And why Adam and Eve were expelled from the Middle East and repatriated to Africa
Ninmah and Ningishzidda were ushered into the presence of Enlil, the principal Jehovah/Yahweh of the Old Testament, with the youthful Ningishzidda affecting a hang-dog expression whilst Ninmah typically put a brave face on the affair. An irate Enlil got to the point straight off.
“Can you two confirm that Enki did nothing else to the Lulus other than give them the ability to reproduce, that he did not confer on them a lifespan approximating ours?”
“Mm… my Lord,” Ningishzidda answered rather falteringly, “the prototypes were indeed given the ability to procreate, but they were genetically allowed a life expectancy only a fraction ours: they can only live for 70,000 Earth years at most, which is nothing my Lord compared to the million Earth years we are capable of living.”
“You should understand, my brother,” Ninmah weighed in, “that what Enki did, what we did under his guidance, was purely in the interests of Nibiru and for the sake of the toiling Anunnaki miners. There simply was no other way to proliferate the human race.”
“That’s balderdash!” Enlil exploded. “I received not so much as a murmur of protestation from the Birth Mothers! They were dutifully resigned to the task!” Then again turning to the Sergeant-at-Arms, Enlil hollered, “Get the Lulus in here.”Adam and Eve shuffled in, looking timid and woebegone. Adam was stark naked whereas Eve was clothed.
“Take off the lass’s clothes,” Enlil ordered the Sergeant-At-Arms. “The Lulu’s are an inferior species; they are not entitled to the dignity of clothing. How on Earth could they be equal to us when we created them? My decree reverses completely their recognition, unilaterally, by Enki that they occupy the same station as we do in life’s pecking order.”
Looking fixedly and contemptuously at the couple, Enlil said, “Because of Enki, you guys now have become like us in that you will now be able to produce after your kind. But do you know what that entails Adam? Your wife will experience excruciating labour pains! Child bearing could kill her! You guys have become like us because again owing to Enki, you now reason like grown humanoids.
Younow have attained to such intellectual maturity as to know the difference between what is right and what is wrong, what is moral and what is amoral, meaning you are no longer the quasi-animal you used to be before Enki sophisticated you.
If that’s the case, then you should be capable of independent and responsible existence. I’m ordering your expulsion not only from Eridu but from the Edin as a whole: you will be taken back to the Abzu, from whence you originated, to fend for yourselves.
I’m sure you will be able to provide for your wife and the children that may come along Adam through the gathering of wild fruits and the trapping of small game. Off you go!”
Adam and his wife looked imploringly at Enki before they made their exit. Then turning to his step brother, Enlil said: “As for you Enki, you will remain under house arrest here at Eridu till I have ascertained from King Anu as to what sort of crime you should be charged for. Meanwhile, you are forbidden access to your shem so that you do not escape either to Mars or the Moon.
To that effect, I’m ordering that Eridu be out of bounds and that it be tightly guarded. For I don’t want you to somehow spirit the Lulus on board and have them taken to Nibiru to acquire a lengthened lifespan. You are as slippery Enki as a snake. Now get out of here!”
It was Ningishzidda and Ninmah who were to travel with Adam and Eve back to the Abzu, or Africa. Before they got aboard the sky chamber, Ningishzidda provided the tear-sodden couple with coverings improvised from snake hides that hung on the walls of Enki’s mansion as decorative trophies.
“GOD IS THE DEVIL AND THE DEVIL IS OUR MAKER”
The above account is a paraphrase of Sumerian accounts, which include titbits from The Lost Book of Enki, itself based on the same Sumerian records. In the Bible, the incident is recorded in GENESIS 3:14-24. The Genesis version verges on fiction.
In it, there is a literal serpent, when the serpent (NAHASH in the original Hebrew) was actually Enki as we have already gathered. Eve’s child-bearing travails are multiplied when at the time Eve had never experienced child birth at all. The Tree of Life is literalised when again this stands for a spacecraft.
Adam is condemned to tilling the land when at the time agriculture had not yet been introduced to mankind. Adam and Eve are also rendered subject to death, when death was inevitable even for the Anunnaki themselves.
The statement “thou art dust and to dust you shall return” exposes the ignorance of the Genesis writers regarding how mankind was fashioned by Enki. Characterising mankind as dust was a derogative term, just like some Caucasian racial bigots characterise blacks as “apes”.
The Anunnaki used the term, first, to stress the fact that they were the creators of mankind and to drum into us the false notion that since they did so by animating clay, we mankind were little more than a puff of dust. Since mankind was so benighted at the time, they took this claptrap as gospel truth. Tragically, even “enlightened” mankind today propagates the same spurious message from church pulpits!
So what do we learn from the incident, which Christians describe as “The Fall”? We learn that Eden (the Edin) was the abode of several “gods”, not one. One god, Enki, wanted to uplift mankind morally and intellectually and to get them to produce after their kind.
Another god, Enlil, took very strong exception: he had Enki detained when he learnt of what the latter had done and had Adam and Eve expelled from the Edin. Yet another god, Ningishzidda, provided Adam with coverings after Enlil had declothed him.
The transcendent God, the God of the Universe and All Dimensions Jesus introduced to mankind, was not involved whatsoever. There was no snake at all and there were no trees and fruits of knowledge and eternal life: all these were simply metaphoric terms.
Perhaps the most paradoxical of lessons is that our god in a physical sense, Enki, is the one who we today call the Devil; whereas our oppressor, the one who was dead-set against the advancement of mankind, the one who literary regarded us as disposable pieces of trash, is the one we now worship as our God – Enlil, the primary Jehovah/Yahweh of the Old Testament! Says Earth chronicles researcher Michael Tellinger: “When I say that god is the Devil and the Devil is our maker, it should be seen in this context.”
ENKI IS RELEASED
Nibiru King Anu ordered Enlil to free Enki because he had not committed any statutory crime. At the same time, he made it clear that if Enki genetically accorded mankind the same longevity as the Anunnaki, there would be serious reprisals.
Choking with exasperation, Enlil told Enki he was going to do his utmost to create a wedge between his (Enki) clan and Eve’s off spring (mankind). He was going to propagandise him to mankind as the “cosmic adversary”, what we today call “The Devil” or “The Evil One”.
Both Enki and his clan were going to be deliberately vilified as “evil snakes” who had to be avoided at all costs as they were cunning and deceptive and led people only to perdition. Enlil also gave Enki to understand that he was going to see to it that he never prospered in whatever he set out to do. “Whatever you touch, I’ll make sure it turns to dust,” he raged. “Like a snake, you will crawl and never sprint”. We find intimations of this illwill in GENESIS 3:14-15.
It is important to note that at the time, the word “Devil” did not have the sinister connotation it carries today. Devil is derived from the Sumerian D’EA-BEL (Diabolos in Latin). This simply meant “The (D) Lord (BEL) of Life (Ea)”.
This was Enki’s title in recognition of his prestige as the Anunnaki’s past master of life sciences and his surpassing mastery of DNA, the very essence of life (Ea, literally “House of Water”, can also denote mankind in general – Enki’s creation – since 70 percent of our bodily constitution is water. The Earth is also a House of Water in that it too is 71 percent water.
Hence, D’Ea-Bel could also be rendered as “Earth Lord”, which precisely is the meaning of the name Enki). D’Ea-Bel turned into the slur “Evil One” after Enki cognitively uplifted Adam and Eve against the wishes of Enlil. The slur assumed heightened proportions when Enki’s firstborn son Marduk, who also was referred to as D’Ea-Bel, began to work at cross-purposes with the Enlilites’ manipulative agenda for mankind.
The reader should also take cognizance of the fact that of the Anunnaki contingent, Enki was the only one whose ancestors evolved from a snake species. Enki was originally from Orion whereas all the other Anunnaki were originally from Sirius. The beings of Sirius evolved from a Wolfen and Leonine (lion) creature, whereas the beings of Orion evolved from a serpentine ancestor.
As such, by calling Enki a snake, Enlil was simply saying, “You act just like the creature you arose from”. But Enki was far from offended because he was indeed of snake heritage. In fact, at this very juncture, Enki decided he was at some point in the future going to form a “secret society” to confide in some ranks of mankind their true origins and to impart to them certain spiritual, bio-chemical, and metaphysical secrets.
Enki thus was the founder of secret societies. The pioneer secret society he called The Brotherhood of the Snake. Tragically, this well-meaning clandestine fraternity was over time infiltrated and adulterated by Enlilites so that it came to be vilified as a Luciferian cabal whose aim was to promoted and perpetuate evil. This Earth, My Brother …
THE LULUS DUTIFULLY SERVE THE KINDLY ENKI
Back in East Africa at Bit Shiimti, Enki built a cottage house for Adam and Eve in the surrounding grove. There, he taught them daily and cared for them like a parent would do his own children. Meanwhile, Ningishzidda kept a close watch on Eve. He was ecstatic when he saw that she had developed a bump: the Shurrupak operation had borne fruit! Nine months later, Ninmah midwived Eve’s first offspring – a set of fraternal twins.
Since the Adamites were fruitful as per Enki’s blessings, they multiplied by geometrical progression. Within about a years’ time, East Africa was teeming with them. Relates Enki in The Lost Book of Enki: “By the time Adamu and Tiamat had other sons and daughters, the first ones were by themselves procreating! Before one shar of Nibiru had passed, the Earthlings were proliferating. With understanding were the Primitive Workers endowed, of commandments they were comprehending.”
Initially, the Earthlings were not deployed to work in the underground gold mines. They served in Enki’s palaces and gardens in Zimbabwe and East Africa as cooks, cleaners, launders, and gardeners. Enki, who was the most considerate of the Anunnaki, did not abuse them: they worked according to a set time table and were well-looked after.
Since they were well treated, they were so devoted to duty and showed no disaffection of any kind however backbreaking the travails were. “To be with the Anunnaki they were eager, for food rations they toiled well, of heat and dust they did not complain, of backbreaking they did not grumble.”
JEHOVAH RAIDS THE ABZU
When Enlil got wind of the news that the Lulus were doing a swell of a job in the Abzu sprucing up Enki’s estates, he too pegged his claim. He sent word to Enki that some of the Lulus should be shipped to the Edin forthwith to serve him too. Enki told him point-blank that he should go get stuffed.
Wasn’t it he, Enlil, who had unceremoniously expelled Adam and Eve from the same Edin? If he wanted Lulus to work for him, then he should go ahead and fashion his own as Enki’s Lulus were strictly helpers in the tasks of the Abzu only. Enki’s intransigence also stemmed from his fear that Enlil, a naturally austere being, was certain to treat the Lulus not as helpers but as slaves.
Enlil, however, was not one to take Enki’s rebuff lying down. He sat down with his eldest son Ninurta and plotted to jet down to the Abzu and grab the Lulus by force. In the event, Enlil, who was an aeronautic engineer by training, assembled aircraft for this purpose he called the ALANI (“Highward Vehicle”), which he mounted with a detachable “Earth Spliter”, a huge power drill capable of pulverising anything however hard.
This was reinforced by Ninurta’s IMDUGUD, a combat aerial vehicle that doubled as conscription machine. The Imdugud was also known as the GIRSU, the “Great Black Machine”, which explains why Ninurta’s other title was NINGIRSU, meaning “Prince of the Great Black Machine”.
The huge craft had a wing span of about 75 feet. In Sumerian drawings, it is depicted as a mechanically constructed "bird," with two wing surfaces supported by cross beams and an undercarriage pierced with a series of round openings that must have served as air intakes for the abductees. It was actually the inspiration for Ninurta’s emblem, which was a heroic lion-headed bird resting on two lions or sometimes on two bulls.
When Enki’s personal intelligence network tipped him as to what Enlil was up to, he decided to take precautionary steps. He fashioned a bunker from a nearby mountain and stowed the Lulus in there (at the time, they did not number more than a few dozens). But it seemed the Lulus misconceived Enki.
They thought his aim was to kind of imprison them so that they were totally shut out from the liberty of the world. By the time Enlil and Ninurta arrived to seek them out, they desperately wanted out. Thus when Enlil set the Splitter Weapon on the mountain bunker and bored a hole through it, the Lulus made a dash for this providential exit and hailed Enlil as their saviour.
But their glee was short-lived as almost instantly, Ninurta’s men, fifty in all, began to herd them into the bottom fuselage of the Imdugud. It occurred to the Lulus that they had jumped from the frying pan into the fire but it was too late. Before long, the Imdugud was air-borne and the Lulus were headed for the Edin not to work for Enlil but to slave for him. A livid Enki cursed under his breath.
NEXT WEEK: HOW THE ANUNNAKI KILLED OUR FOREFATHERS “ALIVE!”
Intelligence and Security Service Act, which is a law that establishes the Directorate of Intelligence and Security Service (DIS), provides for establishment of a Parliamentary Committee. Recently, the President announced nine names of Members of Parliament he had appointed to the Committee.
This announcement was preceded by a meeting the President held with the Speaker and the Leader of Opposition. Following the announcement of Committee MPs by the President, the opposition, through its leader, made it clear that it will not participate in the Committee unless certain conditions that would ensure effective oversight are met. The opposition acted on the non-participation threat through resignation of its three MPs from the Committee.
The Act at Section 38 provides for the establishment of the Committee to examine the expenditure, administration and policy of the Directorate. The law provides that the Parliamentary Committee shall have the same powers and privileges set out under the National Assembly (Powers and Privileges) Act.
On composition, the Committee shall consist of nine members who shall not be members of Cabinet and its quorum shall be five members. The MPs in the Committee elect a chairperson from among their number at their first meeting.
The Members of the Committee are appointed by the President after consultation with the Speaker of the National Assembly and Leader of the Opposition in the National Assembly. It is the provision of the law that the Committee, relative to its size, reflect the numerical strengths of the political parties represented in the National Assembly.
The Act provides that that a member of the Committee holds office for the duration of the Parliament in which he or she is appointed. The Committee is mandated to make an annual report on the discharge of their functions to the President and may at any time report to him or her on any matter relating to the discharge of those functions.
The Minister responsible for intelligence and security is obliged to lay before the National Assembly a copy of each annual report made by the Committee together with a statement as to whether any matter has been excluded from that copy in pursuance of the provision of the Act.
If it appears to the Minister, after consultation with the Parliamentary Committee, that the publication of any matter in a report would be prejudicial to the continued discharge of the functions of the Directorate, the Minister may exclude that matter from the copy of the report as laid before the National Assembly.
So, what are the specific demands of the Opposition and why are they not participating in the Committee? What should happen as a way forward? The Opposition demanded that there be a forensic audit of the Directorate. The DIS has never been audited since it was set up in 2008, more than a decade ago.
The institution has been a law unto itself for a longtime, feared by all oversight bodies. The Auditor General, who had no security of tenure, could not audit the DIS. The Directorate’s personnel, especially at a high level, have been implicated in corruption. Some of its operatives are in courts of law defending corruption charges preferred against them. Some of the corruption cases which appeared in the media have not made it to the courts.
The DIS has been accused of non-accountability and unethical practices as well as of being a burden on the fiscus. So, the Opposition demanded, from the President, a forensic audit for the purpose of cleaning up the DIS. They demand a start from a clean slate.
The second demand by the Opposition is that the law be reviewed to ensure greater accountability of the DIS to Parliament. What are some of the issues that the opposition think should be reviewed? The contention is that the executive cannot appoint a Committee of Parliament to scrutinize an executive institution.
Already, it is argued, Parliament is less independent and it is dominated by the executive. It is contended that the Committee should be established by the Standing Orders and be appointed by a Select Committee of Parliament. There is also an argument that the Committee should report to Parliament and not to the President and that the Minister should not have any role in the Committee.
Democratic and Parliamentary oversight of the intelligence is relatively a new phenomenon across the World. Even developed democracies are still grappling with some of these issues. However, there are acceptable standards or what might be called international best practices which have evolved over the past two or so decades.
In the UK for instance, MPs of the Intelligence and Security Committee are appointed by the Houses of Parliament, having been nominated by the Prime Minister in consultation with the Leader of the Opposition. This is a good balancing exercise of involvement of both the executive and the legislature. Consultation is taken for granted in Botswana context in the sense that it has been reduced to just informing the Leader of Opposition without much regard to his or her ideas; they are never taken seriously.
Furthermore, the current Committee in the UK has four Members of the ruling party and five MPs from the opposition. It is a fairly balanced Committee in terms of Parliamentary representation. However, as said above, the President of Botswana appointed six ruling party MPs and three from the opposition.
The imbalance is preposterous and more pronounced with clear intentions of getting the executive way through the ruling party representatives in the Committee. The intention to avoid scrutiny is clear from the numbers of the ruling party MPs in the Committee.
There is also an international standard of removing sensitive parts which may harm national security from the report before it is tabled in the legislature. The previous and current reluctance of the executive arms to open up on Defence and Security matters emanate from this very reason of preserving and protecting national security.
But national security should be balanced with public interest and other democratic principles. The decision to expunge certain information which may be prejudicial to national security should not be an arbitrary and exclusive decision of the executive but a collective decision of a well fairly balanced Committee in consultation with the Speaker and the minister responsible.
There is no doubt that the DIS has been a rogue institution. The reluctance by the President to commit to democratic-parliamentary oversight reforms presupposes a lack of commitment to democratization. The President has no interest in seeing a reformed DIS with effective oversight of the agency.
He is insincere. This is because the President loathes the idea losing an iota of power and sharing it with any other democratic institution. He sees the agency as his power lever to sustain his stay in the high office. He thought he could sanitize himself with an ineffective DIS Committee that would dance to his tune.
The non-participation of the opposition MPs renders the Committee dysfunctional; it cannot function as this would be unlawful. Participation of the opposition is a legal requirement. Even if it can meet, it would lack legitimacy; it cannot be taken seriously. The President should therefore act on the oversight demands and reform the DIS if he is to be taken seriously.
For years I have trained people about paradigm shifts – those light-bulb-switch-on moments – where there is a seismic change from the usual way of thinking about something to a newer, better way.
I like to refer to them as ‘aha’ moments because of the sudden understanding of something which was previously incomprehensible. However, the topic of today’s article is the complete antithesis of ‘aha’. Though I’d love to tell you I’d had a ‘eureka ‘, ‘problem solved’ moment, I am faced with the complete opposite – an ‘oh-no’ moment or Lost Leader Syndrome.
No matter how well prepared or capable a leader is. they often find themselves facing perplexing events, confounding information, or puzzling situations. Confused by developments of which they can’t make sense and by challenges that they don’t know how to solve they become confused, sometimes lost and completely clueless about what to do.
I am told by Jentz and Murphy (JM) in ‘What leaders do when they don’t know what to do’ that this is normal, and that rapid change is making confusion a defining feature of management in the 21st century. Now doesn’t that sound like the story of 2020 summed up in a single sentence?
The basic premise of their writing is that “confusion is not a weakness to be ashamed of but a regular and inevitable condition of leadership. By learning to embrace their confusion, managers are able to set in motion a constructive process for addressing baffling issues.
In fact, confusion turns out to be a fruitful environment in which the best managers thrive by using the instability around them to open up better lines of communication, test their old assumptions and values against changing realities, and develop more creative approaches to problem solving.”
The problem with this ideology however is that it doesn’t help my overwhelming feelings of fear and panic which is exacerbated by a tape playing on a loop in my head saying ‘you’re supposed to know what to do, do something’. My angst is compounded by annoying motivational phrases also unhelpfully playing in my head like.
Nothing happens until something moves
The secret of getting ahead is getting started
Act or be acted upon
All these platitudes are urging me to pull something out of the bag, but I know that this is a trap. This need to forge ahead is nothing but a coping mechanism and disguise. Instead of owning the fact that I haven’t got a foggy about what to do, part of me worries that I’ll lose authority if I acknowledge that I can’t provide direction – I’m supposed to know the answers, I’m the MD! This feeling of not being in control is common for managers in ‘oh no’ situations and as a result they often start reflexively and unilaterally attempting to impose quick fixes to restore equilibrium because, lets be honest, sometimes we find it hard to resist hiding our confusion.
To admit that I am lost in an “Oh, No!” moment opens the door not only to the fear of losing authority but also to a plethora of other troubling emotions and thoughts: *Shame and loss of face: “You’ll look like a fool!” * Panic and loss of control: “You’ve let this get out of hand!” * Incompetence and incapacitation: “You don’t know what you’re doing!”
As if by saying “I’m at a loss here” is tantamount to declaring “I am not fit to lead.” Of course the real problem for me and any other leader is if they don’t admit when they are disoriented, it sends a signal to others in the organisation stating it’s not cool to be lost and that, by its very nature encourages them to hide. What’s the saying about ‘a real man never asks for direction. ..so they end up driving around in circles’.
As managers we need to embrace the confusion, show vulnerability (remember that’s not a bad word) and accept that leadership is not about pretending to have all the answers but about having the courage to search with others to discover a solution.
JM point out that “being confused, however, does not mean being incapacitated. Indeed, one of the most liberating truths of leadership is that confusion is not quicksand from which to escape but rather the potter’s clay of leadership – the very stuff with which managers can work.”
2020 has certainly been a year to remember and all indications are that the confusion which has characterised this year will still follow us into the New Year, thereby making confusion a defining characteristic of the new normal and how managers need to manage. Our competence as leaders will then surely be measured not only by ‘what I know’ but increasingly by ‘how I behave when I accept, I don’t know, lose my sense of direction and become confused.
.I guess the message for all organizational cultures going forward is that sticking with the belief that we need all-knowing, omni-competent executives will cost them dearly and send a message to managers that it is better to hide their confusion than to address it openly and constructively.
Take comfort in these wise words ‘Confusion is a word we have invented for an order not yet understood’!