peace and hotep,

oshun auset, when you state:

***I just think her interpretation of the origin of the cross doesn't quite work for the previousely mentioned reasons...it doesn't sem to quite fit into her theory properly...but I understand that wasn't the main thrust of the book anyhow...

remember that she was not explaining the origin of the cross but how by learning to look at the symbols and brain processes of 'white' supremacy, we:

....the victims of oppression accurately and completely decode the system and its objective of oppression and once they fully analyze the symbols and patterns of logic, thought, speech, action, emotional response and perception (consciously or unconsciously determined) that constitute the system, the oppressed will be able to recognize their own behavior effectively. this reorganization will result in self/group-respect and support, and thereby end their oppression.
----dr.welsing, isis papers, "learning to look at symbols, ch.4

oshun auset, in the preface, dr.welsing speaks of your namesake isis, as 'the great african goddess". if you do not have a copy, i can relay the doctors reasoning for naming her work after isis/auset. it has to do withe truth and justice.

the cress theory of color-confrontation and racism (white supremacy)is beyond debate in academic circles. oshun auset, can ones name one western institution that can blatantly sweep aside what dr.welsing had provided? name one that has openly debated the cress theory.

the disclaimers of dr welsing work are basically laymen and laywomen.

oshun auset, when martin bernal submitted 'black athena', there was at the least a very bad rebuttal("black athena revisited") by mary leftkowitz(welsley college?)which was released to her dismay. bernal retains his credentials.

but who has publicly rebuted dr. welsing? if their is one, please direct me to it.

oshun auset, why does the symbolisms of christianity not fit into the cress theory?

freedomisahapislave