The Royal Janitor Has Come True

I saw this coming after my ex-muse, Rena Easton, made a false accusation I was stalking her. Her late husband would be startled – and shocked – if he were alive to see The Evangelical Devil – decimate a BOND he and others made after defeating Devil Hitler. the predecessor of Devil Trump. This also helps destroy the work of Denis de Rougemont. There is a real possibly we might see an attempt by the Evangelical Devil to overthrow our Democracy. Easton would be shocked at the pardon of Flynn who I believe entertained ideas of secession if Hillary had won.

John Presco ‘The Prophet’

Art Lesson At Osborne House | Rosamond Press

We shouldn’t be surprised that Trump pardoned Flynn. But we can still be disgusted (Opinion) – CNN

British Defence Staff United States Team Support Officer – FCO Local Posts (

British Defence Staff – US – Wikipedia

Georgia Republican Official Named as Plaintiff by Sidney Powell Never Agreed to…Trump Jr. says he’s cleared to end COVID-19 isolationTrump administration removes experts from Defense Policy Board

Several high profile members of the Defense Policy Board were removed on Wednesday by the Trump administration, in yet another purge of longstanding foreign policy experts and national security establishment figures in the final days of the Trump era, according to three defense officials.

Members who were suddenly removed include former Secretaries of State Madeleine Albright and Henry Kissinger, former ranking member of the House Intelligence committee Jane Harman and former House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, two of the officials said.

The Defense Policy Board is an outside advisory group of former high profile national security officials who “provide the Secretary of Defense and the Deputy Secretary of Defense, independent, informed advice and opinions concerning matters of defense policy in response to specific tasks from the Secretary of Defense, the Deputy Secretary of Defense,” according to their website.

“As part of long-considered changes, we can confirm that several members of the Department’s Defense Policy Board have been removed. We are extremely grateful for their dedicated service, commitment, and contributions to our national security. Future announcements for new members of the board will be made soon,” the third official said.

The first two officials said the members removed also included former Chief of Naval Operations, retired Adm. Gary Roughead, former chief operating officer at the Pentagon Rudy De Leon and former Bush deputy national security adviser J.D. Crouch II.

Foreign Policy first reported the removals.

Acting Defense Secretary Christopher Miller, who made an unannounced trip to Bahrain and Qatar Wednesday nearly a week after announcing US troops in Iraq and Afghanistan would be further reduced, said in a statement Thursday, “I am grateful to the departing board members, many of whom have served for decades.”

“As we adapt the Department for great power competition, I look forward to naming new board members in the coming days,” Miller said.

After Trump fired Defense Secretary Mark Esper earlier this month, the Pentagon made sweeping changes in leadership and removed several most senior officials, replacing them with perceived loyalists to the President. The move fueled alarm among military and civilian officials who were concerned about what could come next.

The new appointments include retired Army Brig. Gen. Anthony Tata, now a top Pentagon official, who once called former President Barack Obama a terrorist leader and suggested that a former CIA director was using a Cicero quote to activate a sleeper agent to kill Trump. Kash Patel, former aide to Republican Rep. Devin Nunes of California, is chief of staff to Miller and leading Pentagon transition efforts with the incoming Biden-Harris administration.

Ezra Cohen-Watnick was also named to a new post and will be the acting under secretary of defense for intelligence. Cohen-Watnick gained notoriety in March 2017 for his alleged involvement in providing intelligence materials to then-House Intelligence Chairman Nunes, who went on to claim that US intelligence officials improperly surveilled Trump associates.




By any measure, the United Kingdom has been one of the most (if not the most) reliable military allies for the United States since World War II. From the Cold War onwards, through the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan, the United Kingdom has played a vital role in supporting the United States in the preservation of the international system forged in the aftermath of the defeat of fascism in the mid-20th century. Against this backdrop, and despite the deep historical and functional ties that exist between the diplomatic, defense, and intelligence establishments of the United States and United Kingdom, it would come as a surprise to many that there is no permanent, uniformed U.S. military presence within the U.K. Ministry of Defence (MOD) dedicated solely to joint strategic planning.

At present, there exist rich and robust coordinating mechanisms between the uniformed service staffs of these two close allies (for example, the British Army Staff to U.S. Army Staff exchange program), operational headquarters (liaison officers and embedded operational planners at U.S. Geographic Combatant Commands and the U.K. Permanent Joint Headquarters), and military education systems within each nation. However, this dynamic is presentationally and functionally unbalanced at the strategic level. For while the U.K. MOD has a dedicated uniformed presence within the Pentagon, through the office of the Chief of Defence Staff Liaison to the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and in Washington, D.C. through the British Defence Staff-U.S., the Department of Defense has no corollary within the Ministry of Defence or in Whitehall.

At a time when the U.S. government and defense establishment increasingly comments on the need to do more with partners and allies, the time is right and ripe to further enhance Anglo-American strategic planning and coordination through the establishment of a permanent, uniformed, and dedicated body of embedded strategic planners and Joint Staff Liaison Officers within the Ministry of Defence. This need is all the more critical following the end of major enduring coalition operations of the last decade in Iraq and Afghanistan, which in many ways provided the context and impetus for close strategic, operational, and tactical collaboration.

Detractors to this proposal could challenge that the interoperability and integration between the militaries of each country could not be closer. On its face, this argument is fair and accurate, but only at the operational and tactical level. Much more can be done within and between the Pentagon and Ministry of Defence, particularly on legitimate strategic-level concerns, including long term planning, prioritization of effort (in a proactive, and less reactive manner), and active horizon scanning for emergent areas that could call for complementary programs and policies, especially in the context of building partner capacity and security cooperation. As recent U.S. Quadrennial Defense Reviews and National Security Strategies direct, the United States must do more with partners and allies now, and improve the conduct of current collaboration with established allies. From this vantage point, there are tremendous benefits, for both countries, that could come about through permanently embedding U.S. strategic planners and liaison officers within the U.K. Ministry of Defence.

First, a permanent strategic planning presence would support enhanced alliance management, and would directly contribute to collaborative priorities at the confluence of the Office of the Secretary of Defense, Joint Staff, and Combatant Command interests. Supported by a clear mandate from the Office of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, and empowered by established reach-back mechanisms to the Joint Staff and, when applicable, relevant Combatant Commands, U.S. uniformed personnel embedded within the Ministry of Defence would be a critical enabler for U.S. national strategic plans and priorities in concert with the United States’ closest ally. Such placement could also offer a complementary role to bespoke civil servant exchanges that already exist between the Office of the Secretary of Defense-Policy, and its opposite number in the U.K., Defence Strategic Priorities. Finally, the establishment of embedded U.S. military planners would provide a real time “focal point” for American matters within the ministry, serving as an invaluable conduit to U.S. planners in Washington and around the world, and decoding and communicating intent on major U.S. strategic initiatives.

This initiative would also create a cohort of subject matter experts on the Anglo-American alliance. These individuals would provide a form of intellectual continuity, thereby addressing the current periodicity gap that exists between the occasional, and at times, ad hoc bilateral strategy development and alliance management functions on the one hand, and more frequent operational planning and execution on the other. Persistent, dedicated presence, especially as fully embedded and empowered staff officers, builds credibility and equities that reveal themselves during times of crisis and strategic shock.

Third, embedding U.S. strategic planners would allow the United States to gain an “insider” appreciation of the influences on allied strategic calculation beyond bilateral engagement (and our own biases and assumptions about how and why our allies “should” behave in the first place). For example, variables such as standing defense-related treaties (i.e. the U.K.-France Lancaster House Agreement), and the dynamics of domestic politics (especially in the differences in parliamentary vs. constitutional democracies) continually influence the atmospherics of allied decision making. Familiarity with vastly different organizational designs and processes (the United Kingdom does not have anything like the Joint Staff/OSD split in the Pentagon) matters as well when advising what is in the realm of the possible and plausible in an allied dynamic. To have an impact on bilateral issues, and identify and anticipate opportunities for optimized strategic alignment, one must understand how best to navigate and interpret the intricacies and eccentricities of one’s own national security enterprise, and also that of one’s allied partner. Mastering this complexity only comes about through dedicated, long term immersive experiences within the political/military “context” of an ally’s strategic generation and implementation machinery. In short, this sort of placement would ensure that embedded U.S. strategic planners would be “acculturated” to the environment in which the United Kingdom makes decisions on resources and formalizes its strategic direction.

Permanently embedding U.S. strategic planners as I recommend would build the growing trend of placing representatives of Five Eyes partner nations (United States, United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand) in increased positions of authority and responsibility within each other’s respective service staffs, large unit headquarters, organizations, and task forces. For example, select U.K. Army officers currently hold U.S. Army division chief positions within the U.S. Army G3/5/7 (operations, plans, logistics, and training) staff. U.S. Army Pacific recently established a permanent billet for an Australian Army two star general to serve as the Deputy Commanding General of Operations, the first foreign general to be assigned to a major Army Service Component Command. In 2013, the U.S. 1st Infantry Division selected a one star U.K. Army brigadier to serve as the Deputy Commanding General of the “Big Red One.” These examples (and there are many more) illustrate the demonstrated support, interest, and utility of “cross-pollinating” Five Eyes talent across the armed services of these nations. Placing strategic planners within the strategic headquarters of close allies is the next logical step in this trajectory, beginning with U.S. representation in the U.K. Ministry of Defence.

As the current geostrategic environment demonstrates, working with partners and allies is more critical now than ever, particularly during times of decreased resources and increased challenges. Crises in the Middle East, Africa, and Eastern Europe demand that the United States and its closest allies and partners, especially the U.K., find new ways to increase the efficiency and effectiveness of their strategic collaboration. Winston Churchill’s remark on alliance management has as much resonance today as it did during the Second World War: “The only thing worse than fighting a war with allies is fighting a war without them.”

MAJ Scott A. Smitson, PhD, is an Army Strategist and a member of the CENTCOM Commander’s Action Group (CAG). From 2013-2014, he was a Council on Foreign Relations International Affairs Fellow, serving as a US-UK Strategic Planner in the United Kingdom Ministry of Defence. He holds a Joint PhD in Political Science and Public Policy from Indiana University, and is the author of The Road to Good Intentions: British Nation-building in Aden.

British Ambassador Resigns

Posted on July 11, 2019by Royal Rosamond Press

Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates, United Kingdom’s Secretary of State for Defence Liam Fox, Sir David Richards, UK Chief of Defence, and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Adm. Mike Mullen render honors during the playing of the British and American national anthems at the Pentagon, April 26, 2011. Defense Department photo by Cherie Cullen (released)

This is pure prophecy!

Britain is a very ancient place. Roman officials lived there. Emperor Constantine was born there. Choices were made. The Brit’s chose The English Language. The King James Bible was printed. Herbert Armstrong understood the importance of the English Speaking People – and our history! There is a Diplomatic Language that Thomas Wilson helped develop with the help of Shakespeare.  Donald Trump is……..The Corrupter!

Seer Jon

Sir Ian Easton

Posted on December 24, 2015by Royal Rosamond Press


Here is the resting place of Rena Easton’s husband who was given a poet’s burial.


Birth:1917Death:Jun. 14, 1989
Admiral, K.C.B., D.S.C. Former Head of the British Defence Staff. He was Commandant of the Royal College of Defence Studies in 1976, a UK senior serving military officer between 1972 and 2001. For the 2nd Louis Vuitton Cup, which was held in Fremantle, Australia in 1987, he paid an entry fee deposit of $16.000 for Royal Thames Yacht Club’s White Crusader I and White Crusader II, representing United Kingdom.Burial:
All Saints Churchyard
Isle of Wight Unitary Authority
Isle of Wight, England

The Most Honourable Order of the Bath (formerly the Most Honourable Military Order of the Bath)[1] is a British order of chivalry founded by George I on 18 May 1725.[2] The name derives from the elaborate medieval ceremony for creating a knight, which involved bathing (as a symbol of purification) as one of its elements. The knights so created were known as “Knights of the Bath”.[3] George I “erected the Knights of the Bath into a regular Military Order”.[4] He did not (as is commonly believed) revive the Order of the Bath,[5] since it had never previously existed as an Order, in the sense of a body of knights who were governed by a set of statutes and whose numbers were replenished when vacancies occurred.[6][7]

The Order consists of the Sovereign (currently Queen Elizabeth II), the Great Master (currently The Prince of Wales),[8] and three Classes of members:[9]

  • Knight Grand Cross (GCBor Dame Grand Cross (GCB)
  • Knight Commander (KCBor Dame Commander (DCB)
  • Companion (CB)

Members belong to either the Civil or the Military Division.[10] Prior to 1815, the order had only a single class, Knight Companion (KB), which no longer exists.[11] Recipients of the Order are now usually senior military officers or senior civil servants.[12][13] Commonwealth citizens not subjects of the Queen and foreigners may be made Honorary Members.[14]

The Order of the Bath is the fourth-most senior of the British Orders of Chivalry, after The Most Noble Order of the GarterThe Most Ancient and Most Noble Order of the Thistle

The church is medieval.[1][2] is one of the oldest churches on the Isle of Wight, and was listed in the Domesday survey of 1086.[3][4][5] Mark Whatson is the pastor of All Saints, which is an Anglican church[6] in the Anglican Diocese of Portsmouth. A primary school associated with the church is nearby.[7]


There is a marble memorial commemorating Alfred Tennyson, 1st Baron Tennyson in All Saints Church. His wife Emily Tennyson, Baroness Tennyson, son Hallam Tennyson, 2nd Baron Tennyson and other family members are buried in the church cemetery. The church is also the site of a memorial to Tennyson’s son, Lionel Tennyson, who died of malaria in 1886. Inside the Church there are memorial plaques to members of the Crozier Family who resided nearby. Lady Mary Martin is also remembered on a plague her maiden name being Crozier. Admirial Crozier is buried near to Lord Tennyson in a large Table Tomb. The wynch Gate was built compete with roof in memory of The Crozier Family.

All Saints’ Church, Freshwater is a parish church in the Church of England located in Freshwater, Isle of Wight

Alfred Tennyson, 1st Baron TennysonFRS (6 August 1809 – 6 October 1892) was Poet Laureate of Great Britain and Ireland during much of Queen Victoria‘s reign and remains one of the most popular British poets.[2]

Tennyson excelled at penning short lyrics, such as “Break, Break, Break“, “The Charge of the Light Brigade“, “Tears, Idle Tears” and “Crossing the Bar“. Much of his verse was based on classical mythological themes, such as Ulysses, although In Memoriam A.H.H. was written to commemorate his friend Arthur Hallam, a fellow poet and student at Trinity College, Cambridge, after he died of a stroke aged just 22.[3] Tennyson also wrote some notable blank verse including Idylls of the King, “Ulysses“, and “Tithonus“. During his career, Tennyson attempted drama, but his plays enjoyed little success. A number of phrases from Tennyson’s work have become commonplaces of the English language, including “Nature, red in tooth and claw” (In Memoriam A.H.H.), “‘Tis better to have loved and lost / Than never to have loved at all”, “Theirs not to reason why, / Theirs but to do and die”, “My strength is as the strength of ten, / Because my heart is pure”, “To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield”, “Knowledge comes, but Wisdom lingers”, and “The old order changeth, yielding place to new”. He is the ninth most frequently quoted writer in The Oxford Dictionary of Quotations.[4]

Lord Tennyson.

After William Wordsworth’s death in 1850, and Samuel Rogers‘ refusal, Tennyson was appointed to the position of Poet Laureate; Elizabeth Barrett Browning and Leigh Hunt had also been considered.[15] He held the position until his own death in 1892, by far the longest tenure of any laureate before or since. Tennyson fulfilled the requirements of this position by turning out appropriate but often uninspired verse, such as a poem of greeting to Princess Alexandra of Denmark when she arrived in Britain to marry the future King Edward VII. In 1855, Tennyson produced one of his best-known works, “The Charge of the Light Brigade“, a dramatic tribute to the British cavalrymen involved in an ill-advised charge on 25 October 1854, during the Crimean War. Other esteemed works written in the post of Poet Laureate include Ode on the Death of the Duke of Wellington and Ode Sung at the Opening of the International Exhibition.

Thomas Wilson – Shakespeare – Rhetoric

Posted on March 6, 2019by Royal Rosamond Press

Did Thomas Wilson inspire Shakespeare? I suspect the clergy were steeped in the art of rhetoric that was taught and practiced at court. They might have put on plays as learning tools. Thomas Wilson would be wanting his sons and grandsons to master rhetoric. Rev, John Wilson may have been using rhetoric in his sermons, which put him at loggerheads with the Quakers who were preaching in Plain English. This would explain why the Wilson family was installed at Windsor and Buckingham palace. They represented the English Renaissance, that was the enemy of the Catholic Habsburgs and Mary Queen f Scots who drove the English Renaissance into exile where they came in contact with radical ideas.

The Duchess of Suffolk was close to Thomas Wilson, and the De Vere family who had an acting troupe. It has been suggested De Vere wrote Shakespeare’s plays. But I suspect he was the façade, the front man, who owned a stage, a forum for the radicals who now took over Parliament. How many children of the gentry attended these plays, they able to follow the lesson, while the undedicated were delighted with the spectacle. The Oxford Men added a bawdiness for the masses. I suspect Erasmus Webb played a role? That so little is known about Shakespeare’s life, indicates there were folks in high places behind the curtain as William took his bows. If some of them were heads of the Church and members of Parliaments, you would not want this known. It was dangerous. Many people ended up in a dungeon. This was a Masked Ball. This is a – School!

Thomas Deloney was a Literary Anarchist who realized Royals can be toppled with clever words. The wrong people have had their scholarly right-wing way with The Bard of the Royal Soap Opera. Of course they do not want to see the right people are in power – for a change! One only need look at the Dumbing Down of America by the Trumpsterites and his Hew-Haw Boys. Watching Senator Lindsey Graham kiss ass on the most rancid political stage ever created, spells the end of the Enlightenment that Founded this Democracy. The evangelical leaders are the new Habsburg Catholic church, full of self-righteous prigs that bow down to a clown, a buffoon and pussy-grabber.

“Lock her up!”

“Off with her head!”

I am surrounded by ignorant Grunt Women of the Lethal End Time Evangelical Gossip Circle who hate men who own knowledge and show good breeding. These holy ones are fueled by the Pixilated Dixie Trash Talking that is broadcast by the corrupted actors at Fox News, who got the President in their back pocket. Putin is keen on learning from them.

John Presco

About Royal Rosamond Press

I am an artist, a writer, and a theologian.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.