A few words need to be said,a sort of disclaimer on this material. This file that I am using(the only one I find on the web)is definitely not the best PDF,I have worked with.I suspect that it has been tampered with,like certain comments added by others,not the author and not noted as such,particularly in the second chapter. Also certain paragraphs seemed scrambled, I suspect this was done to discredit the book in general, which must be very hard to find.I considered trying to purchase a copy,but decided against it when I seen this…

https://www.amazon.com/Pandoras-box-ultimate-Revised-Millennium/dp/B0006QE9H8 Crazy price huh? Anyhow I wanted the reader to be aware,that I seen,what I am sure some will notice.I cleaned it up where I knew it would not hurt the integrity of the authors intent.Anywhere I commented is in italic’s,different font and noted D.C.

The methods of recording the events of the past for posterity and the edification of future generations have changed over the millennia. Thousands of years ago knowledge of past events was passed on from generation to generation in the form of stories, related by fathers to sons and to others willing to listen.

The origin of the word “History” comes from that practice of narration in that each legend so recited would be “his story”, but the advent of writing changed the method of recital. Historians became relatively passive, relating their story just once, leaving the efforts of learning to the reader.

The spoken, or narrated story changed down through the ages and the telling, mutating into far more than the realities of the original exploits of the principal players in the drama into legends extolling the super human characteristics of the heroes of the saga, but also at the same time they would degenerate into nothing more than mere legends.

But transcribe “his-story” into writing thereafter cannot be changed, or can it?

Aside from the origins of the word which describes the discipline, there is also a related and unwritten law: History has always been written by the winners.

Contrary to popular belief, it is neither a legal requirement nor a fact that the winner always writes a true account of history, If the victor is corrupted, or has interests to protect from the public, for example: why the war was created in the first place, he is in a position, being the winner, to make sure that the unsuspecting public never gets to know.

How? He simply writes and rewrites the history books, or causes the history books to be re-written, and everyone knows that the history books are correct, aren’t they?

Wars have been fought down through the millennia, and almost always, when over, the victor always gets to write down the results. Where the “true” accounts of the “magnificent exploits” of the victorious are applauded and extolled to the world (whatever comprised “The World” at that time), the comments and observations of the vanquished have been (if not outright destroyed) suppressed, and consigned to a dusty, second rate status of “archives (written by nobodies)”, thereafter to slowly decompose into the mists of antiquity and (hopefully) never again reach the light of day.

The victor is therefore exalted as the one who had “right” (and inevitably, God as well) on his side, and the vanquished become in posterity, if not criminals, then simply mis-informed non-entities who fought for a lost and often evil cause.

If anyone should doubt that, then consider how history would be written today (in either Japanese for the U.S. side of the Atlantic and the Pacific, or German for the European and North African theatre) should the “nasty other side” have won the second world war! What then would become of the British “Stiff upper lip, old chap” or the “American Way of Life”, or any of the other colloquial cliches which are abused in describing this “wonderful?” current way of life?….]