ADKO

attila

3 min read

Here’s a summary of the provided text, with the requested elements marked:

The author, Miles Mathis, proposes that historical figures like Attila the Hun and Genghis Khan were not who mainstream history claims them to be. Mathis asserts that Genghis Khan was actually Phoenician with the real name George Kohen, not Mongol or Asian. He then applies a similar argument to Attila the Hun, suggesting he was also not a Hun, but rather Phoenician. Mathis criticizes the historical narrative surrounding Attila and the Huns, highlighting the lack of concrete information and the heavy misdirection in their portrayal. He points to the name “Attila” itself, arguing it derives from the Roman name Atilius, citing Marcus Atilius Regulus as an example, and not from Germanic, Gothic, Turkish, Mongolian, or Russian origins as often suggested.

Mathis further connects the name “Hun” to the Hebrew word Kohen via the Greek variant Khounoi, suggesting a Phoenician link. He theorizes that attila never attacked Byzantium because the ruling Komnenes family was connected to the Kohens. He extends this conspiracy to Emperor Justinian the Great, suggesting he was also a Komnene/Kohen, despite mainstream historians claiming an unknown peasant ancestry with the alleged name Petrus Sabbatius or “Pete Saturday.” Mathis believes the historical accounts of the Huns and their rapid rise and disappearance, along with the substantial gold tributes paid by Rome (e.g., 700 pounds annually, later tripled to 2,100 pounds), are fabrications designed to conceal the looting of treasuries and their transfer to private Phoenician banks. He contrasts the brief, unsubstantiated existence of the “Hunnic Empire” with the longevity of the Roman Empire.

Mathis also critiques the historical accounts of the Goths, asserting they were early Vikings and also Phoenicians who settled in northern Europe, not “wildmen.” He posits that many ancient wars were staged or conducted “on paper” for financial gain, patriotism, and population control, drawing parallels to modern financial cons and war reparations. He cites the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk and post-World War II reparations as examples of this financial manipulation, involving significant payments to entities like Hoffmanns (identified as “big Jewish bankers”) and Germany paying vast sums in gold and assets. Mathis concludes that much of this wealth was likely diverted to private US Federal Reserve accounts owned by bankers, similar to how he believes gold was looted from Rome and Byzantium.

List of Subjects, Names, References, Locations, Companies, etc.:

Backlinks

Graph View