Annunaki History And The Role Of Reptilian ET’s
In May 2003 I was E-
mailing a “
” to people I was meeting on the net in which I
described what I know or suspect regarding the ET colonial power that is currently holding us in slaveryand has been doing so for the past several millennia. I have written a lot of papers about this andexplained this a lot in E-mails and private conversations.
” was cut
-and-pasted from old papers and E-mails.It is still rough and I cannot vouch that everything in it is correct with 100% certainty, but this is the best I
have at the moment. I’m still planning to clean it up, support it with more facts and evidence, and turn it
into a book.But here is what I have so far:
A clarification is in order here. Four thousands years ago I would not have had to tell you this, since ifyou lived in those times you would have been taught this in school, but 4000 years of a powerfuldirected misinf
ormation campaign have taken their toll, and it’ll take me some effort here to clarify some
basics for you.
The ancient peoples had
in the sense you are probably accustomed to. Consider, for example,the ancient Near East. Throughout the two millennia preceding the birth of Christ, this area waspolitically dominated by the two powerful kingdoms of
. The language spokenthroughout the area was
The popular notions about those people’s gods and religion are erroneous,
however. These incorrectnotions stem quite simply from a mistranslation of one Akkadian word. The Akkadian cuneiform tabletsspeak extensively about the affairs of
. The word “
” has been commonly mistranslated as “
and this is what gives rise to the popular notions about ancient Near Eastern religion.
The entire hypothesis that the ancient Near Eastern people had a religion rests on only one support, and
that is the interpretation of “
” as “
”. If this support is shown to be false, as i
t will be momentarily,the entire hypothesis of ancient Near Eastern religion collapses and must be discarded.
The premise that “
” means “
” is false simply because this is not what the
ancient Akkadian word
means. Its literal meaning in
”. This literal meaning is accepted by the mainstreamlinguists, and yet they continue to claim that even though “
” is the literal meaning, what the
really meant was “
”. Why, I wonder,
suchinsistence? What evidence is this claim based on?
All evidence in fact points that the literal meaning of “
” as “
” was in fact the intended meaning.
were clearly anthropomorphic beings much taller than ordinary humans. In every depiction where
and ordinary people are shown side by side the
are much taller. From both ancient evidence andsome modern evidence to be discussed, I have estimated the height of the ilu as 4.5 m, or 14 to 15 ft.
But who were these
How did such tall people come into being?
Were they members of a now extinct evolutionary branch of the human species, the supposedHomo Gigantus?
Were they genetic aberrations?
Were there some plants in antiquity that naturally produced growth hormones potent enough tocreate such giants?