Brit-Am Now no. 1302
February 15 2009, 21 Shevet 5769
1. David Jackson:
"the best eventual outcome is a greatly expanded Israel"
2. More Thoughts on Manassas and the Battle of Bull Run
3. Brit-Am Books and Magazines
4. Identification must precede Rectification
5. Proposed Plan of Action for Brit-Am and those who think along the same lines.


Discussion Group
Contents by Subject Research

Site Map
Contents in Alphabetical Order
This Site

Khazars Cover
Tribe 13

Now Available!

 Click Here 

1. David Jackson:
"the best eventual outcome is a greatly expanded Israel"

RE: Brit-Am Now no. 1301

Hi Yair,
As much as I think that Israel becoming a US state would bring a lot of benefits to the US, I'm afraid it would destroy Israel.  US states have open borders between them and separation of state from religion (antagonism of state toward religion is probably more accurate).  Within a few years Israelis wouldn't recognize their country.  How many Orthodox Jews would want too see Zion turned into Los Angeles? 

The Word of God assures us that Judah, not Manasseh or Ephraim, will have eternal sovereignty over the Promised Land, especially Jerusalem the capitol.  Any hoped for scenario has to start with that. 
While I'm all for a NATO type alliance of English speaking countries with Israel, I think the best eventual outcome is a greatly expanded Israel stretching from the Nile to the Euphrates as prophesied in Genesis.  That would stabilize the region, normalize world oil supplies, and provide room for the exiles of the lost tribes to return.

For all Bible-believing peoples descended physically or spiritually from Jacob, the geographic expansion and demographic wholeness of Israel should be a primary goal.        

David Jackson
Keller, TX

2. More Thoughts on Manassas and the Battle of Bull Run
We identify Britain with Ephraim and the USA with Manasseh.
Nevertheless many citizens in the physical sense are descended from Ephraim.
It seems that descendants from Ephraim may be especially prominent in the southern areas of the USA.
We have discussed this before as the following extracts from our archives show:

"Brit-Am Now"-486
1. The Civil War: Manasseh versus Ephraim?
From: Woodrow Lovett <>
Re: "Brit-Am Now"-484

Mr. Collins opinion on the USA being Manasseh may be correct. The first battle of the American civil war was the Battle of Manassas in 1861. The Southern forces did not have the wherewithal to follow up and take Washington, D.C. which foretold the eventual outcome of the war. There was a second battle of Manassas in 1862 both battles may be referred to as the battles of Bull Run.
Just a thought.

 From Our Archives
"Brit-Am Now"-57
item 7.The Identity of Menasseh with the USA
We have identified the USA with Menasseh due to the fact that:
[1. Groups identified with Menasseh in Britain (and maybe also in Holland and Germany at that time) dominated the immigrants to the USA at an early stage of its formation.
[2. The USA has aspects of Menasseh including an emphasis on responsible representative government.
[3. The name America is a Latinized version of the Hebrew "Ha-Machiri".
Machir was the firstborn son of Menasseh. "Machir" in Hebrew can also denote the principle of Capitalism.
Together with this the USA also contains a large contingent from Ephraim as well as many non-Israelites. In Biblical times the territory of Menasseh also held a segment from Ephraim, groups from other Israelite Tribes
and numerous non-Israelites. It appears that in the south of the USA the dominant element was Ephraim. The American Civil War may be seen as Menasseh asserting himself over Ephraim. Brit-Am representative in South Carolina, Mark Mosley, pointed out that the first battle of the Civil War was at Menasses, i.e. at a place named after Menasseh! Yehonatan David White saw the Civil War as a kind of replay (or "rectification"?) of the original split between Judah and Israel. In the first split the Tribes of Benjamin and Judah had been in the south under the House of David whereas the Tribes in the north split away. In the American Civil War the south was led by Jefferson Davis (of the House of David? Davis is short for David's son) and by a man of Jewish birth named Judah Philip Benjamin Secretary of State of the Confederate Sates of America (1862-1865), later queen's counsel in England. The South was more aristocratic and Ephraim was associated with aristocracy many of whom already in Biblical times had intermarried with the House of David.

From: William Rasmussen
Shalom Yair: Excellent piece on Manassas. It is interesting to note that the North [Yankees], called the first battle "Bull Run". It was named after a creek that was in the vicinity of Manassas. The symbol of Ephraim is a bull. The South [Confederates], called the battle "Manassas" after the nearby town. One wonders why the South who was made up of Ephraim would call the battle "Manassas" and the North who was made up of Manasseh, would call the battle "Bull Run". There is a juxtaposition here and perhaps an unwitting acknowledgement of the two tribes by both the North and the South. Keep up the fascinating articles. Shalom, Bill Rasmussen

In the first division [in Biblical Times] the northern tribes led by Ephraim split away from Judah and Benjamin under the House of David. In the second case [a segment from Manasseh that included many from] Ephraim under Jefferson Davis with Judah Benjamin attempted to split away [from the rest of Manasseh] but were prevented from doing so by a man named after Abraham the first Patriarch of the Hebrew nation. We have identified Britain as dominated by Ephraim and in the American Civil War Britain did back the Confederate side and considered intervening militarily on behalf of the Confederates.

3. Brit-Am Books and Magazines

Brit-Am Periodicals: Table of Contents
Go to:
Here you will find links to the Table of Contents of
5 issues of "Tribesman"
5 issues of "Brit-Am Magazine"
5 issues of "Brit-Am TRUTH"
These may be purchased as .pdf documents for $10 each.
There are articles of great value in these issues and important information not obtainable elsewhere.
Nevertheless so far no-one has take advantage of this offer.
This was a trial run.
It may be that e-books and e-magazines and productions along those lines are not something we should waste our energies upon.

Our books,
"Joseph.The Israelite Destiny of America"
"Biblical Truth - The Lost Ten Tribes of Israel in the West according to the Book of Genesis"
are now selling for only $10 each.
Not many have taken advantage of this opportunity.

Our newest work,
"The Khazars. Tribe 13"
is now available and has been favorably received.
It sold fairly well when promoted as a pre-publication offer.
Since actually becoming available however (and looking good, to boot) sales have fallen off.

There may be an economic downturn but expenses have remained almost the same.

We may need to rely more on offering but these too have drastically dwindled.
Anyway, Brit-Am is doing what it can to remain (or become) solvent and to spread the message.
Those who can should support Brit-Am as much as they are able.

4. Identification must precede Rectification
What  Caused the Division? Whose Fault Was it?

From: Jonathan Tillotson <>

Dear Yair,
May I ask you what you would identify, from the Bible or Rabbinical writings, as the first moment or event from ancient Israelite history that initiated the process of the division of the 12 tribed Kingdom, as established under Saul, David and Solomon, into the two Kingdoms of Judah and Israel? Would it be fair to say that the fault (if that be the right concept) for this division can be found in both halves of the tribes that would later become Israel and Judah, and not just either those tribes associated with Judah or with Ephraim?
If 12 tribed Israel is to reunite perhaps it is useful and instructive to remember why and how they divided in the first place. This, leaving aside the question of what role the division might be understood to have played in God's providential history and therefore whether it perhaps served a purpose.
Regards and Best Wishes
Brit-Am Answer:
The fault for the initial split lies with both Judah and with Israel i.e. with all the other Tribes.
That if necessary can come later.
We know who Judah was.
Judah is the Jews.
What about "Joseph"?
The problem at present is clarifying both to OURSELVES and to the general public who the other party was.
At first there was Judah and Israel (also referred to as "Joseph" and as "Ephraim").
They were initially together.
Later they divided.
The second party (Joseph) got lost.
You may agree with us as to "Joseph" is but most people do not.
"Joseph" himself does not.
If you tried to explain to a group of people from "Joseph" who they were you might not get a hearing.
"Ephraimites"  seem to continually ignore the need to establish some minimal degree of acceptance in the minds of others as to who they.
I am constantly astonished at these attempts.
Common sense would appear to require that first we know for sure who we are and prove it to others before proceeding with other matters.

5. Proposed Plan of Action for Brit-Am and those who think along the same lines.
a) Study and clarify continuously proofs concerning the identity of the Lost Ten Tribes bringing forth new evidence as it becomes available and modifying existing points when necessary.
b) Promoting this knowledge as much as possible.
c) Endeavoring to live, learn, and act in such a way as that the message will achieve its maximum effect in a positive direction..


Pleased with what you read?
Did you benefit from it?
Your benefit and wellbeing are goals of ours and worthwhile to us in themselves.
We understand that the Brit-Am enterprise is a good work and that they who assist Brit-Am will be blessed.
Brit-Am depends on contributions alongside purchases of our publications

Click Here to make an offering.
Click Here to view our publications.

'It is impossible to rightly govern the world without God or the Bible.'
  George Washington

Brit-Am is the "still small voice" that contains the truth.


Security Cameras, Florida, USA.
security cameras

The Lifestyle Doctor