4th April 2004
Of recent, the article "Nibiru and the Anunnaki" by my wife Amitakh Stanford, whose pseudonym is D. M., has been the subject of a great deal of discussion. I hope that I can shed some light on that discussion with my interpretation of a few points concerning her article.
Some readers have misread "Nibiru and the Anunnaki" and think that the piece agrees with Zecharia Sitchin's theories. In fact, Amitakh states very early in the piece that a great deal of speculative writing about Nibiru seems to be based upon Sitchin's "Twelfth Planet." She goes on to say that: "Sitchin, like Velikovsky and Darwin, used his own theories to support his claims."
In that sentence she shows that she disagrees with Darwin's theory of evolution and that she believes the premise upon which he based his theory is unfounded. She also demonstrates her disagreement with Velikovsky's theory that Venus was a comet that was captured by our solar system and thence became a planet and that his premise was likewise unfounded. The same is true with her assessment of Sitchin's theory as to why the Anunnaki came to Earth.
Amitakh explains that she is presenting her account of the Nibiru, which is quite different from those currently in circulation for the very reason that most accounts of the planet are in fact based upon Sitchin's writings, and she disagrees with Sitchin.
Sitchin theorises that the Anunnaki are near neighbours to Earth, being a planet that he refers to as the Twelfth Planet. (Amitakh calls this planet Nibiru thoughout her article). Sitchin then hypothesises that the atmosphere of the Anunnaki's home planet was deteriorating and needed bolstering so the people of Nibiru travelled to Earth to mine physical gold which they subsequently used to construct a shield to protect their home planet. He argues that while the Anunnaki were on Earth they enslaved the inhabitants of the planet to force them to mine the gold.
"Nibiru and the Anunnaki" disagrees with that premise, and states that the Anunnaki are a bloodthirsty, conquering race that came to Earth for conquest of the planet. When they arrived, they discovered physical gold, a non-native element of the planet; the gold was merely a bonus for the Anunnaki in their conquest of the Earth.
With Sitichin's theory and his presentation of the story, one can actually feel sorry for the Anunnaki as he argues that their home planet is dying and that the Anunnaki are attempting a rescue of their planet. On the contrary, no possible sympathy for the Anunnaki can be found in Amitakh's writing about them. She exposes them by stating: "If you imagine the worst characteristics you can conceive in Satan, you have well concocted the impression of the Anunnaki."
Finally, Sitchin discusses the theory of the salvation of Nibiru with the golden shield and presents the story to make the actions of the Anunnaki palatable by even making their home planet a part of our solar system. Amitakh avers that Nibiru is not a part of our solar system at all, but is a foreign planet whose inhabitants invaded the Earth and that they seek conquest of our entire solar system. She also explains that Nibiru is extinct, along with its home star (sun) ZA-OS, so there is nothing to salvage, and she exposes the Anunnaki for what they are — dreadful, sneaky, deceptive, manipulative, vengeful conquerors of the Earth. A fair and insightful reading of Amitakh's article and Sitchin's writings would lead one to believe that the two authors are from opposite camps.
Amitakh then closes with the inspiring message that the Light is correcting this dreadful rule of the evil tyrants.
Copyright © 2004 by Steffan Stanford and ATTBAR