Connect with us
Advertisement

Ninurta Routs Marduk

Benson C Saili
THIS EARTH, MY BROTHER                                                     

 

“Son of God” wages chemical warfare in showdown between Enkites and Enlilites
 

The Second Pyramid War, pitying Enlilites, led by Ninurta, against Enkites, led by Marduk, “The Great Serpent”, was bloodier than the First Pyramid War, in which Seth squared up against Horus. For the first time ever, the Anunnaki employed a combination of conventional and chemical weapons, the latter of which wielded by the more callous Enlilites, the faction headed by the Bible’s main Jehovah. And as usual in wars like these where elephants tangle, it was the grass – poor Earthlings – that bore the harsher brunt. It were the foot soldiers and the totally uninvolved civilian masses who were the overwhelming victims of the carnage. 
 

Ninurta’s onslaught on the Sinai Peninsula was so vicious and so ferocious the hugely outgunned Enkites hastily withdrew to their legal domain, the continent of Africa. When it came to pounding the enemy in high altitude, mountainous terrain, General Ninurta, the Master Blaster, was ruthless and highly effective: he wasn’t called “The God of War” simply for the fun of it. “I am the Lord of the High Mountains (El Shaddai in the Old Testament),” he would later boast. “Of the mountains which to the horizon raise their peak, I am the master.”


Retreating from the Sinai Peninsula, the Enkites perhaps pinned their hopes on much familiar ground in their African ramparts. If so, they had a rude awakening. The Enlilite attack forces were spearheaded by Ninurta and Ishkur-Adad. While Ninurta, the “Whirlwind”, led and sustained the frontal attack, Adad, the “Storm Wind”,  zeroed in on the countryside behind enemy lines, destroying and disrupting both food sources and supplies.

“In the Abzu (Africa), Adad caused the fish to waste away, the cattle to be dispersed,” the Sumerian records relate. The aim was to starve the enemy combatants and thus sap their energies, thereby enervating and demoralising them into surrender if they wanted to avoid total annihilation.    The Enlilites shelled, bombed, and gassed without let-up.


Although Nergal of the Enkites had opted to tread a neutral path by staying out of the war, that did not insulate him from the Enlilite wrath. Ninurta ordered a pre-emptive, thorough and decisive offensive on Nergal’s cult city Meslam as it was deemed to be potentially the strongest militarily. In doing so, Ninurta reasoned that Nergal’s non-involvement in the hostilities was in all probability a ruse: it was calculated to lure the Enlilites into a false sense of triumphalism, whereupon Nergal would spring upon them and totally obliterate their ranks.

Nergal took the assault on his city as a provocation and consequently threw down the gauntlet to join the war. By the time he did, however, a great deal of damage had been done. “The Enlilite scorched the Earth and made the rivers run red with blood of the innocent bystanders – the men, women, and children of the Abzu,” writes Zechariah Sitchin in The War of the Gods.    


But Nergal was far from cowed. From his theatre of war, he gave the Enlilites as much as he took, which spread alarm in their midst. Fearing that the tables could so spectacularly turn, Ninurta, the firstborn “Son of God”, gave orders for chemical weapons to be unleashed on every inch of Nergal’s territory. These poison-bearing missiles had the effect that Nergal’s heartland was laid to waste in terms of the toll of human and animal lives.


The chemical warfare waged by the Enlilites is described in vivid imagery in the Sumerian chronicles. The particular weapon that strafed Nergal’s lands with billows of poisonous gas is called “The Weapon Which Tears Apart”. This weapon “robbed the senses” (caused people to turn mad) and “peeled the skin off”. The result was that “the canals were filled with blood for days, for dogs like milk to lick.”


Ninurta, the Bible’s “Archangel Michael”,  was merciless and relentless: when droves upon droves of civilian Africans took to the mountains to escape the chemical blitz, he followed after them using what sounds like napalm bombs. “With the Weapon That Smites, he threw fire upon the mountains,” say the Sumerian records.  This utter disregard for civilian wellbeing was so unconscionable Ningishzidda, who like Nergal had initially chosen not to be part and parcel of the hostilities, decided it was time he too reinforced his fighting brood.

 

ENKITES FORTIFY THEMSELVES IN PYRAMID

 

Since the Enkites were clearly on the ropes, their general Marduk finally buckled, having lost great numbers of both the foot soldiers and the civilian populace. At the urging of Enki, he ordered a unilateral ceasefire but without an outright surrender. Marduk was not a spent force yet: he was simply counting on one furious, rearguard knockout salvo from the impregnability of the “House Which Is Raised Like A Heap” – the Great Pyramid – into which all the Enkites had retreated. 


But Ninurta, the Anunnaki’s “Foremost of Warrior” as was one of his acclamations, was not yet done. His aim was to capture or kill the Great Serpent. Thus he now trained his missiles on the Great Pyramid with a view to rattle the Enkites and get them to capitulate. Well, he had not counted on the genius of Enki. The “Wise Craftsman” took Nergal and Ningishzidda aside and administered to them marathon electromagnetic tips on how to secure the pyramid.

Applying these tips, Ningishzidda raised a protective electromagnetic shield around the pyramid which no firepower could penetrate, let alone what were called “Death Rays”, that is,  a kind of electronic weapon that beamed deadly radiation rays. At the same time, Nergal further fortified the pyramid’s defence system by strengthening the ray-emitting crystals known as the Water Stone and the Apex Stone.  What that entailed was that the Enkites were now untouchable: there was nothing Ninurta could do to get at them, finish and klaar.


Ninurta, however, was hardly at his wits ends. He was by no means outsmarted by the Enkites. Unable to inflict martial harm on the Enkites anymore, he detailed his nephew Utu-Shamash to cut off the water supply to the pyramid and to mount a hawk-eyed vigil over the pyramid precincts day and night so that anybody leaving or entering it would be taken out in a hail of military fire. This new weapon Ninurta resorted too was famishment.

The Enkites were to be made to wither from hunger and thirst. It took months though for Ninurta’s measures to begin to bite as the pyramid was substantially catered to. It was to all intents and purposes self-contained but not indefinitely so.
 

When the hunger and thirst began to gnaw away at the men in the Ekur, the Enkites decided that Horus, the youngest of the Enkite pantheon, should steal out at the head of a small party to look for rations. In the dead of night, when the Enlilites were expected to have let their guard down a bit, Horus and a few men accordingly sneaked out of the pyramid, he himself disguised as a ram, the emblem of Marduk. 

But Shamash was no simpleton: he was quick to read through the Horus hoax   and when the young god and his men had gotten to just beyond the range of the electromagnetic fence, Ninurta gave orders to “blast him with fire”. This was not literal fire but a kind of precision laser beam unleashed from Ninurta’s “Brilliant Weapon”.   As such, Horus was not blown to smithereens but simply lost an eye.

 
The moment Horus was so injured, the men around him radioed Enki inside the pyramid. Enki in turn radioed a neutral Ninmah, the Anunnaki’s Chief Medical Officer, to rush over and attend to the young god’s injuries before they aggravated. Ninurta was deeply opposed to the idea of his highly cherished mother “entering alone in Enemyland” but Ninmah was adamant that she just had to proceed and save the young Enkite’s life.

Ninurta at last caved in but not before he provided her with “clothes which should make her unafraid”, which was simply anti-radiation apparel. Ninurta immediately ordered a suspension of hostilities so as not to unduly put his mother in harm’s way.

 

NINMAH INITIATES PEACE FEELER

 

Arriving at the Giza Pyramid with a team of medics, Ninmah’s intention was not simply to attend to the injuries of Horus: she wanted to broker a truce between the Enkites and Enlilites lest the war escalate to a kind of Armageddon. So as her medical team dealt with Horus right on the steps of the pyramid, she radioed Enki and began to sound out peace feelers. In particular, she suggested that Enki meet Enlil face-to-face at the Harsag, her abode at Tilmun, and set about hammering out terms for the peace.


But before that, the Enkites had to surrender   control of the Giza Pyramid to a neutral arbiter, herself. After all, her honorary Egyptian title was Hathor, meaning Mistress of the Great Pyramid. It was time now that the title became literal and official, at least throughout the duration of the peace process.
 

Having consulted his sons, Enki gave the proposition the nod, which was in keeping with his pacifist bent naturally “That which is like a heap (the Giza Pyramid), that which I have as a pile raised up, its Mistress you may be,” Enki said to Ninmah. But, Enki insisted, that was only subject to the Enlilites agreeing to round-table deliberations on a mutually beneficial way forward.


Ninmah, who took with him Horus and put him in a medical clinic at the Harsag, flew to the Mission Control Centre at Jerusalem, where Enlil was now based, and reported what transpired during her exchanges with Enki. Enlil was with Adad when she met him. Adad was not keen on the idea of sit-down talks with the Enkites: he wanted an unconditional surrender. “We are expecting victory,” he bragged to Ninmah.

“The enemy forces are beaten.” The only thing Ninmah had to do was to fetch Marduk and bring him over so that he enunciates   his surrender before Ninurta. Only then would the ceasefire hold and discussions take place. “Go talk to the enemy (Marduk),” Adad hollered. “Get him to attend the discussions so that the attack can be withdrawn.”


Although Enlil endorsed Adad’s position, it was Enki, rather than Marduk, he would rather meet. It seemed Enlil too no longer favoured continued hostilities as he spoke in a uncharacteristically conciliatory tone. He put it to Adad that Ninmah, who he referred to as the Mother of the Gods, was acting at the say-so of King Anu on Nibiru and not on her own behalf. She therefore had to be heeded. Then turning to Ninmah, Enlil said: “Go appease my brother (Enki). Raise with him a hand for life. From his barred doorway let him come out.”


Rushing back to the Giza Pyramid in a chopper, Ninmah accordingly relayed the message from Enlil to Enki at the door of the great structure. Initially, Enki was reluctant to emerge for fear that he was being lured into a death trap, but Ninmah swore “by the stars” that his safety was guaranteed. At long last, Enki and his brood  trooped out of the Giza Pyramid and got aboard the chopper, whereupon they set course for the Harsag, where Enlil awaited them. At the controls of an escort helicopter gunship right in their wake was General Ninurta.

 

                                                                       A PEACE TREATY IS REACHED        

 

At the Harsag, the two clans sat opposite each other, with Ninmah as chairlady and moderator at the head table. On the Enlilite side were Enlil, Ninurta, Nannar-Sin, and Adad. The Enkites were represented by Enki, Marduk, and Nergal. The rest of the clan members sat in the outer hall, eagerly waiting for Ninmah to come and announce the outcome of the deliberations. 


At the commencement of the proceedings, the Enlilites were not that favourably disposed towards Ninmah. At least two of them were not convinced she was a neutral arbiter. Nannar-Sin kept referring to her as Tsir, meaning snake, a metaphor for the Enkites, who paternally traced their origins to the Serpent Race of Orion, to which Enki, who was the firstborn son of the Orion Queen and was born asexually without male involvement, belonged.
 

Adad panned her as a sympathiser with the “demons”, his characterisation of the Enkites. Ninmah had to perform a symbolic neutral-ground ceremony and chant an oracle of total impartiality to demonstrate her merit as a wholly objective peace broker.”Find peace,” she entreated the two belligerents. “We descendents of Anu all must of warring cease.”


The first to speak was Enki. Enki made no pretences at vanity or bravado. With cap in hand, he appealed to his step-brother Enlil reverentially thus: “O one who is foremost among the brothers, Bull of Heaven, who the fate of mankind holds: in my lands (Africa) all the dwellings are filled with sorrow by your attacks.”
 

Enlil, as heartless as he otherwise was, was seemingly moved by Enki’s lament. Rising to his feet magisterially, he announced: “Removed is the affliction (visited upon Africans by Ninurta in the war) from the face of the Earth. The Great Weapon (Ninurta’s untouchable Imdugud) is lifted.” But for the peace to effect, Enlil demanded two courses of action by the Enkites. First, the Canaanites should dis-inhabit Jerusalem, the site of the Mission Control Centre, and the Sinai Peninsula, the site of the spaceport.

This in fact was a concession by Enlil as Ninurta wanted a total withdrawal from the entire lands of Shem. Ninmah, however, neutralised him, persuasively arguing that ejecting the Canaanites wholesale from the lands of Shem would only be possible if they were carpet-bombed as having dwelt in the region for more than 300 years, they would rather they were forcibly uprooted than leave voluntarily.   Secondly, all the Igigis who had taken part in the capture of Tilmun and Mission Control Centre by Seth should be expelled from Lebanon.  
 

Enki readily gave ground. “I will grant thee (the Enlilites) the rulers’ position in the Restricted Zone (the Sinai Peninsula),” he said to Enlil. “The Radiant Place (Jerusalem) I will entrust.” However, Enki insisted that his concession was subject to Enlil undertaking that the Giza Pyramid would forever be under Enkite authority. But the chess match was not yet over. Enlil said that was well and good, but one strong conditionality had to be met.

This was that the Enlilites must be given the right to recommend the ruler over Giza as well as lower (northern) Egypt. Enki duly agreed, whereupon the Enlilites voted for Ningishzidda as the new ruler of northern Egypt and new authority over Giza. Zidda was particularly acceptable to the Enkites because he was the son of Ereshkigal, Enlil’s granddaughter and Sin’s daughter. That’s how Zidda replaced Horus as the King of Egypt circa 8670 BC. Zidda was to rule Egypt for 1570 years in a reign that saw the most peaceful and harmonious relations between the Enkites and Enlilites.    
 

The final prerequisite for peace was tabled by Enki. He demanded Enlil’s undertaking that the Enkites should be free to visit the Edin, which was to be re-established. Enki also demanded the same sovereignty he had over his prediluvial cult city Eridu, the first Anunnaki settlement on Earth which he founded. Ninurta strongly objected to the idea of Enki regaining Eridu, saying it now would be in strictly Enlilite territory, but Ninmah prevailed over him for the sake of peace and Enki’s potential usefulness as the new Edin’s engenderer of prosperity.
 

On his part, Enlil endorsed his half-sister’s standpoint and said thus to Enki: “In my land (the new Edin) let your abode (Eridu) become everlasting. From the day that you shall come into my presence, the laden table shall exhale delicious smells for thee … Pour abundance onto the land; each year increase its fortunes.” Ninmah also said to Enki: “Lord of Life, God of Fruit, let the beer (wine) pour in double measure. Make abundant the wool.”

NEXT WEEK:  THE NINURTA  SHOCKER!

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