Connect with us
Advertisement

Nibiru Source of Life on Earth

Benson C Saili
THIS EARTH, MY BROTHER…

How did life-forms emerge and evolve on Earth? Sumerian records, corroborated by science and the Genesis account, point to the “Planet of the Gods”.   

On September 6, 1988, The New York Times, America’s largest newspaper, carried an article headed     NASA to Probe Heavens for Clues to Life’s Origins on Earth. The article’s central point was conveyed in the following passage:

Driving the new search for clues to life’s beginnings is the recent discovery that comets, meteors and interstellar dust carry vast amounts of complex organic chemicals as well as the elements crucial to living cells. Scientists believe that Earth and other planets have been seeded from space with these potential building blocks of life.   

Well, what modern scientists “discovered” in 1988 was actually common knowledge 6,000 years ago. The Sumerians, the world’s first known civilisation who thrived in what is today’s southern Iraq, record that the seed of life here on Earth was sown by the planet Nibiru during a cosmic showdown they termed the Celestial Battle, in which the interloper Nibiru slammed into the planet Tiamat at least three times, hiving off a piece that came to be our Earth, with rest of the debris forming what we today call the Asteroid Belt in the same space where Tiamat used to be, that is, between Mars and Jupiter.   

At the time, the Solar System was still young, having come into being only 600 million years before, and there was a lot of volcanic activity going on on the planets.  Nibiru too was a young planet (its people, the Anunnaki, who were later to come to Earth in the guise of gods and create mankind, had not yet evolved) but slightly older than the Solar System planets, which in astronomical terms is in millions of years. Nibiru was an intruder planet: it wandered into our Solar System from Sirius B when that star aborted – that is, failed to develop into a viable, full-grown star. By then, however, primeval forms of life – single-celled organisms and seed-bearing plants – had already sprung up on Nibiru and these it imparted to Tiamat and consequently to Earth during the Celestial Battle.

Scientists are now virtually unanimous that the Solar System is 4.6 billion years old. But at what stage during these 4.6 billion years did life on Earth emerge?

In November 1989, a team of Stanford University scientists concluded that “the window of time when life on Earth began was just 200 million years between 4 and 3.8 billion years ago … Everything alive today evolved from organisms that originated within that window of time”. But exactly how life originated this august team of scientists could not be drawn into explaining.  

Scientific research done both on Earth and the Moon consistently comes up with the 4-billion-year date as marking the beginning of any conceivable life-form on Earth. Now, if planets were formed 4.6 billion years ago, why did life not arise much sooner than 4 billion years ago? Why didn’t life spring up, say, 4,5 billion years ago? Scientists have no definite answer: all they say is that life on Earth was spawned by a “catastrophic event”.

In the May 12 1989 edition of the authoritative journal Science, Nobel Prize winning geneticist Manfred Eigen and his colleagues from Germany’s Max Planck Institute reported that “the genetic code on Earth cannot be older than 3.8 billion years, plus or minus 600 million years”. At that time, Eigen said, “a primordial gene might have appeared whose message was the biblical injunction  ‘Go out into the world, be fruitful and multiply’”. If we allow for the 600 million years-plus scenario, that is, life emerging around 4,4 billion years ago, “this would be possible only in the case of extraterrestrial origin”, Eigen and his team concluded.

Earlier, other eminent scientists had even been more revealing. In 1973, another Nobel laureate Francis Crick – one of the two discoverers of DNA – and his colleague Leslie Orgel published a paper titled Directed Panspermia in the science magazine Icarus.  The paper postulated that Earth was seeded by an “extraterrestrial source”. By 1986, the consensus among the scientific community was that “all life on Earth, from bacteria to sequoia trees to humans, evolved from a single ancestral cell”. Scientists arrived at this position  after establishing that all living organisms on Earth had the same DNA and the same 20 or so amino acids.

Now, consider the terms we have encountered so far as per the pronouncements of scientists: catastrophic event; extraterrestrial origin; single ancestral cell. What was the catastrophic event that seeded life on Earth? The Sumerian answer: the Celestial Battle. What is the extraterrestrial origin of life on Earth, the place where the seed of life on Earth came from? The Sumerian answer: the planet Nibiru. The Sumerians indeed did have reason to refer to Nibiru as “The Celestial Lord”  or “The Planet of the Gods”. It was Nibiru that 4 billion years ago caused the cosmic upheaval –  the Celestial Battle – that  seeded life on Earth.

Says the iconic Sumerologist  Zechariah Sitchin: “The Anunnaki, capable of space travel half a million years before us, discovered this phenomenon (that is, the Celestial Battle) long before us; in this respect, modern science is just catching up with ancient knowledge.” It is shameful that our stubborn, swell-headed scientists will never give the Sumerians, who documented the knowledge endowed them by the Anunnaki, the credit due to them.  

GLIMPSE INTO ILLUMINATI CRAFT

On occasion in the course of these Earth Chronicles texts, I have made a passing mention of the Illuminati. The term Illuminati simply means “the Illuminated Ones”, that is, people who have certain, privileged  knowledge most of Earth’s inhabitants do not have. All secret societies, such as the infamous Freemasons and the Bilderberg Group, for instance, are Illuminati.

The Illuminati,  who date back thousands of years, are the world’s most powerful and wealthiest cabal – filthy rich is the more fitting term – and therefore the most influential force. They are the backstage rulers of the world. No one knows for sure who the Illuminati proper – its highest echelons – are    (the ones we do know, such as Henry Kissinger, the  Bush clan, the Pope, and the British Royal Family are simply their proxies) but exist they do. What makes them so implacably powerful is the wealth of secretive knowledge they have about the origins of life on Earth and the cosmic powers behind it.

They also know a great deal more about science (particularly metaphysics and genetics) and technology (it is said at any given time their technology is at least 40 years ahead of that   in the public domain), about the universe, and about supernatural forces than most university professors do.  The Illuminati themselves answer to certain other, fiendish  powers, who are the direct intermediaries between nature and supernature. Since they serve Satanic forces, the Illuminati’s agenda for the world is nefarious and self-serving in the long-term. They worship the forces of darkness, the so-called demons or devils. That’s why they are also referred to as Satanists or Luciferians.   

If we now know about Nibiru – the planet of the Old Testament gods – it is thanks to the pioneering work of people like Zechariah Sitchin, who began to enlighten us in the last quarter of the twentieth century following 30 years of painstaking research. In fact, the knowledge of Nibiru began to come into the mainstream in the 90s with the advent of the Internet. However, the Illuminati have known about Nibiru since days immemorial. The iconic artist Leonardo Da Vinci (1452-1519) and legendary inventor Sir Isaac Newton (1643-1727) both were familiar with Nibiru. Newton in fact predicted that Nibiru, which appears once every 3,600 years,   would reappear in 2060 AD (the code language he used, like all Illuminati do, was “the world was going to come to an end in 2060”, meaning Nibiru’s return in that year would effectively usher in a new zodiacal age, the Age of Aquarius. The present age,  that  of Pieces, mathematically began in 60 BC; it ends in 2100 AD, as a zodiacal age mathematically lasts 2160 years).  

I  hate to say this, but if there is one good thing about the Illuminati, it is that they do not exactly keep us in the dark; they always provide glimpses into themselves and their agenda, be it through coded language, symbolism, hand signals, movies, or outright leaks and slip-ups. We know, for instance, that their symbol for Nibiru is any of these: a winged  or horned disc (because that was the commonest way  in which the ancients depicted Nibiru);  anything globular or elliptical (because the ancients sometimes depicted Nibiru as a circle and because Nibiru has an elliptical orbit); a flying saucer (because the Anunnaki,  when they were on Earth, liked to fly in saucers as they explored the planet); the All-Seeing Eye (because the Anunnaki satellite technology was such that nothing could be hidden from them); something resembling a cross (because when Nibiru was imminent, the ancients anticipated its coming through cross-sign depictions); and a pyramid with a floating top (because the Anunnaki used  pyramid structures as take-off and landing platforms for their flying saucers).

Of course some of this symbology does on occasion carry alternative meanings  and therefore it is not in every case  that they solely stand for Nibiru. Like everything else, symbols are informational energy fields and all energy is neutral: what meaning it carries depends on intention.   

What the Illuminati are saying, in effect,  is that their gods, their creators, came from another planet, Nibiru, and it is to these gods  they owe their allegiance first and foremost, not to the “fictitious” God of the New Testament.   And worshipping or revering flesh-and-blood gods is tantamount to worshipping the Devil, as everything that takes the place of the real God, the one Jesus preached to mankind in the first century, is counterfeit and so is Satanic.

JESUS IN RENAISSANCE PAINTINGS

The Illuminati have all along been cryptically hinting that it is they who crucified Jesus Christ. In most of the Renaissance (that is, 14th to 17th century)  paintings of Jesus Christ, he’s depicted with a circular halo. The popular spin is that this projects a “halo of holiness”. Fact is, the halo  is fundamentally symbolism for Nibiru! Even the crown of thorns does not evince sympathy at all; it actually denotes a horned disc – a Nibiru symbol – and is therefore a mockery. Further, if you look at some of these paintings that show a crucified Jesus, you will see that in addition to a halo around Jesus’s head, there are one or two three-legged flying discs. These same 3-legged flying discs can be seen on a 5600-year-old art carving on a high ceiling beam in the old Temple of Osiris in Egypt (it is small wonder that the overwhelming majority of UFOs sighted today are flying discs. The Anunnaki did not exactly evacuate from Earth; some of them are next door on Mars and with their sophisticated, super-fast flying saucers periodically pay reconnaissance visits to Earth).  

Consider these archived illuminati paintings. One by Paolo Uccello dated 1460-1465 and which hangs in the Academy of Florence in Italy shows a red saucer-shaped object hovering around a crucified Jesus. A 17th century painting by Fresco, which can be seen in the Svetishoveli Cathedral in the former Soviet republic of Georgia, shows two saucer-shaped objects on either side of a crucified Jesus. In the Fitzwilliam Museum of Cambridge, England, is an even more intriguing painting by Flemish artist Aert De Gelder. The 1710 AD painting shows a disk-shaped object shining beams of light down on Jesus as John administers baptism to him! Do you remember what the Bible says about this event – that a loud voice came from  heaven and said ‘this is my son in whom I’m well pleased’? Did that voice come from an Anunnaki chopper hovering overhead? Was the event stage-managed by the still lingering, shadowy ranks of the departed Enlil – the Bible’s Yahweh/ Jehovah?     

Then there is this 1680 French coin called the Jeton, which has remained a mystery ever since. It appears to commemorate a UFO sighting of a saucer-like object. At the bottom of the coin is a winged disc – the symbol of Nibiru. Around the rim are the words “OPPORTUNUS ADEST”, which translate as “it is here at an opportune time”. Was this coded language for the French illuminati of the time that the planet of their gods, Nibiru, was not imminent but would arrive at the right time?       

NIBIRU SYMBOLISM EVERYWHERE

The flying disc is found on major buildings all over the world – St. Peter’s Basilica in the Vatican; St. Paul’s Cathedral in England (which has a golden globe and a cross on top – symbolism for the Planet of the Crossing, as the Sumerians referred to Nibiru); Capitol Hill in the US; to mention only a few. The Vatican actually chokes with flying discs signage and so does  Westminster Abbey in London. Alexandra Palace  in North London has even been nicknamed Nibiru Palace! Built in 1873, the building does not even pretend to conceal the fact that it celebrates the return of Nibiru. Practically every inch of the building, including the fencing,  is steeped in Nibiru symbolism – winged and horned discs; All-Seeing Eye; flying saucer depictions on floors and ceilings; etc.  The Big Ben clock tower depicts a pyramid with a floating top, another version of Nibiru symbolism.

The priestly uniform of Ron Williams, the Archbishop of Canterbury, is fraught with Nibiru symbolism too, including his office backdrop. The Pope’s uniform is likewise. A monstrance, used by the Catholic and the Vatican as a holder of the so-called communion wafer, actually depicts the centre of the flying disc (in fact most of the illuminati church windows, the Catholic included, depict the underside of a flying disc).  The same monstrance symbol was used by Hitler’s  Nazis to house their swastika. The UN logo is also designed in monstrance fashion.  

Yet the most obvious evidence of Nibiru veneration is seen everyday around us. It is the logos on the cars that we see or drive. The Bentleys,  Chryslers, Aston Martins, SAABs, Toyotas, Fords, Nissans, Land Rovers, Alpha Romeos, BMWs, Audis, etc, are embossed with winged globe logos or their approximation – interlocking circles or ellipses. The  Illuminati rule the world  folks and they do not shrink from asserting  their clout in any  way, shape or form.  Above all, they make sure the planet of their gods, Nibiru, takes pride of place in any setting.  

The Founding Fathers of America – George Washington, Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, etc – were all Freemasons and therefore Illuminati to the core. Nibiru symbolism around them   was ubiquitous. The 1776 painting by John Trumbul that shows the so-called Committee of Five presenting to Congress America’s Declaration of Independence is dominated by two wall-hung winged discs draped in flags (as a camouflage perhaps?) This same painting appears on the back side of the  2-dollar bill too. On the tombstone of Benjamin Franklin are found not one but four winged disc depictions – for  emphasis? The epitaph reads, “Benjamin Franklin (1706-1790): The sage who two worlds claimed as their own”.

What were these two worlds? One need not be a genius to tell that they  are Earth and Nibiru. In other words, Franklin as a politician served Earth and as a Freemason served the agenda of the Anunnaki (rogue elements of the Anunnaki such as Enlil, I should hasten to say).  Then there is the famous Masonic Apron of George Washington, the founding president of the United States. It is awash with Anunnaki symbolism – the pyramid steps, the All-Seeing Eye in the centre of a flying disc with swirling thrust, a disguised inverted horned disc, etc.   

This Earth, My Brother, hardly belongs to you and I: it’s the property of the Illuminati and their Nibiru masters.

NEXT WEEK: DEVELOPMENTS IN THE SIRIUS STAR SYSTEM

Continue Reading

Columns

STRESS TEST

14th December 2022

We have come a long way from the 19th century, when mental un-healthiness was not recognised as treatable. In those days mental health problems were viewed as a sign of madness, warranting imprisonment in often merciless and unhygienic conditions; and with that backdrop you would think twice before calling in sick because of stress or admit feelings of hopelessness or depression but that’s changing. That may sound like good news but it’s not.

Reasons why employees don’t show up for work can vary, but one thing is for certain; an organisation relies on its staff to get things done and when employees don’t show up for work it disrupts organisational plans, takes up the valuable time from management and lowers the company’s productivity. It’s always been that people miss work for several reasons, some understandable and legitimate and others less so but it’s important that we know the reasons so that such situations can be better managed.

Today stress is one of the most common causes of long-term absence and is especially prevalent amongst office-based staff. This is also related to absence due to depression or anxiety. Is this indicative of where we are as a society, a sign of the times which is that people are constantly pressurised and have less work-life balance?

The British Museum houses a tablet which provides a peek into work-life balance in ancient Egypt. It documents how many sick days and why 40 workers took time off from their workplace in 1250 BC. All sorts of fascinating reasons have been given for why people were away from their work, including a note about someone named Buqentuf, who needed time off for embalming and wrapping the corpse of his dead mother.

There were other reasons like some workers, such as a man named Pennub, missed work because their mothers were ill.  Others had causes that we wouldn’t expect to hear as often today, such as men who stayed home to help around the house due to a “wife or daughter bleeding” – a reference to menstruation. But no mention of mental health, not because it didn’t exist, but it wasn’t labelled thus not reported.

What was reported was a person such as Aapehti who was said to have been ill on a regular basis and also took time off when he was “making offerings to god”.  Workers also took days off when they had to perform tasks for their superiors – which was apparently permitted in moderate amounts. For example, Amenmose was allowed time away from work when he was “fetching stones for the scribe:  And what about other employees who had to excuse themselves from work to brew beer, an activity which was associated with some of their gods and rituals.

All fascinating stuff which provides insight into life at that time. But what insights can we gather from today’s sick leave records? One study recently undertaken gives us insight into the UK police force’s absenteeism. Figures obtained through the Freedom of Information Act from police forces in the UK showed that the number of days absent due to mental health problems increased by 9% in one year, from 457,154 in 2020 to 497,154 in 2021.

And here is the shocker. Police have taken a record 500,000 days off due to mental health issues. Zoe Billingham, a former police inspector, suggested there was a greater prevalence of mental health issues among emergency services, due to what they faced during the pandemic of coronavirus. “Police and other frontline services have protected us during the pandemic,” she said. “The pandemic was a great unknown. People were really scared of dying and coming into contact with the virus, and a lot of people did.”

It is a ‘mental health epidemic’ among police. Alistair Carmichael, Home Affairs spokesman for the Liberal Democrats, said: “Frontline police officers do an incredible job serving their communities. But we know that the stress of policing can take a heavy toll on the mental health of officers, in some cases leading to burnout.

Let’s look at another group. A poll by Gallup reported that in the last three years, 75% of young adults aged 18–22 have left their jobs because of stated mental health reasons. This study showed that employees (millennials and Gen Z) want employers who care about their wellbeing. Contributing factors to mental health stress centre around increases in uncertainty and include: Hybrid work environments and the side-effects: no socialization, no end time, no feedback, caring for others; changing rules around work often with poor communications & clarity;  inconsistency & incompleteness of rule implementation:  Uncertainty from these and other factors leads to anxiety and depression.

 

The real story here is not that burnout, stress, depression and anxiety are becoming the number one reasons for absenteeism but that for a large part they are preventable. We have the data telling us it’s the problem but still organisations are doing very little to proactively manage it. Sure, we have counselling services for staff who are struggling and wellness days to reinforce feelings of wellbeing, but this is not enough.

If we start caring and developing work cultures that do not create unintentional stress through how work gets done, that will go a long way to change the status quo. Simple things like ensuring your culture doesn’t thrive on fire drills and heroics to get things done and that emails do not come with expected responses after hours or over the weekend. If we can stop managers bullying, yelling or losing their cool when there is a performance or customer issue and begin giving people more control over their work – all of these are the kinds of stuff that contribute to weakened mental health and absenteeism.

To sum up, your staff’s stress levels are directly proportional to your business’s absentee levels.  Ergo, lowering the former, will also reduce the latter.  Stress down, productivity up and everybody wins out.

QUOTE

Contributing factors to mental health stress centre around increases in uncertainty and include: Hybrid work environments and the side-effects: no socialization, no end time, no feedback, caring for others; changing rules around work often with poor communications & clarity;  inconsistency & incompleteness of rule implementation:  Uncertainty from these and other factors leads to anxiety and depression.

 

Continue Reading

Columns

Diana Irks Queen

14th December 2022
I

In September 1978, General Atiku, Princess Diana had enrolled for a cookery course. That same month whilst she was staying at her parents’ home in Norfolk, her friends innocently asked about the health of her father  John Spencer, the 8th Earl. Hitherto, the Earl’s health had never been a matter of concern but Diana somewhat inscrutably voiced a somewhat portendous outlook. “He’s going to drop down in some way,” she said.  “If he dies, he will die immediately;  otherwise he’ll survive.”  

It came to pass,  General. The following day, the telephone bell rang to the news that her father had collapsed in the courtyard of his Althorp Estate residence and that he had been rushed to a nearby hospital after suffering a massive cerebral haemorrhage. The medical prognosis was bleak:  Earl Spencer was not expected to survive the night. Writes Andrew Morton in Diana Her True Story: “For two days the children camped out in the hospital waiting-room as their father clung on to life. When doctors announced that there was a glimmer of hope, Raine [second wife] organised a private ambulance to take him to the National Hospital for Nervous Diseases in Queen Square, Central London, where for several months he lay in a coma.”

Raine was so fiercely protective of her beloved husband that she had the nurses see to it that his own children did not come near him in this critical condition in his elitist private room.  ‘I’m a survivor and people forget that at their peril,” she would later tell a journalist. “There’s pure steel up my backbone. Nobody destroys me, and nobody was going to destroy Johnnie so long as I could sit by his bed – some of his family tried to stop me – and will my life force into him.” But if Raine had steel in her, General, so did the implacable Spencer children, more so the eldest of them all.  “During this critical time,” Morton goes on, “the ill feeling between Raine and the children boiled over into a series of vicious exchanges. There was iron too in the Spencer soul and numerous hospital corridors rang to the sound of the redoubtable Countess and the fiery Lady Sarah Spencer [the Earl’s firstborn child] hissing at each other like a pair of angry geese.”

As Diana had correctly predicted, her father was not destined to die at that juncture but healthwise he was never the same henceforth. First, he suffered a relapse in November that same year and was moved to another hospital. Once again, he teetered on the brink. He was drifting in and out of consciousness and as such he was not able to properly process  people who were visiting him, including his own daughters when nurses relented and allowed them in. Even when he was awake a feeding tube in his throat meant that he was unable to speak. Understandably, Diana found it hard to concentrate on the cookery course she had enrolled in a few days before her father suffered his stroke.

But Raine, General,  was determined that her husband survive come rain or shine. Morton: “When his doctors were at their most pessimistic, Raine’s will-power won through. She had heard of a German drug called Aslocillin which she thought could help and so she pulled every string to find a supply. It was unlicensed in Britain but that didn’t stop her. The wonder drug was duly acquired and miraculously did the trick. One afternoon she was maintaining her usual bedside vigil when, with the strains of Madam Butterfly playing in the background, he opened his eyes ‘and was back’. In January 1979, when he was finally released from hospital, he and Raine booked into the Dorchester Hotel in Park Lane for an expensive month-long convalescence. Throughout this episode the strain on the family was intense.”

Altogether, Earl Spencer had been in hospital for 8 straight months. The lingering effects of the stroke left him somewhat unsteady on his feet when he escorted his daughter down the aisle at St. Paul’s Cathedral in 1981 for her marriage to the Prince of Wales.

 

R.I.P. EARL SPENCER

 

It was not until March 29, 1992, General, that Earl Spencer finally gave up the ghost. He was admitted in hospital for pneumonia but what killed him days later was a heart attack. Rumours of his death actually began to make the rounds the day before he passed on. At the time, Diana was on a skiing holiday in the  Austrian Alps along with  her estranged hubby Prince Charles and their two kids William and Harry.

When Diana was told of her dad’s death, she insisted that under no circumstances would she return to England on the same flight as Charles, with whom she was barely on talking terms. “I mean it, Ken,” she told her body minder Ken Wharfe. “I don’t want him with me. He doesn’t love me – he loves that woman [Camilla]. Why should I help save his face? Why the bloody hell should I? It’s my father who has gone. It’s a bit bloody late for Charles to start playing the caring husband, don’t you think so?”

Naturally, General, Charles was alarmed, particularly that his efforts to use one of his right-hand-men to reason with the Princess had been rebuffed. He therefore  prevailed over Wharfe to try and ram sense into his wife. “Lord Spencer’s death was a major news story,” writes Ken Wharfe,  “and if the Prince and Princess did not return to Britain together then nothing, not even compassion for the grief-stricken Diana, would stop the journalists from going for the jugular. The truth about the Waleses would be immediately and blindingly obvious to the most naive journalist … Returning to the Princess’s room, I told her bluntly that this was not a matter for debate. ‘Ma’am, you have to go back with the Prince. This one is not open for discussion. You just have to go with it’.’’

At long last persuaded, General, Diana said, “Okay Ken, I’ll do it. Tell him I’ll do it, but it is for my father, not for him – it is out of loyalty to my father.” But what in truth got Diana to change tack was the intervention of the Queen, who personally called her at Charles’ own request. That, however, General, was only as far as Diana was prepared to play ball: as far as engaging with Charles in conversation was concerned, that was simply inconceivable. “There was an icy silence for the rest of the two-hour journey,” writes Wharfe. “Nothing was said during the entire flight. The Princess did not want to speak to her husband and he, fearing a furious or even hysterical outburst, did not dare even to try to start a conversation. Whatever the discomforts of the journey, however, it was soon clear that the PR spin had worked. The next day it was reported that Prince Charles was at Diana’s side in her hour of need. Yet as soon as the Prince and Princess arrived at Kensington Palace they went their separate ways – he to Highgrove, and she to pay her last respects to her father.”

Lord Spencer was 68 when he died. He was a remote descendant of King Henry VIII.

 

PRINCE CHARLES FINALLY OWNS UP TO ADULTERY WITH CAMILLA

 

In June 1994, when Diana and Charles had been separated for exactly one-and-half years, Prince Charles was interviewed in a BBC documentary by Jonathan Dimbleby. The interview was billed as intended to mark Charles’ 25 anniversary as Prince of Wales but it was in truth a not-to-cleverly-disguised riposte to Diana Her True Story, the highly controversial 1992 collaboration between Diana and Andrew Morton.

In the interview, which was watched by 13 million people, Charles, General, openly admitted for the first time that he had committed adultery with Camilla Parker-Bowles, who he hailed as, “a great friend of mine who has been a friend for a very long time and will continue to be a friend for a very long time”. Diana had been requested to feature in the interview alongside her husband but she parried the overture on the advice of her aides, which was spot-on as she would have been greatly embarrassed by her hubby’s unsavoury confession in her own face and on national television.

The Prince’s candid confessional was followed weeks later by a book titled The  Prince of Wales: A Biography, which was written by the same Jonathan Dimbleby. The book was even frankier than the interview. In it, Charles put it bluntly that she had never once loved Diana and that he married her only because he was coerced into doing so by his  notoriously overbearing father. Charles also made it known that as a child, he had been bullied by his abusive father, virtually ignored by his mother, and persecuted by a wife he portrayed as both spoiled and mentally unstable.   Both Diana and his parents were revolted by the bare-knuckle  contents of the book though Dana need not have been irked considering that it was she herself who had fired the first salvo in the Morton book.

 

BASHIR INTERVIEW BODES ILL FOR DIANA

 

If Diana’s collaboration with Morton was a miscalculation, General, Prince Charles’ Dimbleby interview was equally so. For in November 1995, the wayward Princess hit back with her own tell-all interview on BBC’s  current affairs programme called Panorama. “She wanted to get even with Prince Charles over his adulterous confession with the Dimbleby documentary,” writes Paul Burrell, her final butler, in A Royal Duty.

The interview was conducted by journalist Martin Bashir who was attached to BBC, and was watched by 23 million people,  conferring it the distinction of having attracted the largest audience for any television documentary in broadcasting history. In the interview, Diana voiced concern about there having been “three of us in this marriage and so it was  a bit crowded”, the intruder obviously being Camilla. Diana also gave Charles a dose of his own medicine by confessing to her own adulterous relationship with James Hewitt, of whom she said, “Yes, I adored him, yes, I was in love with him”. Hewitt had at the time documented his affair with Diana in lurid detail in a best-selling book and Diana thought he had ill-conceivedly stabbed her in the back.

And as if to rub salt into the wound, General, Diana cast serious  doubts on her husband’s fitness to rule as future King and therefore his eventual accession to the British throne.   Unfortunately for her, the interview sealed her fate  in so far as her marriage was concerned. “In her headstrong decision to co-operate with Bashir,” says Burrell, “she had never considered, perhaps naively, the implications that Panorama had for her marriage.” Indeed, just four weeks after the interview, the Queen, after consultation with the Prime Minister and the Archbishop of Canterbury, wrote personally to both the Prince and Princess of Wales requesting that they divorce sooner rather than later.

It was a dream-come-true for at least two parties to the triangle, namely Charles and Camilla. But did it also constitute music to the ears of Princess Diana too, General?

 

Pic Cap

SOWING THE WIND ONLY TO REAP THE WHIRLWIND: Martin Bashir interviews Princess Diana in a BBC documentary which aired on Monday 29 November 1995. The interview incensed the Windsors: the following month, Queen Elizabeth ordered Charles and Diana to sever matrimonial ties. In her vengeful resolve to hit back at her husband following his own interview the previous year, Diana had foolishly sown the wind and reaped the whirlwind.

NEXT WEEK: DIANA REVERTS TO SINGLENESS

Continue Reading

Columns

Rights of an Individual in Islam

14th December 2022

Islam is a way of life completed and perfected by the last and final Messenger of Allah, Prophet Muhammad (pbuh). The Holy Quran along with the practical teachings of the Prophet (pbuh) forms the basis of Islamic law, social, economic and political systems of Islam – in short the basis of a complete code of conduct for the entire life of a Muslim

Regrettably in this day and age there are certain views in non-Muslims that have a very negative ‘view’ of Islam. The bottom line is that if a Muslim says that two plus two is four, others can ‘argue’ to say three plus one is four, or two times two is four or the square root of 16 is four. The bottom line is no matter what we may think we all are ‘correct’. The fact is that we are all on this earth for a ‘limited’ time. Regardless of beliefs, tribe, race, colour or our social standing in life, we will all die one day or the other and we will “all” be called up thereafter to answer for our behaviour, beliefs, and our life on this earth.

To a Muslim the Holy Quran is the Divine Revelation which is all encompassing and lays down in clear terms, how we should live our daily lives including the need for humans to allow fellow humans certain basic rights at all times. Due to the limited space available I can only reflect on some of the major fundamental rights laid down by Islam:

Right to life

The first and foremost of fundamental basic human-rights is the right to life. “Whosoever kills any human being (without any valid reason) like manslaughter or any disruption and chaos on earth, it is though he had killed all the mankind. And whoever saves a life it is though as he had saved the lives of all mankind” (Quran Ch5: v 32). It further declares: “Do not kill a soul which Allah has made sacred except through the due process of law” (Quran Ch6: v 151). Islam further explains that this sacrosanct right to life is not granted only to its adherents (believers), but it has been granted to all human beings without consideration of their religion, race, colour or sex

Right to Equality 

The Holy Quran recognises equality between humans irrespective of any distinction of nationality, race, colour or gender. “O Mankind We have created you from a male and female, and We made you as nations and tribes so that you may be able to recognise each other (not that you may despise each other). Indeed the most honourable among you before God is the most God-conscious”. (Quran Ch49: v 13). The Prophet Muhammed (pbuh) further explained this: “No Arab has any superiority over a non-Arab, nor does a non-Arab have any superiority over an Arab…… You are all the children of Adam and Adam was created from soil”. If there is any superiority for a man it is based on his piety, righteousness, sense of responsibility and character. Even such a person with these noble qualities would not have any privileged rights over others.

Right to justice

Allah Almighty has bestowed on all human beings, believer or non-believer, friend or foe the right to justice.  The Holy Quran states: “We sent our messengers with clear teachings and sent down along with them the Book and the Balance so that society may be established on the basis of justice” (Quran Ch 57 : v 25). It further says “O Believers stand for the cause of God and as witness to justice and remember that enmity of some people should not lead you to injustice. Be just as it is nearest to God consciousness” (Quran Ch 5:v  8 ). This makes it obligatory that a believer must uphold justice in all circumstances, including to his enemies.

Right to freedom of conscience and religion

The Holy Quran clearly mentions that there is no compulsion in accepting or rejecting a religion. “There is no compulsion in (submitting to) the religion” (Quran Ch 2 : v 256). Every individual has been granted basic freedom to accept a religion of his or her choice. Therefore no religion should be imposed on a person.

Right to personal freedom

No person can be deprived of his or her personal freedom except in pursuance of justice. Therefore there cannot be any arbitrary or preventive arrest without the permission of duly appointed judge and in the light of a solid proof.

Right to Protection of Honour

Every person has been ensured basic human dignity which should not be violated. If someone falsely attacks the honour of a person the culprit will be punished according to the Islamic Law. The Holy Quran says: “Do not let one group of people make fun of another group”. It further states: “Do not defame one another”, the Quran goes on to say: And do not backbite or speak ill of one another” (Quran Ch 49  : v 11-12).

Continue Reading