures of certain command economies and political constructions to miss the gaps between productions and manufacturing where manufacturing is the root of healthy credit rating. One of such economies in the world is Japan and the other - Russia, each trapped by frontiers for production and the complex for global markets that failed to inundate history.


A theory of Development Banks and the culture of national banks succumb to this examination by fact and in theory; banks play nominal and provincial roles in regulating national currency which in turn offer stability to communities around the world. Banks also play a pivotal hand in helping to initiate the gap between rich and the poor, for sure; the lending factor of any manufacturing community or nationality is a deniability of infinite majesty. We can argue perennially against the failures of certain societies to act upon some policies that the return to the lender is the hung for the prosperity.


We can argue that even the requirement for nominal central banks such as the Federal Reserve of the United States and Bank of England for placing baits for new revenue lines, makes the better argument that Community Re-investment Act created as needing requirement creates as much problems are they solve. That the loftily of several international banks heavily engaged in all classes of respect collapse into their right to choose - driven without remorse by credit.


In times like this when there are the themes of Red lining original from say housing and American economic requirement for housing in the 1950's is nothing compared to economic activity in very recent times. At some point in New York and several parts of United States, the question of housing and proper planning created such as gap that a fifth of the population literally had problems finding new houses and homes in spite of the heavy investment from international markets. We are confronted by selective choice which enjoins international interest and external economies of scale.


The experiment of new market and economic corporation falls short of charity given the nature of renting and return to investment and competitive advantage of international market. We look at it as a fiat with lesser accompli that a Community in say Brazil is refracted through the index of the larger economic umbrellas, the larger hosting choice and privileged access to world markets perpetuating a pursuit of wealth.


The Role of the Community is helping to grab some of these opportunities is to force the hands of the investors who are doing business to add to their expectations through a deal. In essence, there are failures associated with say Community Re-investment Act and housing vehicles such as GSE, that it seems to some degree to be a 'social contract'. A financial contract is closer to the general expectations in markets, where a gap widens between the international institutions and communities of interest.


It is common that the use of word Banking for African American in the United States merits an expectation in the heavily traded every U.S market, that African American markets no less communities of interest and natives in shared nationality such as Brazil will not shift their ground in financial statement even when there are cases of direct policies of interest such as direct or compulsory employment without the premier roles of Banks and financial cabals.


It merits the arguments that the nature of profit is that poor censorship endorses poor control, to a certiorari that failure of international committee of any interest to manage the interest of social navigators and financial benefactors in all respect of business transaction is poor distribution of wealth. No group of international committee of experts caught between the investment and commercial banks with varying degrees of effectual discipline and concerns for exposures, risk, and return of wealth even for the most adroit of all leisure class will fail to recognize the need for moratorium fetching for community development....