They Came Before Columbus – A Review

Professor Ivan van Sertima, They Came before Columbus, A review by Femi Akomolafe, 19 January 1995

“History, as taught in the Western and Western-dominated world, gives the impression that the first Africans to reach the Americas were brought as slaves, in shackles on slaves-ships. So total is the Euro-Americans onslaught on black people that all military, missionary, scholarship, academic forces are mobilized to paint the picture of the African as an eternal slave of the white man.……

….Happily, one by one, these edifices of distortions, constructed by white-supremacists posing as scholars, historians, anthropologists, even scientists, are being knocked down.

In his They Came Before Columbus, Professor Ivan Van Sertima of Rutgers University assembled an impressive array of evidence to challenge one of the most persistent of these historical distortions. His argument are so compelling that very many high-calibre scholars, who have maintained the prejudiced line of history, are bound to fall flat from their pedestal. The style of the book is very engaging, almost novel-like—this makes a very good reading.

The first evidence of a black presence in the America was given to Columbus by the Indians themselves: they gave concrete proof to the Spanish that they were trading with black people. “The Indians of this Espanola said there had come to Espanola a black people who have the tops of their spears made of a metal which they called gua-nin, of which he [Columbus] had sent samples to the Sovereigns to have them assayed, when it was found that of 32 parts, 18 were of gold, 6 of silver and 8 of copper. The origin of the word guanin may be tracked down in the Mande languages of West Africa, through Mandigo, Kabunga, Toronka, Kankanka, Banbara, Mande and Vei. In Vei, we have the form of the word ka-ni which, transliterated into native phonetics, would give us gua-nin.” p.11. This was just one of the numerous instances, cited by Professor [van] Sertima, where the names, cultures and rituals of the Mandigos confluenced with those of the ancient Americans.

Thus we have the Bambara werewolf cult whose head is known as amantigi (heads of faith) appeared in Mexican rituals as amanteca. The ceremonies accompanying these rituals are too identical to have been independently evolved among peoples who have had no previous encounter. Talking devil is called Hore in Mandigo, and Haure in Carib. In the American language of Nahuatl a waistcloth is called maxtli, in Malinke it’s masiti. The female loincloth is nagua in Mexico, it is nagba in Mande.

Why would the Indians claimed to have traded with black people if they haven’t? Why would their faith and language have so much infusion of West African influence if these people haven’t had any contact? These might not be sufficient, in themselves, to justify the claims that Africans have been visiting the Americas in pre-Colombian times. But there are witnesses. In 1513 Vasco Nunez de Balboa, another Spanish usurper came upon a group of African war captives in an Indian settlement. He was told that the blacks lived nearby and were constantly waging wars. A priest, Fray Gregoria Garcia wrote an account of another encounter in a book that was silenced by the inquisition: “Here we found slaves of the lord – Negroes- who were the first our people saw in the Indies.” p.22. (It should be noted that in pre-European slavery, slaves are what we called ‘Prisoners of wars’ today. Thus, the Yorubas have the same name, ERU, for both slaves and POWs.)

Aside from these confirmed sightings, there are also an abundance archeological evidence of an Africa presence in pre-Colombian times. These were in the form of realistic portraitures of Negro-Africans in clay, gold, and stone unearthed in pre-Colombian strata in Central and South America.- pp.23-24. Moved by these overwhelming evidence, the Society of American Archeology at a conference in 1968, Professor [van] Sertima reported, concluded: “Surely there cannot now be any question but that there were visitors to the New World from the Old in historic or even prehistoric time before 1492.”

Then there is the oral history of the two peoples. The Griots—traditional historians and masters of orature—‘Oral Literature’ in Mali, have stories about their King, Abubakari the second, grandson of Sundiata, the founder of the Mali Empire (larger than the Holy Roman Empire), who set out on a great expedition of large boats in 1311. None of the boats returned to Mali, but curiously around this time evidence of contact between West Africans and Mexicans appear in strata in America in an overwhelming combination of artifacts and cultural parallels. A black-haired, black-bearded figure in white robes, one of the representations of Quetzalcoatl, modeled on a dark-skinned outsider, appears in paintings in the valley of Mexico… while the Aztecs begin to worship a Negroid figure mistaken for their god Tezcatlipoca because he had the right ceremonial color. Negroid skeletons are found in this time stratum in the Caribbean... ‘A notable tale is recorded in the Peruvian traditions … of how black men coming from the east had been able to penetrate the Andes Mountains.’ p.26

Read the whole review at Hartford-hwp.com

Women’s rights begin in the womb

http://www.priestsforlife.org/africanamerican/blog/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/s-Righs-Begin-in-the-Womb.jpg

PriestsforLife points out how abortion providers target poor people and racial minorities, so that over 60 percent of the victims of abortion in the US are non-whites. This is the fulfillment of the eugenicist dreams of Planned Parenthood’s founder, Margaret Sanger. Combine this with the race-replacement goals of unrestricted subsidized immigration and you get a different picture of the leftist agenda.

It is telling that left-liberals cover up this real murderous racism, while nattering on about people’s unpleasant or offensive words:

“As an African American woman, the threat to my freedom is under siege with the threat of the HHS mandate looming over my vocation at PFL, and over the plight of my people whom abortion threatens to depopulate because of our skin color.

The CDC’s latest Abortion Surveillance report (Nov. 29, 2013) found that between 2007 and 2010, nearly 36 percent of all abortions in the U.S. were performed on black children, even though blacks make up only 12.8 percent of the population. Another 21 percent of abortions were performed on Hispanics, and an additional seven percent on other minority races. A total of 64 percent of all abortions were on minority groups.

A disproportionate number of Planned Parenthood abortion mills, 79 percent, are in black and other minority neighborhoods; further evidence of the targeting of minorities by the abortion industry.

Women like Tonya Reeves and Lakisha Wilson are dying in these abortion mills. Abortion has also robbed men like boxer Floyd Mayweather of fatherhood.

Dangerous carcinogens contraceptives are harmful to women and are negatively impacting our society. The effects of these contraceptives lead to increased risk of various cancers, infertility, depression, suicidal ideation and suicide attempts, psychological problems, relational problems, and a host of other issues including death.

Abortion has also been linked to cancer and other female disorders.

Please connect the dots. Abortion and applied use of carcinogenic fertility blockers masquerading as “birth control” are acts that repeatedly result in the often painful deaths of a children in the womb and which can inflict lasting negative emotional, physical and psychological consequences on women is real torture. Yet some officials and experts – at home and abroad – continue to chose to ignore these facts, focusing instead to challenge the Prolife Community’s respect for the right to life and opposition to abortion.

The fight for religious freedom, the battle against the unjust HHS Mandate, the UN crusade against fertility, the decimating impact of abortion on the Black community; these are not isolated incidents. They are all part of a war on the rights of children, women, families and the global communities. God help us! This is war! Please pray with us and join us in the march towards victory.”

Proving the existence of Lord Krishna

Indians are taught that Krishna was a myth and did not exist. This is the inevitable byproduct of an educational system and mentality put in place by the British empire. But things are changing. In response to the question of whether Krishna existed amateur historians are coming up with new evidence of the authentic nature of the Hindu scriptures:

“Most certainly, says Dr Manish Pandit, a nuclear medicine physician who teaches in the United Kingdom, proffering astronomical, archaeological, linguistic and oral evidences to make his case.

“I used to think of Krishna is a part of Hindu myth and mythology. Imagine my surprise when I came across Dr Narhari Achar (a professor of physics at the University of Memphis, Tennessee, in the US) and his research in 2004 and 2005. He had done the dating of the Mahabharata war using astronomy. I immediately tried to corroborate all his research using the regular Planetarium software and I came to the same conclusions [as him],” Pandit says.

Which meant, he says, that what is taught in schools about Indian history is not correct?

The Great War between the Pandavas and the Kauravas took place in 3067 BC, the Pune-born Pandit, who did his MBBS from BJ Medical College there, says in his first documentary, Krishna: History or Myth?.

Pandit’s calculations say Krishna was born in 3112 BC, so must have been 54-55 years old at the time of the battle of Kurukshetra.

Pandit is also a distinguished astrologer, having written several books on the subject, and claims to have predicted that Sonia Gandhi would reject prime ministership, the exact time at which Shankaracharya Jayendra Saraswati would be released on bail and also the Kargil war.

Pandit, as the sutradhar of the documentary Krishna: History or Myth?, uses four pillars — archaeology, linguistics, what he calls the living tradition of India and astronomy to arrive at the circumstantial verdict that Krishna was indeed a living being, because Mahabharata and the battle of Kurukshetra indeed happened, and since Krishna was the pivot of the Armageddon, it is all true.

You are a specialist in nuclear medicine. What persuaded you to do a film on the history/myth of Krishna? You think there are too many who doubt? Is this a politico-religious message or a purely religious one?

We are always taught that Krishna is a part of Hindu myth and mythology. And this is exactly what I thought as well. But imagine my surprise when I came across Dr Narhari Achar (of the Department of Physics at the University of Memphis, Tennessee, in the US) and his research somewhere in 2004 and 2005. He had done the dating of the Mahabharata war using astronomy.

I immediately tried to corroborate all his research using the regular Planetarium software and I came to the same conclusions. This meant that what we are taught in schools about Indian history is not correct.

I also started wondering about why this should be so. I think that a mixture of the post-colonial need to conform to western ideas of Indian civilisation and an inability to stand up firmly to bizarre western ideas are to blame. Also, any attempt at a more impartial look at Indian history is given a saffron hue.

I decided that I could take this nonsense no more, and decided to make films to show educated Indians what their true heritage was. The pen is mightier than the sword is an old phrase but I thought of new one: Film is the new pen.

Any ideas I have will receive wide dissemination through this medium.

I wanted to present a true idea of Indian history unfettered by perception, which was truly scientific, not just somebody’s hypothesis coloured by their perceptions and prejudices.

Why not a documentary on Rama, who is more controversial in India today? Proof of his existence would certainly be more than welcome today…

A documentary on Rama is forthcoming in the future. But the immediate reason I deferred that project is the immense cost it would entail. Whereas research on Krishna and Mahabharata was present and ready to go.

Further more, Rama according to Indian thought, existed in the long hoary ancient past of Treta Yuga, where science finds it difficult to go.

There is a controversial point in your documentary where someone Isckon monk alludes to Krishna as being the father of Jesus. How can you say that since there is an age gap of roughly 3000 years between the two spiritual giants?

Is Krishna the spiritual father of Jesus? That is what the person who was training to be a Roman Catholic priest, and who now worships Krishna, asks. The answer comes within the field of comparative religion and theology.

The Biblical scriptures qualify Jesus as the son of God. Most Indians have no problems accepting this as Hindus are a naturally secular people. However, then the question that arises is, if Jesus is the son, then who is the Father or God Himself?

[Lila: The word secular in India means not-communal or not provoking religious animosities.]

Now, Biblical scriptures do not really give the answer except to say that the Father is all-powerful and omnipresent. Now, of course, we know that Jesus does not say that he is omnipresent or omnipotent.

[Lila: Jesus both says that he and his father are “one,” implying omniscience and also says at other times, “No man knoweth except the father,” implying limitation.]

Now, no scripture can live as an island, all by itself, and the Srimad Bhagavatam and other scriptures such as the Bramha Samhita all call Krishna as an all powerful, omnipresent being.

So, if we use these words of Bhagavatam, there can be no other truth, which means that Krishna is the father of all living creation.

But it does not mean that Jesus is not divine. Jesus is indeed divine. What I liked about the monks in my documentary is that they do not denigrate Jesus although they worship Krishna as God. They keep Jesus in their hearts, while worshipping Krishna. What could be more secular or more Christian?”

Abortion as Population Control: The Missing 2 Billion

From Life-News, a perspective on a depopulation project more successful than war and equal to any genocide:

At 40 million abortions a year, it would only take 25 years to eliminate one billion babies. Since the abortion business really took off around 1960 or so, we have probably eliminated nearly twice that number, or two billion unborn human beings.

Think about it. Over the past half-century, quietly and without fanfare, in ordinary towns and cities, in dozens of countries around the world, perhaps two billion children have been killed. They have died unknown, often unmourned, and acknowledged only from time to time.

The 20th century was violent by any measure. Thirty-seven million people were killed in World War I. Over 60 million perished in World War II. Six million Jews and another six million Catholics died in Hitler’s death camps. Twenty million died at the hands of the Soviet authorities. Sixty-five million Chinese were killed by the Communist Party, while forty-two million more starved to death during Mao’s Great Leap Forward. And so on.

But these numbers are dwarfed by the sheer volume of children who have been killed this past half-century.”

So those were the tiny, unimportant little lives that were snuffed out so that human beings could become sex-addicts and proud of it..

Something about a voice in Rama…

Father knew best: “The Silent Holocaust” (1981)

The author of “Abortion: The Silent Holocaust” (1981) was a man, and a celibate Catholic priest at that, yet his understanding of the moral import of abortion far exceeds that of feminist pro-abortion women who deny the nature of what they are doing, or, worse yet, understand it fully, but nonetheless elevate their own convenience above it at all times (Salon):

“I would put the life of a mother over the life of a fetus every single time — even if I still need to acknowledge my conviction that the fetus is indeed a life. A life worth sacrificing.”

(Lila: my emphasis)

The author of these chilling lines, which could have come out of the mouth of some KGB chief or Nazi commandant, does get one thing right: Motherhood, devoid of elementary moral development, does not in itself confer humanitarian feeling or ethics. One can be childless and/or a male and have a far truer ethical compass than many of the malign mothers of modernity or the industry experts who brainwashed them.

For instance, contrast Father Powell, who quit his career for a year to write “Abortion: The Silent Holocaust,” with Dr. Nathanson, the godfather of the abortion industry who admitted that the pro-abort movement manufactured statistics to brainwash the population to accept the new laws.

Nathanson stated unequivocally that abortion was kept in place not by the needs of “women’s emancipation” – as feminism’s dupes believed and still believe – but by the self-interest of the abortion providers and the state.

National Right To Life News reviews Father Powell’s important book:

“(Father) Powell rhetorically asks himself why a heavily trained academic [Powell says he had so many degrees he felt like “Father Fahrenheit”] would be so burdened by Roe. He concludes it was because of two formative experiences that had left Powell with an “acute sensitivity to the value of every human life.”

One came about as a result of his short stint as a hospital chaplain in Akron, Ohio. He quickly realized that “scenes of suffering and raw grief had been quarantined out of my academic experience.” It dawns on him that he had never even seen someone die or be born.

[Lila: What changed me from pro-choice to pro-life was not a change in understanding of the nature of the act. I always understood abortion to be the taking of human life, but I was mesmerized by the propaganda that the child was somehow “more” the moral responsibility of the woman’s because of its residence in her womb.

This, of course, denies the man’s genetic contribution as well as the genetic contributions of the grand-parents of the child on both sides.

Previously, I’d also not seen pictures of the fetus or the evidence from new technology of  its complete humanity very early on in development.  As soon as I saw that evidence, thanks to the activism of Lila Rose (yes, I realize she’s Opus Dei but that’s another blog post), I changed my mind.]

“…..each of us has an absolutely essential part to play, that none of us are accidents, that God could have created the world without a place for us but didn’t want to.

“No one else can speak my message,” Powell writes, “or sing my song, or bestow my act of love. These have been entrusted only to me.”

The other formative experience for Powell, also before Roe, came when he went to Europe for further studies. While there, Powell visited the remains of the Nazi death camp at Dachau.

There he learned firsthand of the utilitarian ethic of the Nazi regime, its utter disregard for those who were frail or “unproductive,” and the silence of many Germans to the unspeakable monstrosities that were taking place.

He notes that the words “Never again” are printed on the gate in five languages. It’s a memory that haunts Powell when the U.S. Supreme Court unleashed the abortion holocaust.

Both experiences left him numb. One was too beautiful, too sacred. The other too violent, too shattering.

Yet troubled as he was by these experiences, it was something else that persuaded Powell to take a year’s sabbatical to serve as a pro-life speaker: his counseling experience with three young women.

The first had aborted and was deeply sorry. The life had seemed to have gone out of her eyes and as she left her visage seemed to say, “How can I ever forget?”

The second–a bubble gum-smacking teenager–represented the polar opposite extreme. She was as casual about her impending abortion as the first woman was devastated by the abortion she now bitterly regretted. But it was the third woman whose attitude nearly struck him dumb.

Laboratory tests had confirmed her pregnancy. In response, she told Powell that she had even stopped smoking and drinking; those “can affect the baby,” she remarked. Then in the next breath, she offhandedly remarks, “But I have an appointment to kill this baby next Thursday morning.”

While rocked back on his heels, Powell didn’t blame her for her wildly inconsistent statements. This new ethic of “utility and convenience” was in the very air she breathed, air remarkably like that which permeated Nazi-era Germany.”

Powell also grasps the fact that abortion is intimately connected with neglect of the weak and elderly. He describes what the last 24 hours of his mother’s life meant, absent any measure of “productivity”:

“During those many hours of conversation, characterized by “complete openness,” Powell was “introduced to parts of myself that I didn’t know existed.” He adds, “If I had to pick out the most humanizing, maturing, and life-transforming days of my life,” they would include his mother’s last 24 hours.

“What a terrible and personal loss I would have suffered,” he writes, “if she had been ‘put out of her misery’ because the supposedly meaningful and productive days of her life were over.”

Godfather of Abortion Inc. Converted to Pro-Life

At Catholic Education.org, the godfather of American abortion, Dr. Bernard Nathanson, confesses he’s had a change of heart:

“I am personally responsible for 75,000 abortions. This legitimizes my credentials to speak to you with some authority on the issue. I was one of the founders of the National Association for the Repeal of the Abortion Laws in the U.S. in 1968.

A truthful poll of opinion then would have found that most Americans were against permissive abortion. Yet within five years we had convinced the Supreme Court to issue the decision which legalized abortion throughout America in 1973 and produced virtual abortion on demand up to birth.

How did we do this? It is important to understand the tactics involved because these tactics have been used throughout the western world with one permutation or another, in order to change abortion law

The First Key Tactic was to capture the media

We persuaded the media that the cause of permissive abortion was a liberal enlightened, sophisticated one. Knowing that if a true poll were taken, we would be soundly defeated, we simply fabricated the results of fictional polls. We announced to the media that we had taken polls and that 60% of Americans were in favour of permissive abortion. This is the tactic of the self-fulfilling lie. Few people care to be in the minority.

We aroused enough sympathy to sell our program of permissive abortion by fabricating the number of illegal abortions done annually in the U.S. The actual figure was approaching 100,000 but the figure we gave to the media repeatedly was 1,000,000. Repeating the big lie often enough convinces the public.

The number of women dying from illegal abortions was around 200-250 annually. The figure constantly fed to the media was 10,000. These false figures took root in the consciousness of Americans convincing many that we needed to crack the abortion law.

Another myth we fed to the public through the media was that legalizing abortion would only mean that the abortions taking place illegally would then be done legally. In fact, of course, abortion is now being used as a primary method of birth control in the U.S. and the annual number of abortions has increased by 1500% since legalization.

[Lila: Again, concealed from the public is the fact that the US has an abortion policy far more radical than many socialist countries, like India, where late-term abortions would be considered murder. Here, they are perfectly legal, and, as the Kermit Gosnell story shows, they are far more prevalent than the media admits.

Moreover, the Emily Letts  abortion snuff video shows that abortion is used instead of contraception or responsible prevention.

Indeed, the video was most likely disseminated to normalize and promote the practice of abortion as contraception. There is no doubt in my mind that the intention is not to sever and destroy the “stigma of abortion,” as the media claimed, but to sear and cauterize the mother’s conscience, to cut the umbilical cord of maternal affection, to pervert the energetic bond between mother and child.

In that sense, and in many others, the video was filled with “occult” religious clues, but it was the religion of black witchcraft, not Christianity or Judaism.]

The Second Key Tactic was to Play the Catholic Card

We systematically vilified the Catholic Church and its “socially backward ideas” and picked on the Catholic hierarchy as the villain in opposing abortion. This theme was played endlessly. We fed the media such lies as “we all know that opposition to abortion comes from the hierarchy and not from most Catholics” and “Polls prove time and again that most Catholics want abortion law reform.”

And the media drum-fired all this into the American people, persuading them that anyone opposing permissive abortion must be under the influence of the Catholic hierarchy and that Catholics in favour of abortion are enlightened and forward-looking. An inference of this tactic was that there were no non-Catholic groups opposing abortion. The fact that other Christian as well as non-Christian religions were (and still are) monolithically opposed to abortion was constantly suppressed, along with pro-life atheists’ opinions.

[Lila: A key element in this strategy was to infiltrate and subvert the Catholic church from within. Thus, the church was first demonized for excluding gays; then when the gays in the church contributed to the pedophilic abuse, the blame was shifted onto celibacy and Catholic teaching on celibacy, rather than onto the proclivities of the priests.

Celibacy was thus associated with a so-called pedophilic hierarchy of conservative males, thus discrediting it.]

The Third Key Tactic was the Denigration and Suppression of all Scientific Evidence that Life Begins at Conception

I am often asked what made me change my mind. How did I change from prominent abortionist to pro-life advocate? In 1973, I became director of obstetrics of a large hospital in New York City and had to set up a perinatal research unit, just at the start of a great new technology which we now use every day to study the fetus in the womb. A favorite pro-abortion tactic is to insist that the definition of when life begins is impossible; that the question is a theological or moral or philosophical one, anything but a scientific one. Fetology makes it undeniably evident that life begins at conception and requires all the protection and safeguards that any of us enjoy.

Why, you may well ask, do some American doctors who are privy to the findings of fetology, discredit themselves by carrying out abortions?

Simple arithmetic: at $300.00 a time 1.55 million abortions means an industry generating $500,000,000 annually, of which most goes into the pocket of the physician doing the abortion.

[Lila: Actually, because of the trade in organs and fetal tissue, abortion is probably far more lucrative than that.  Kermit Gosnell apparently made something like $1500, not $300, from each abortion performed. That means roughly five times the figure above, or over $2 billion. This is just an extrapolation from media figures, of course.

The largest advocate of family planning services and the biggest provider of them, Planned Parenthood, relies largely on providing abortion to the public, not “other family services”:

“According to Planned Parenthood’s own apologist, Media Matters, its “total revenue from abortion services was approximately $164,154,000,” a year. Accordingly, over 51 percent of Planned Parenthood’s clinic income comes from abortion.

In addition to its $320.1 million in clinic income and $223.8 million in private donations, Planned Parenthood receives $487.4 million dollars a year from taxpayers.

Lila (continued): The liberal-left darling, Planned Parenthood, dispenses abortion pills in addition to abortion procedures, making the outfit the killer of over 300,000 children every year.

It is not coincidental that those children are mostly black, brown, and from the underclass, given that the mother of family-planning, Margaret Sanger, was a devoted eugenicist who wanted to control the birth-rate of the population and weed out “undesirables.”

Bernard Nathanson (cont):

It is clear that permissive abortion is purposeful destruction of what is undeniably human life. It is an impermissible act of deadly violence. One must concede that unplanned pregnancy is a wrenchingly difficult dilemma. But to look for its solution in a deliberate act of destruction is to trash the vast resourcefulness of human ingenuity, and to surrender the public weal to the classic utilitarian answer to social problems.”

As a scientist I know, not believe,  that human life begins at conception. Although I am not a formal religionist, I believe with all my heart that there is a divinity of existence which commands us to declare a final and irreversible halt to this infinitely sad and shameful crime against humanity.”

Virgin Birth – the product of Kriyashakthi

UPDATE

The long excerpt I posted below, supposedly about a woman who had the experience of virgin birth, is intended to bolster my argument that such things have been recorded throughout history and that religious texts outside Christianity have described them.

However, I don’t subscribe to the author’s eco-feminism and gnosticism.  I should add that I’ve noticed not a few blogs recently that are essentially Gnostic, not Christian,  advocating radical celibacy. They might have been around all along, of course.

There is a strong radical celibacy movement that derides human sexuality, originating from Putin’s Russia (more on that later).

Caveat lector, as always.

ORIGINAL POST

The Virgin birth is the central mystery of Christianity, inseparable from the Cross and the Resurrection.

Nor -in a more generic form –  is it unique to Christianity.

From the pregnancy of Kunti with Karna (in Hinduism) to the birth of the Buddha from Maya, virgin birth has been described and sanctified across cultures.

Moreover, any study of yoga will tell you that such a thing is not an impossibility, within the frame of reference of yoga.

Shakti (energy) creates spontaneously, when the attention is powerful.

That observation is the basis for the popular “Law of Attraction” but it is a foundation of Hindu belief, finding its confirmation in Christian doctrine. On the other hand, Incarnation is denied both in Islam and  some forms of Judaism.

HInduism  affirms both incarnation (avatar) and the Trinity (the law of three – creation, preservation, and destruction).

One reason I came to Hinduism spontaneously while quite young and while in a thoroughly Christian atmosphere was my experience of Kriyashakthi, which until then I thought was my personal secret.

I experienced spontaneous precognitive experiences, as well as experiences of repeated synchronicity and “attraction,” which made me doubt the “scientism” around me.

The explanation for these experiences I found only in yoga texts, which is what drew me to a syncretist Hindu-Christian belief I retain to this day.

It was in Hinduism that I found the teaching that let me understand and accept the doctrines of Christianity unproblematically and without the sterile speculations of modern deist and atheist Christians like Tillich and Kung.

This understanding differs from the mainstream teachings of both Judaism and Judaism’s cousin, Islam.

More below about Kriyashakthi and Virgin Birth (I don’t subscribe to the blogger’s feminist theories):

“In the early 70’s I read and wrote a review for a book about the Ojibwa or Chippewa people. (Sorry, I can’t remember the title.) The author spent a decade re-searching oral stories from the Ojibwa’s old traditional speakers that existed before the coming of the Whiteman. One story was that wise-women of the tribe looked for certain young maidens that possessed grace, intelligence and compassion. Sometimes a candidate for conceiving and giving birth this way wouldn’t show up for a generation or two. Nevertheless, these wise-women kept an eagle-eye open for her. When found, men were not allowed to court her. When she reached the age of fertility, her first period, she was instructed to fast for several days and, if willing, was required to dance around a fire in a sacred women’s lodge built far away from the village. This ceremony occurred while she was ovulating. Ideally a state of bliss or ecstasy was reached during which, according to hidden wise women knowledge, it would be possible for her to conceive and give birth in the “old Way”. They also knew that a child born this way would be blessed with gifts of healing, clairvoyance or leadership. The Great Spirit would give to the child whatever tools the tribe might be in need of. I believe this is what happened among The Essenes along The Dead Sea over 2,000 years ago. Jesus was the result. It’s my guess that they planned it. Also, I might venture to say that this “old way” of conceiving and giving birth was considered a no-no during a time when patriarchy was firmly established. Was this why King Herod felt so threatened, enough to try and have all the new born males put to death in his kingdom?

It’s assumed that the law of parthenogenesis results in the birth of females only. This has been shown to occur in animal, insect and microscopic species but it may operate differently among humans, for there is a visionary power us humans possess. The Sanskrit term for it is Kriyashakti or, in short, Shakti; the mysterious power of thought which enables us to produce external, perceptible, phenomenal results by its own inherent energy. Any idea will manifest itself externally if one’s attention is deeply concentrated. If a woman envisions a boy it’s quite possible she will give birth to one. “In the Mother Cell begins all living things. The Creative Principle is feminine. The highest divine mystery is Brahamana, the feminine of Brahma.” (according to Hindu mythology) If I haven’t scared the reader off by dipping into religious lore, one might ask the biological reason for the presence of the hymen in women. I believe only one species of whale has a hymen but it is to keep sea-water out. Among us humans the hymen remains a “medical mystery”. Some folks think it’s there merely as fodder for comedians. Is it there because Nature, the great conservative, has a higher form of conception and birth in mind for women? One might also inquire about dermoid cysts—-or certain types of them.

Looking up dermoid cysts in Chambers Medical Dictionary, under Medio-logical Records, one finds; “dermoid cystic growths; embryonic growths or tumor-like formations found in women which are of congenital origin, containing evidence of being dejecta membra, or the remains of pregnant growths, in the embryonic fetal period of gestation, somewhat akin to the primary state of being with child.” Some of these dermoid cysts, sometimes mistaken by surgeons for tumors, but really are embryos, are similar in all respects to the products of female gestation, containing bones, hair, teeth, flesh, glands, portions of the scalp, face, eyes, ribs,—–in short, all the organs of the human body—what else could they be but virgin embryos in the process of development? The following is from a recent news item (as of Oct.’09) : A dermoid cyst, also known as benign cystic teratoma, which develops “from germ cells which are primitive cells that are capable of producing eggs and all human tissues,” Dr. Judith Reichman says on MSNBC’s Web site, www.msnbc.msn.com. “A dermoid cyst is formed if the germ cells multiply bizarrely without fertilization, forming an encapsulated tumor that contains hair, sebaceous or oil materials, cartilage, bone, neural tissue and teeth.”
In a lecture delivered before the New York Academy of Medicine in 1933, on “Immaculate Conception—a Scientific Possibility”, Dr. Walter Timme, eminent endocrinologist, presented evidence to prove that Immaculate Conception is physiologically possible. The parovarium of the female reproductive organs, he claims, in some cases can produce living spermatozoa capable of impregnating eggs in the same body, causing them to develop without male fertilization.
They’ve been known to appear in young girls from 8 to 16 that have their hymens intact. Unbeknownst to them, one of their eggs had parthenogenetically been fertilized and then had stopped developing and, typically getting trapped in their fallopian tube, had to be removed, as the failed embryo had become toxic. There is reason to believe that parthenogenesis was the primordial form of re-production for all life, while sexual generation (epigenesist) arose later as a result of inferior environmental and nutritive conditions resulting in diminished fertility. In other words, males develop in order to insure the survival of the species. [Lila You could also say that sex developed after the Fall, which created an “inferior environmental and nutritive condition….”]

Anthropoid apes, our closest biological cousins, have a monthly period while in captivity and on a artificial diet.

[Lila: By restricting the diet, for instance, menstruation can be controlled.]

“When returned to their natural habitat and diet they will bleed in the Spring and Fall like most mammals. Back in 1969 I used to live at Hippocrates Health Institute, in Boston, where everyone drank wheatgrass juice, ate raw sprouts, fruits, nuts and vegetables and nothing else. That means, no bread, grains, meats, or dairy products. The root philosophy at Hippocrates is that “Life Comes Only From Life”. After a month or two on this living food diet some women would have their periods lessen in the amount of blood-loss; and the overall discomfort and cramps they usually experience practically vanished. One woman in particular, who I got to know as a sister, lost her period completely and enjoyed total health. I also met several women who experienced extended fasts of one month or more. They had no periods as well. It’s also quite common that many women athletes lose their periods. Non-menstruating women, providing they are on a (super)-natural diet, faithfully practicing yoga or getting lots of vigorous exercise, like women athletes, enjoy a superior, overall health with a robust vitality. They’re able to re-absorb vitamins, minerals and hormones otherwise lost during menstruation. I should say that women on a normal, civilized diet should have their period. This is nature’s way of cleaning house. We can’t all be raw-fooders. Frankly, most of us can’t even imagine wanting to be a super-natural-health-nut. I do not encourage going in this raw-food direction unless one truly studies the subject in depth with experienced teachers. A commitment to this lifestyle is taxing—-at least until one eliminates the accumulations of a toxic, civilized diet. There are artistic depictions of Mary standing on the Crescent Moon. Did our ancestors know that women had to rise above the moon (menstruation) in order to immaculately conceive? Indeed it seems obvious, from what we’ve observed thus far, that a clean, living food diet is necessary for eliminating wasteful monthly menstruation and is the foundation for the process of parthenogenesis. Part of the condition required for a virgin birth is alkalinity. A proper raw-food diet alkalizes the blood. In a way we are like alkaline batteries—80% alkaline, 20% acid—which allows us to hold our life-force completely. If this balance is upset, as in a “civilized” diet, the life-force fails to fill the body and illness results.

It’s obvious that the human race is over-sexed. The earth has amassed way too many bodies that don’t know how to get along with each other and are straining the earth’s resources.

[Lila: Here the author’s eco-feminism is unnecessarily tacked on.]

This is old news. But sex is beautiful and deemed necessary by almost everyone I know. I’m the last person to say it is wrong or evil. Still, 50% of marriages end in divorce. Think of rape, disease, un-planned pregnancies, over-population and the endless battle of the sexes. Oh well, we must pay the fiddler for our modern lifestyles. I do. In almost every culture on earth and in almost every major religion stories of The Virgin Birth abide. The following is an old Fijian legend: “There was a great chief in Tonga who had an exceedingly beautiful daughter. He hid her from the eyes of men, for he had never seen one worthy to be her husband. Down on the sea-beach he built a fence, thick, strong and high. Here she used to bathe after which it was her custom to lie down for a time upon the clean white sand within the fence, that she might rest a while, and that her body might dry. So it came to pass that the Sun looked down upon her, and saw her and loved her; and in the course of time a child was born to her, whose name she called Sun-child”.

The insanity of public debate in America

Consider the following,:

1. A woman has the absolute right to kill her baby until the moment it exits her uterus. She can also dismember it and torture it by burning it with saline fluid, plucking off its limbs, crushing its bones, or sucking its brains out.

These actions are guarded ferociously as her “right to privacy” by the entire intellectual establishment that silently blacks out or distorts descriptions of these killings. Some 50 million babies have been killed in the past few decades but this holocaust is left to private conscience only. Women or their doctors are not punished for it at all. In fact, they’re applauded and public funding is used to pay for it, even while that part of the public that doesn’t go along with abortion is demonized.

2. An eighty-year-old man makes a few untoward remarks to a girlfriend in the privacy of their bedroom. The tapes are recorded. and published. He is denounced as a disgusting racist with no right to his opinions and he is deprived of his property rights.

Leading “libertarian” activists  say nothing or defend the media’s position. They tell people they ought not to say anything in private they can’t say in public.  This is a thought-control much greater than that under Sharia law, which all these activists would denounce, correctly. None of them sees the contradiction.

No one thinks of simply ignoring and not linking the Sterling material. Instead, they all follow the media’s cue automatically, as though pulled by invisible strings. Then they call themselves “fiercely independent” and talk about “freedom,:” “free speech,” “free choice,” “self-ownership” and other flattering mythologies with a straight face.

Meanwhile, so-called “evil statists” are the only ones arguing that the the recordings are on their face illegal and should not be distributed in the public realm.

The parameters of debate in the much-vaunted “free press” are set by media barons who profit from cheap gossip and extortion (which lowers the cost of running a paper, since the public does the reporting for free or for small sums), pornographers, and paid operatives of the government posing as private actors.

No one considers this a gross conflict of interest. The media barons are presumed not to have political agendas and presumed not to manipulate in collusion.

Nor is this manipulation termed what it is – an extension of the state into the private sphere. It is all deemed “free market” unproblematically.

3. The same people attack anyone who criticizes a paid porn performer for her consciously public acts. They argue that she has a right to privacy even though she sold her porn pictures to a public company voluntarily.

I actually agree with that argument, but those who deny a Donald Sterling his privacy can surely have no justification for giving a Belle Knox hers.

With equal confusion, recording the private sexual behavior of Tyler Clementi (the gay Rutgers freshman who committed suicide)  is a vicious assault on his privacy and dignity (it is), but recording the speech of a Donald Sterling is a righteous act of public policing (it is not).

4. The same people who attack Donald Sterling’s private speech and hold it to an arbitrarily decided public standard also denounce theocracy (with its logically entailed blasphemy laws) as an insupportable and “medieval” intrusion into free speech and thought. And they declare themselves the embodiment of “reason” against the “irrationality” of the religious.

5. The same critics of Sterling who believe it is legitimate for him to lose his livelihood over private speech within his bedroom have a fit over the most minor constraint placed on their right to use speech in public to degrade, inflame, incite, defraud, mislead, or titillate. They even object to any constraint placed on their right to disseminate for commercial profit the vilest images, even where they would be accessible by minors.

They defend their right to view violent child pornography, even though that right supplies the demand that drives a global market of child abuse and murder and though the act of viewing itself has been deemed criminal.

But while the act of viewing child-porn is criminal, the act of dismembering a child is deemed “private” and protected.

The left also defends without any nuance or moderation the right to publish “art”  that inflames the public, even where major violence could result  as in the Danish cartoons of Mohammed, which, as it turns out, were a deliberate provocation from a neo-con flack.

Film to expose abortionist Kermit Gosnell’s serial infanticide

UPDATE

A conservative site has a list of other abortion facilities guilty of negligence, showing that the Gosnell case is not an outlier. This is the ugly, brutalizing industry that abortion activists try to prettify with touchy-feely movies.

ORIGINAL POST

A film-maker couple is intent on exposing the murderous career of Kermit Gosnell, the millionaire African-American Philadelphia abortionist who was found guilty of severing the spines of new-born babies whom he had failed to successfully abort. It has been called the most important story not being covered by the major media in America:

“It has been described as one of the most important stories never told: the case of Kermit Gosnell, an abortion doctor some believe killed thousands of babies over the span of three decades.

From the 1970s to early 2010, the sign on Gosnell’s West Philadelphia clinic read “Women’s Medical Society.” But in 2010, after investigating claims of an illegal prescription drug operation, federal agents discovered what they call a “house of horrors.”

Three years later, a jury found Gosnell guilty on three counts of murder for killing babies that were born alive. He was also convicted of manslaughter in the death of a 41-year-old Bhutanese immigrant who died from a botched abortion while under his care.”

Trying to work up funding for their project, the film-makers, Anne McElhinney and her husband Phelim McAleer, ran into problems with the supposedly independent crowd-sourcing site, Kickstarter, which they believe tried to censor the project.

Heritage.org reports that Gosnell  killed at least a hundred babies and it published gruesome photos of the body parts stored in the clinic:

Abortion doctor's 'house of horrors'

Gosnell’s assistants (including a 15 year old)  were untrained, but participated in the procedures and prescribed medicine; Gosnell’s instruments were rusty and old and the clinic was filthy.

“This case is about a doctor who killed babies … What we mean is that he regularly and illegally delivered live, viable, babies in the third trimester of pregnancy – and then murdered these newborns by severing their spinal cords with scissors …. Over the years, many people came to know that something was going on here. But no one put a stop to it.”

This was the number of reporters at this trial:

bench

This is the grand jury report on Gosnell’s house of horrors.

Some excerpts:

“Mrs. Mongar was just one of many patients victimized by Gosnell’s depravity. There were scores more. At least one other mother died following an abortion in which Gosnell punctured her uterus and then sent her home. He left an arm and a leg of a partially aborted fetus in the womb of another woman, and then told her he did not need to see her when she became sick days later, having developed a temperature of 106 degrees. He perforated bowels, cervixes, and uteruses. He left women sterile. He also killed live, viable, moving, breathing, crying babies. He killed them by cutting their spinal cords after their mothers had delivered them after receiving excessive amounts of medication designed to induce active labor. This report documents multiple murders of viable babies. The evidence makes a compelling case that many others were murdered.”

According to the report, Gosnell made $10-15,000 every night from a few hours of work.

Even more damning was his attitude:

“Gosnell routinely cracked jokes about babies whose necks he had just slit. He treated his patients with condescension – slapping them, providing abysmal care, and often refusing even to see or talk to them – unless they were Caucasian, or had money.”

Gosnell’s procedures were performed on babies that had been delivered, were viable, and  exhibited pain.

“After the baby was expelled, Cross noticed that he was breathing, though not for long. After about 10 to 20 seconds, while the mother was asleep, “the doctor just slit the neck,” said Cross. Gosnell put the boy’s body in a shoebox. Cross described the baby as so big that his feet and arms hung out over the sides of the container. Cross said that she saw the baby move after his neck was cut, and after the doctor placed it in the shoebox. Gosnell told her, “it’s the baby’s reflexes. It’s  not really moving.”

Gosnell crushed the skulls of babies that had been delivered and were viable:

“Under further questioning, Massof acknowledged that Gosnell and he almost al
ways cut the spinal cords, and sometimes suctioned skulls as well, after the babies were fully expelled by their mothers, when there was clearly no need or medical reason to collapse the skull. Tina Baldwin’s testimony also made it clear that Gosnell was not cutting spinal  cords, crushing babies’ skulls, or suctioning in order to allow the head to pass through the cervix. Even while claiming that Gosnell sometimes suctioned a fetus’s skull in order to
get  it through the birth canal, her description of his technique belied her claim: She said
that he would “crack” the neck after the head was out
– when only the baby’s torso was
still inside the mother – and then suction the brain matter out.”

Her killed several of the women who came to him with over-dosages and bad medication, and, at least in one case, refrained from doing anything to reverse his actions:

“After returning several minutes later with the medicine case, however, Gosnell did not use any of the drugs in it to try to save Mrs. Mongar’ s life. O’Neill said that she tried to use the defibrillator “paddles” to revive Mrs. Mongar, but that they did not work. Still no one called 911. Even though an overdose was immediately suspected as the cause of Mrs. Mongar’s cardiac arrest, O’Neill testified that Gosnell instructed her not to administer Narcan, a drug that could have reversed the effects of the Demerol. She said that Gosnell told her it would not work on Demerol – which is not true according to the toxicology expert who appeared before the Grand Jury. O’Neill testified that Gosnell took the time to look through the case of medicines and that he was “thrilled” to find it was up-to-date. This is puzzling, since he seemed to have no intent of actually using the drugs to try to save Mrs. Mongar.”

In 2013, Population Research Institute reported on the suppressed story and blamed ideology for the media silence:

“The mainstream media has done an excellent job of completely ignoring the trial of Kermit Gosnell. As everyone knows by now, Gosnell was the Philadelphia abortionist famous for “snipping the spines” of newborns who happened to survive his efforts to abort them.

The state health authorities ignored his clinic for 17 long years. Then one of his patients died from a drug overdose. At long last, the authorities decided to come in and take a look around.

They were horrified by what they found. There was blood and animal feces everywhere and the stench of urine filled the air. Jars filled with the severed feet of babies lined the shelves, ghoulish “trophies” of Gosnell’s grisly work.

Then, when the investigators attempted to check the medical licenses of Gosnell’s employees, whom he referred to as his fellow “doctors,” they found that they had none. They were practicing medicine without a license.

After Gosnell’s arrest became public, present and past workers in his abortion mill began to come forward with their own stories. They spoke of babies crying after being born alive, only to be silenced by Gosnell’s scissors. They spoke of having to wrap up these tiny corpses in tissue and throw them in a deep freeze.

This trial should be making the headlines in every major paper, and be leading the news broadcasts each night. Every other mass murder story in America ignites a media frenzy, after all. Yet Gosnell’s trial has been greeted by silence. The national media is doing its best to pretend it doesn’t exist.

One Washington Post blog writer explains the lack of coverage in an article entitled Why Kermit Gosnell hasn’t been on page one: “I say we didn’t write more because the only abortion story most outlets ever cover in the news pages is every single threat or perceived threat to abortion rights. In fact, that is so fixed a view of what constitutes coverage of that issue that it’s genuinely hard, I think, for many journalists to see a story outside that paradigm as news.”

Again, a post on HuffPost Live echoed this sentiment: “For what it’s worth, I do think that those of us on the left have made a decision not to cover this trial because we worry that it’ll compromise abortion rights. Whether you agree with abortion or not, I do think there’s a direct connection between the media’s failure to cover this and our own political commitments on the left. I think it’s a bad idea, I think it’s dangerous, but I think that’s the way it is.” In other words, the mainstream media, predominantly leftist, sees this case as detrimental to abortion “rights”, so they ignore abortion wrongs.”

Many pro-life activists believe Gosnell is only the tip of the iceberg:

“Prosecutors say Gosnell routinely cut live babies in the back of the neck to sever their spines. Pro-abortion groups have suggested Gosnell’s alleged murder of live children is the exception in the abortion industry.

But a video released by the pro-life group Live Action shows Washington, D.C., abortion doctor Cesare Santangelo telling a 24-weeks pregnant woman he will not give medical care to a baby born alive.”

Mommy dearest makes snuff-movie, calls critics “haters”

UPDATE:

Please note that this piece is not intended to bash or mock women who have undergone abortions. That is a matter between a woman and her conscience, at least under current law.

The post is intended to deride an abortion-activist who turns a  matter that at all other times she claims is private into a public spectacle, even while branding critics as pure evil, for simply telling her what they think about it.

ORIGINAL POST

Yet another gloriously “humanitarian” feminist, not content with aborting her child,  goes viral with the deed so she can blot out her guilt.….

The malign mommy didn’t really film her first trimester abortion in gory detail, because that would put a crimp in her “you-go-girl” story.

She just filmed herself – the heroine of the episode.

A genuine aborti-flick would have shown the unpleasant reality behind the flattering fiction.

And, of course, this brand of feminism is all about spinning flattering fiction…. and erasing unflattering reality.

Mommy dearest writes:

“A first trimester abortion takes three to five minutes. It is safer than giving birth. There is no cutting, and risk of infertility is less than 1 percent. Yet women come into the clinic all the time terrified that they are going to be cut open, convinced that they won’t be able to have kids after the abortion. The misinformation is amazing, but think about it: They are still willing to sacrifice these things because they know that they can’t carry the child at this moment.

[Lila: To an objective observer, this “sacrifice” is nothing of the sort. It is sheer recklessness.]

“There are three options for a first-trimester abortion: medical abortion, which is the pill; a surgical abortion with IV sedation, where you’re asleep through the whole thing; and a surgical abortion with local anesthesia during which you’re awake. Women are most terrified of being awake.

[Lila: Indeed.]

“I could have taken the pill, but I wanted to do the one that women were most afraid of. I wanted to show it wasn’t scary — and that there is such a thing as a positive abortion story. It’s my story.

Everyone at the clinic was really supportive of filming it.”

[Lila:  Mass man is at his core a voyeur, a bored busy-body.  He seems never happier than when playing peeping- tom at your expense, or sharing more than you want to know, at his own.]

“At first they wanted to sit down and talk about the real consequences of this. There are a lot of politics involved. We knew we could have hundreds of protesters at our door; we could have bomb threats. Working at an abortion clinic, every once in awhile it feels like you’re working in a war zone.

[Lila:  Her self -dramatization takes away the focus from the real victims, her unborn baby.]

“But I said, “Bring it,” and they were on board.

I knew the cameras were in the room during the procedure, but I forgot about them almost immediately. I was focused on staying positive and feeling the love from everyone in the room. I am so lucky that I knew everyone involved, and I was so supported. I remember breathing and humming through it like I was giving birth. I know that sounds weird, but to me, this was as birth-like as it could be. It will always be a special memory for me. I still have my sonogram, and if my apartment were to catch fire, it would be the first thing I’d grab.

[Lila: If this were metaphysics, it would be excellent. As abortion documentary, it’s nothing more than delusion.]

“The first night I posted the video to my Facebook page, I couldn’t sleep. I went out with friends, and I was so paranoid people were looking at me a certain way because they saw my video. The intimacy of it made me nervous, even though I really wanted people to see it.

[Lila: Can anyone any more wonder why the population doesn’t object to its medical records being pawed through by the government? People simply have no sense of privacy. If the love of private life is the mark of the civilized man, then we must confront the truth that we are no longer civilized.]

“Then I looked at my Facebook wall. I was expecting this tsunami of hateful, scary things, but everyone was so breathtakingly supportive. People who I have never talked to started writing their own abortion stories.

[Lila: Bad taste, thy name is “sisterhood.”]

“I had one woman who messaged me saying she’d had an abortion that week and she was plagued with guilt. Her boyfriend called her a killer, but she said she was recovering well and appreciated the video. Another woman told me she’d had a miscarriage and that because of my video she felt like she could talk to me about it. Just all of these things started pouring out of women.

There were hateful responses, of course, which was the hardest part of this whole thing. When I put it up on YouTube, pro-lifers put it on their newscasts. And so I got, “You’re a Nazi,” “You deserve to die,” “You killed your baby.” Just so much blind hatred without knowing who I am or what I’m about.

[Lila: This so-called  “hatred” is far from blind. It’s the wide-awake anger of the sentient and the just, appalled by her self-absorption and indifference to what is, finally, a killing.

It is both natural and good to hate something hate-worthy, like  irresponsible killing.]

“Still, every time I watch the video, I love it. I love how positive it is. I think that there are just no positive abortion stories on video for everyone to see. But mine is.

I know there are women who feel great remorse. I have seen the tears. Grieving is an important part of a woman’s process, but what I really wanted to address in my video is guilt.

[Lila: Yes, guilt. That little voice from one’s conscience that says that abortion is not all fine-and-dandy.]

“Our society breeds this guilt. We inhale it from all directions. Even women who come to the clinic completely solid in their decision to have an abortion say they feel guilty for not feeling guilty. Even though they know 110 percent that this is the best decision for them, they pressure themselves to feel bad about it.

I didn’t feel bad. I do feel a little irresponsible and embarrassed about not using birth control. I mean, Emily, wake up! What are you doing? I was going against the advice I give to patients all the time. So I had them put an IUD in after the abortion. I was able to learn and move forward. And I am grateful that I can share my story and inspire other women to stop the guilt.”

Lila: Translation:

As long as you can make yourself feel good about it, go ahead and do what you want. Ignore anyone who suggests that, if not garden-variety murder, this is something less and more at the same time.

Above all, feel good, because feeling good is all that matters.

For that, keep tight control of the language and the images.

Don’t let either get out of your control.

As long as you can make yourself look good, through subversion of the language  you can feel good.

As long as you feel good, you are good.

And anyone who fails to go along with that self-portrait, why, they’re nothing more than haters.