where is moscow?

when i was akid i played a game called axis allies and what was good was the different types of ,arkers/pieces and their abilities i didnot know at the time that battleships despite many guns were ineffective and so unjustly asssigned 4/6 probability.
i did not know that the map was drawn in a way so that the allies would be happy when they won unjustly...
well guess what i just discovered?
a straight line north from the black sea reaches moscow and i had thought moscow was north of the aspian sea...
now specificaly in the end of 1941 nazis were very near moscow and moscow is north of the black sea only 370 kilometers east of smolensk...
240 kilometers west of the edge of the black sea... i could not believe my eyes.
i thought the map positioned moscow north of caspian and indeed after extensive searching i found the map of the old game made to unjustly protect moscow...
with a vast area between ukraine as if moscow was north of caspian while it is in fact 200 kilometers west of the edge of black sea although later games fixed thios i got the bad map...
in fact they could defend that europe was expanded and stiull not north of caspian...
amnd worse the number of defebses as if nazi was not a threat well nazi was a great threat.
in the battle for moscow in winter of 1942january the nazis had already captured half of the soviet forces who had many people with few guns.
nazi had one million and lost a quarter by january leaving 750000 while russians had 1.2 million and lost 500000 making them balanced except nazis had more tanks yet between the nazis and moscow is not only land but an army nine 9 markers=3 times larger... that unjustly protects soviet which faced a grave threat if soviet 750 thousand is marked as nine 5+4 then the nazis should have the same markers... not 3! as if nazis were not a threat.  and moscow is not north of caspian who said it was ? the artists of the only cool game with specific pieces... yet moscow was in real danger.
 according to the game map the infantry in ukraine would not capture moscow even if they won because it was far yet as above it is only 300 km from smolensk so defeating the 3 markers of soviets captures moscow because the forces were even as above and since the people of moscow neither had giuns nor training that is not an army so if nazis have 3 armies each with 24 divisions of 10000 then the soviet army had the same 3 markers as the nazi force at the edge of ukraine. so people will chuckle and say it is only a game well it is not a game either.

the dialog

based on the grammar and content of the book isaia we can identify a dialog of multi-opinioned culture.
we begin with the question did you notice?
the grammar style in ezekiel differs from the tsyle in isaia
we were born into a world which prints these in an order where isaia is printed first and then ezekiel while the grammar style indicates the opposite.
exekiel was in exile away from jerusalem and called on the people to resist the local calendar of names and used numbers for months.
he also resisted the influence of removing the form of verb "future+w" as used in the book joshua which was before the exile and before the event in era of solomon of gezer because joshua and i mean the l;ater altered and corrupt joshua which is the only one not lost was completed before the event in the later book of kings so counting back afer the last king around 500 bc, abook of kings was written about the kings and the event described in the later book abput the era of solomon follows the writing of the later version of josjua with gezer story "until this day".
using the ancient grammar of book joshua ezekiel resisted the influence of tigris culture on the janguage
later the cyrus allowed the jews to return. and the following dialog took place between to competing sects of jews.
now if we consider the order "which we are taught by people" it is odd that we are to believe that first moses taught kill animals for blood and later isaia said in the past-verb "i did not want" blood that content indicates that the order we are taught by people is a lie. instead isaia or his students "dared"  to write god said i "didnot want blood" in past-verb indicating that at that time when they resisted the cult to kill animals the "bloods' or pro-blood, there was not yet a book of moses to say otherwise and write it in the LATER grammar influenced by tigris region not ezekiel grammar and as i explain in the following dialog  based on the grammar style draws a picture.
the dialog
cyrus allowed the exiled jews to return to jeruslame
zacarya wrote "between" the return of god and the building of house to build a houise apparently to be the dweelling for "the returned " god as described in zacarya one.
at that time two sects of jews argued how to use the house one sect said house is for dwelling
like "house". the word house in zacarya.
the other groups said we should kill animals there=pro-blood.
in response the later jews using "post exile grammar" the way they spoka at that post-exile time,  wrote isaia claiming "god will not take sacrifice from your hands and adding also "in past time the blood i did not desire" in the past either with a past-verb. they "dared to write this in "concurrent" indicating that there was no book that said otherwise.
the bloods or pro-blood replied by writing a book using ezekiel old grammar claiming moses said to kill animals writing in response to isaia by using old grammar of ezekiel. but the other sect knew that this was a forgery noi such biook had been written yet so...
so the "house" cult replied with jeremia [who perhaps was a true prophet bringing a true denial from god, as religious would describe the book]  a demial "i did not command" so they would know the book claimed to be from moses was a lie and a forgery which had not existed before isaia which as mentioned isaia was written using the later grammar post exile to teach even when there was a temple good in the past-verb "i did not want blood" past verb.
the dialog is now revealed based on the grammar style and content. so the leaders wanted to unite the multi-opinion or multi-faith sects of one family by including BOTH groups books in one unifying "set" of book series so that the multi-faith group of one family would be united with a series of books which contained the important faithe\s of both groups.
in light of the grammar and content the "series" of books included both sides of the dialog to unite the two groups  which includes both opinions. and each group was happy that their ioidea was represented in the series.

identifying eras in the jewish bible

several years ago a university professor directed me to read a book with academic analysis of the bible one section pointed out the "unique" style of the song of paro inserted into exodus 15.
indeed the verbs are a differnt style than usual demonstartaing two layers or strata  of the song blended into one text.
the usual verb form is future plus "w" yet that secion of the song mixes the usual verb with abnormal forms liks future without w for past time and even simple past form this is unique.
the author claims thatt the "older one" is the simple past  and if so the same mix in the creation story would show two layers from different times blended into the creation story in genesis
THE LIE IS NOTABLY revealed
when we compare the book of isaia somebody said this is what "he saw" using the simple verb form and even in that section a future verb for past as noted by david radak and the grammar alone "god will say' in that same section of isaia one indicating that the word "yikasyumu" like yomar and the simple past verb was added at an editing in the time of isaia the opposite of the academic book two times but simple verb is laterin the time of the tsudents of isaia and similarly in the creation story the FIRST OPENING words of genesis are THE LATER  addition using the unusual simple verb "created" instead of the constant future+w which follows so yes we have a blenmd of layers and the ;ater one was the verb style in isaia after isaia and after solomon added into the book of genesis itself in an editing.
now it is time to edit again to identify what is "critical" and removed all details that are cruel and immoral and non critical.
in fact the most reliable preservation of pre jesus content is what jesus quoted!
firstly because he ws an ancient source quoting plus considering the evidence we already know as in previous post that the original books of ruth joshua and moses were lost the jews failed to preserve the originals replacing them with corrupted and lengthened versions which are noticably different from the lost originals as described in jewish tradition and septuagint.
so when jesus said "a curser of a father or mother deserves death" which in my opinion is not from any merciful godnor and justly god... it is an accurate preservation of the original bad evil law.
we can connect by criticism and say my connection to the ancient part of the law is knwing and recognizing the bad evil cruelty of killking a son for speaking because that is trulyin the ancient text and deserves notice and condemnation.
in contrast  jesus tells the story of the "snake which moses lifted in the desert" beside the snake of moses and aron at paro, this preserves the ancient original tale and the corrupted jewish bible that moses "made a metal snake from copper" is revealedmoses lifted not made
in fact in septuagingt to numbers 21 the word could be made and could also by "did" obeyed gods method to lift a snnake in fact why metal? altho this is permitted if not for worship teh word in numbers could describe the type of snake named in english copperhead  or any snamke colored copper because copperhead is american soa different sname colored copper except that the hebrew is produced while jesus preserved moses lifted a snake and septuagint also the verb is did like obey  not making a snake but did the action of god in the previous verse "poinson" which means poise and raise and lift
not make nor produce in fact the same word is used in the verse nine "poins" so moses lifted! matching jesus better than the english trahnslation of the septuagint!
clearly the septuagint was the source of jesus poins not produce but lift and that preserves the original bible not the jewish hebrew book which makes a metal snake just a word game of the letters nhs... but not the original preserved by jesus and septuagint
poinse and epoise same word for lift like jesus said not like corrupted jewish biuble corrupted by rabbis between the originbal and jesus which jesus saw and rejected and replaced by the original and similarly other examples jesus quotes from septuagint not the corrupted rabbi one with different words which the jews nclaim moses wrote and is the same unaware or ignoring the evidence of corruption preserved in septuagint and new testament. the differnce is this is not cruelty and can be connected to without condemnation in contrast to the kill son bad evil message truly in original bible as preserved by jesus.

what is the earliest bible book?

from all the bible books which is the oldest?
jews believe the talmud that moses wrote genesis so that is older than joshua while christians claim that job is before moses while jews say job was the same or later than moses.
well research shows that all of the earliest originals were lost and replaced and not preserved.
original ruth was first of surviving texts but that differs from ruth as above and  lost like original moses and joshua were not preserved but replaced by corrrupted exapnded versions.
talmud baba batra positions ruth first yet is described as differing our ruth begins with bad suffering hunger whereas original ruth "differed from job in that ruth did not begin with suffering..."
the original ruth was lost and that was the oldest before later writers wrote about joshua and moses.
since the originals of moses and joshua differ from what we received with those names the oldest ones are certainly lost=the jews failed to preserve the originals barely preserving the description which allow us to identify that they exterminated the previous texts and replaced them with altered enlarged baseless versions. which christians adopted trusting bad rabbis. they coulda said we only acccept the parts of old testament quoted by jesus and apostles... making a book of quotes from jesus...
back to oldest, considering that joshua was before kings 9 regarding gezer the earliest surviving book is what we call joshua written after joshua and corrupted while the original joshua and book of moses like original ruth were lost and replaced by corrupted versions between joshua and writing of kings completed at bablonian exile giving a huge time frame like the qsita coin... large time frame.
so the ones we have first joshua before kings 9, so before the book was written after the last king around 500 bc
as historian PAUL JOHNSON wrote the rest are later "after 500 bc " and these differing+corrupted books replaced the riginals which were certainly lost and extermninated to conceal differences between the lengthened versions.
the original moses would be oldest yet certainly lost and replaced and similarly ruth lost and replaced.
for evidence and analysis of  my process of revealing lies and rejecting mistakes to avoid
repeating my mistakes and baseless tricjks from so-called researches continue or trust me i untied the lies although it took many frustrating hours searching the evidence.
see below to avoid the pitfalls of religiuos liars who insist on "meeting religious guiodelines"
the oldest most ancient biblical book is ruth and earlier books including original ruth were lost and jews failed to preserve the book and exterminated previous versions, only preserving the descritptions so we could catch the lies of later authors.
i am aware that christians claim job is an old book telling the story about the time of jacob with coin ksita, altho this matches genesis what is the time frame of that coin?
also the words of job are unique a differnt era than the bible could there be evidence of the babylon exile?
the word kapan seems aramaic such as capan for hunger in job 5 when did aramic enter the jewish books when they were exiled to babylon... oops in the time of ezekeil guess what ezekiel had the word capan damn it. every detail of the "so-called-researchers" turns out a false trail.
so job is in the time of ezekiel and so is genesis. in fact the jewish traddition specified the coin ksita is an arabic coin and the first arabs were near israel in isaia 13 long after moses so gensis too was long after moses.
if we believe genesis then ksita was in era of jacob but what if kesita was used for a long time and the hebrew of job is late with unique words at least ninety and capan from ezekiel age
so which is oldest?
also translation of ksita was tetradrachma a weight of 4 drachma
furthermore jewish tradition sadi moses wrote books of moses yet that same tradition describes moses book so we know it is not the sam e book... so not from the age of moses in fact the style of name interpretation indicates later rabbinic style after jesus if not for being in septuagint
now jewish tradition said the opposite of christians and th eevidence of ksita is weak because the coin was used for a long time until the days of akiba there were ksita so olong after moses it could be anywhen before akiba now the jewish tradition puts job late after both ruth and pslams andasks if moses wrote it or job was moses time it should be before ruth now thta implies that it isnot uniform anmd ;late is good if not moses... so after moses and no conflict because used ksita until akiba and capan dates in in iezekiel era
but christians say before moses while jews say maybe moses or later
now moses wrote "his book and bilam and job" reveals that he book we call moses which contains bilam and is a different size is after moses deutro moses so like job later hile the book of the other size separate from bilam was not preserved.
lost.
since joshua said i wrote my book and job specified he did not! job 19 he wishes it was written so he did not write nor moses because ezekiel kapan, so joshua must be oldest.
this is supported by joshua 24 .26 joshua wrote these wors in the book of god sparate from moses no book of moses yet until later claimed what was from moses so exodus does nmot say "me god said to me" and supported by joshua joshua did write it but not in moses book
also joshua 8 31 saidmoses wrote one book short enough to write on a rocj in one day... that is a different lost book and the 5 books handed to us are laetr in contrast to joshua 24 he wrote his own book so first book. however he wrote isnot the same but differs from i wrote so somebody wrote that joshua wrote s
tuff and this is not the original book which joshua wrote either...
especialy since the enmd no sword refutes the stories in the beginning and the no sword is the part joshua wrote that is stronger to refute the war lies written by post joshua
so what is next judges? or ruth/ the evidence said ruth was before job and since joshua wrote stuff bot not the book joshua then ruth must be the first book written before later people expanded moses and joshua books so the traditional order has ruth first in talmud before psalms and before job and therefore oldrr book then joshua which is after the stuf joshua wrote and bd refiuted by the wird sof joshua preserved at the end of th ebad book and ruth is oleder than the later expansion of the differing moses book which th jews did not preserve except for its description allowing us to note the difference in fact ruth starts with peraz so starting with jacob in joshua ios a challenger to the earlkier original ruth. ruth never attempted top connect to abraham starting at perez whereas later writers claimed baselessly that the root is before perez however the tradition postioned ruth earlier so we could revela the truth and reject the lies of genesis and joshua 24 whoich were "cklaime by someone later that joshua wrote" in order to challenbge ruth which started with perez and a poositioned first so the lie of autujhor of joshua is revealed.
now joshua said gezer until this day which is before kings [not the day reading this the one near the writer] and by solomons time it was past kings 9.16 so before solomon and after joshua and since ruth is first in talmud after ruth. also ruth starts with perez ytherefore first also meditation 3 years ago revealed ruth ius first but i did not rely on that alone.
now ruth is the oldest surviving jewish book since the jews failed to preserve the writings o f joshua and moses and even ruth was expanded and the original ruth  was preserved in josepus with differencesand since by then jospus beleived genesis he didnot mention perez otherwiose preserving the original while th ejews lost the one josepus quoted from which had perez klike the ocrrupted ne with additional corruptions. and the jews failed to preserve that original only keepuing the expanded version known to be corrupt when comnpared to josepus so ruth the way ot is is not original and still first in talmud because all are after the later author who wrote ruth but who wrote ruth?  the lost original said but the jews lost it...

madagascar was...

so when i was a brat age 12 i would play the game "axis and allies" with the tanks, the one which the book said is in the "setting" of "spring 1942" and if that is what is chosen then the situation was quite different from the situation described and in previous posts i mentioned several differences not in that setting and even dared to question,  i questioned the choice of that time and i now repeat in terms of time:
1 i want/prefer a game that gives japan a choice WHEN to attack hawaii with america neutral until attacked! why? because it would be cool to allow the player/leader of japan to  CHOOSE WHEN and perhaps educate people of the mistake japan made and also the game should COUNT cycles to educate people how long it would take to capture tokyo if tokyo had not surrendered after the SECOND  nuclear bomb. and similarly counting would show how much later to atatck hawaii.
the way the game was chosen after USA is in the war is very lopsided with the allied potential for production so high that jpan will certainly lose and still COUNT TURNS to see how long it would take. a real challenge game would start the game with washington NEUTRAL and allow japan the choice when to attack hawaii and thenm the players can try differing strategies.
this is my preference. so how about NOVEMBER 1941 and if so really making that setting what was the situatiuon in pjilipines then? what was the situation in africa and ukraine then etc. and as people play they will probably start with japan immediately using forces against washington=w yet as they play mroe times they will doscover the japanese error!
2 another option is choosing spring 1942 but if so the first player should be japan! after the attack on hawaii the troops regrouped and w repaired 3 battleships if so now tokyo can strike again and bad to start with russia.
3 a third time option which would fit starting after japan is selecting december 1941 so japan is not first since it used its "turn" to attack hawaii so the next player is CHINA  it is unjustly planned to arrange china potential to help washington and china was separately fighting since 1935 so it should be separate.
this regarding time.
***regarding madagascar...
well after choosing the year 1942 and spring meaning after march chose n to allow washington=w to repair battleships- instead of spending 24... well at that point the british did not tyet control madagascar until the end of 1942 and uin previous posts i wrote that madagascar should be neutral to show british doidn ot control however madagascar was... FRENCH which means that the axis should have potential of madagascar not london and unntil london send ssoldiers to madagascar it is axis and not only should l have one less from madagascar in "april 1942" but did you notice the name "french west africa had the word FRENCH which was axis in 1942 so in addition to algeria being axcis because of france mauritibnia is als o axis until british send soldiers so those two countries should be marked axis and the potential should be 2 more for nazi and 2 less for london a difference of four unjustlu for allies and as mentioned in previous posts this difference is magnified by brazil and mexico which were neutral in 1942 until 1945 and the africa territory only has potential if it is big regions similat oto map oif game "risk" although we must not copy it the idea is correct in terms of potential that africa is desert or jungle and not developed so only large regions can ahve poteential so south africa should have a different name and and a "straight line" for border to differ from the "risk" copyright while north of it are two large regions reaching to around 16 degrees north of equator or 19 seee previous posts and hat means that iof we place a tank on the map of game risk it can go two steps from egypt to sapetown in one move that is how it shgould be in recreation of the nazi war and i already complained numerous times about philipines to australia and back so i will not repeat that one.

separate message

months before i saw "knowing 2009" i received and transmitted a message with some parallel details the difference is that the video is fiction with different content in contrast to the transmission.
https://thinkforyourselfn8.blogspot.co.il/2017/08/alien-abduction.html

most-dire warning

today I watched a very suspensefull video I emphasize it is my first time watching "knowing 2009" today in novenmeber  i had not seen it in 2009.
at least two ideas in previous posts were NOT INSPIRED by that video although they are similar the two ideas were "transmitted separately" from each other and hence published here separately and independant of that video/film which contained similar ideas the key difference is 1 both are together in the video knowing 2009.+2  that video is fiction. so in contrast to that video. the parallel transmissions are not.
bye-bye cruel world.