Mother Teresa 'saint of the media', controversial study says

A study conducted by Canadian researchers has called Mother Teresa "anything but a saint", a creation of an orchestrated and effective media campaign who was generous with her prayers but miserly with her foundation's millions when it came to humanity's suffering.

The controversial study, to be published this month in the journal of studies in religion/sciences called Religieuses, says that Teresa — known across the world as the apostle of the dying and the downtrodden — actually felt it was beautiful to see the poor suffer.

According to the study, the Vatican overlooked the crucial human side of Teresa — her dubious way of caring for the sick by glorifying their suffering instead of relieving it.

Instead, the Vatican went ahead with her beatification followed by canonization "to revitalize the Church and inspire the faithful especially at a time when churches are empty and the Roman authority is in decline".

Researchers Serge Larivee and Genevieve Chenard from the University of Montreal's department of psychoeducation, and Carole Senechal of the University of Ottawa's faculty of education, analysed published writings about Mother Teresa and concluded that her hallowed image, "which does not stand up to analysis of the facts, was constructed, and that her beatification was orchestrated by an effective media campaign".

According to Larivee, facts debunk Teresa's myth. He says that the Vatican, before deciding on Teresa's beatification, did not take into account "her rather dubious way of caring for the sick, her questionable political contacts, her suspicious management of the enormous sums of money she received, and her overly dogmatic views regarding ... abortion, contraception, and divorce."

At the time of her death, Teresa had 517 missions or "homes for the dying" as described by doctors visiting several of these establishments in Kolkata. They welcomed the poor and sick in more than 100 countries. Two-thirds of the people coming to these missions hoped to a find a doctor to treat them, while the other third lay dying without receiving apt care.

'Miracle of medicine'

According to the study, the doctors observed a significant lack of hygiene, even unfit conditions and a shortage of actual care, food and painkillers. They say that the problem was not a paucity of funds as the Order of the Missionaries of Charity successfully raised hundreds of millions of dollars. Researchers said that when it came to her own treatment, "she received it in a modern American hospital".

The three researchers also dug into records of her meeting in London in 1968 with the BBC's Malcom Muggeridge who had strong views against abortion and shared Mother Teresa's right-wing Catholic values.

The researchers say Muggeridge had decided to promote Teresa. In 1969, he made a eulogistic film on the missionary, promoting her by attributing to her the "first photographic miracle", when it should have been attributed to the new film stock being marketed by Kodak.

Following her death, the Vatican decided to waive the usual five-year waiting period to open the beatification process. According to the researchers, one of the miracles attributed to Mother Theresa is the healing of Monica Besra, who suffered from intense abdominal pain, after a medallion blessed by her was placed on Besra's abdomen.

Larivee said, "Her doctors thought otherwise: the ovarian cyst and the tuberculosis from which she suffered were healed by the drugs they had given her. The Vatican, nevertheless, concluded that it was a miracle. Mother Teresa's popularity was such that she had become untouchable for the population, which had already declared her a saint."

Larivee however signs off on a surprisingly positive note and says there could also be a positive effect of the Mother Teresa myth. "If the extraordinary image of Mother Teresa conveyed in the collective imagination has encouraged humanitarian initiatives that are genuinely engaged with those crushed by poverty, we can only rejoice," they signed off. 

Courtesy: Times of India Mother Theresa Controversy 

Also read;  Mother Theresa's Charity Frauds

Native American Rights

he history of federal policy toward Native Americans has reflected changing ideas about whether Indians should be assimilated into white society or whether tribes should retain their sovereignty—their right to be independent and selfgoverning entities. Native Americans have always maintained that each individual tribe is a sovereign nation and should therefore be authorized to govern itself without outside influence. Official recognition of Native American sovereignty has fluctuated according to the beliefs of presidents, Congress, and the U.S. Supreme Court. Consequently, the rights of Native Americans have been expanded and curtailed at various times throughout the nation’s history.

When Europeans first colonized North America, each settlement recognized its neighboring Indian tribes as self-governing, independent entities. The settlers negotiated treaties with Indians to secure peace and regulate trade and the expansion of white settlements. After the Revolutionary War, the U.S. Constitution gave Congress “plenary” power over all tribes; Congress continued to recognize Indian tribes as foreign nations and negotiated treaties with them as equal governments.

Federal policy toward America’s native residents changed, however, when Andrew Jackson—renowned for his military campaigns against the Indians—became president in 1829. The Indian Removal Act of 1830 required most of the eastern tribes to give up their lands and move west of the Mississippi River, despite any guarantees of permanent residence in their existing treaties with the government. When the Cherokees sued the state of Georgia in 1831 to prevent the enforcement of the act, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of the state, declaring that Indian tribes were “domestic dependent nations” that had lost their status as independent, foreign nations. Forty years later, Congress enacted legislation that changed the status of tribes forever; the new law (known as Section 71) eliminated the need for treaties with the Indian nations altogether by allowing Congress to use legislation— which did not require the Indians’ consent—to govern the tribes.

The Dawes Act of 1887 further changed the lives of Indians. The act, also known as the General Allotment Act, attempted to force the assimilation of Indians into white culture by mandating the education of Indian children in specially built schools, forbidding Native American ceremonies, and dismantling the reservations. Individual Indians were given plots of reservation land to farm; the remaining land was sold to white farmers. Congress hoped that surrounding the Indians with white culture would encourage them to adopt white beliefs and practices, but this policy failed abysmally because most Indians did not want to give up their culture.

During the Great Depression, Congress passed legislation intended to restore some sovereignty to Indian tribes: the Indian Reorganization Act (IRA) of 1934. The purpose of the new law was to “rehabilitate the Indian’s economic life and to give him a chance to develop the initiative destroyed by a century of oppression and paternalism.” The IRA prohibited the further breakdown of reservations, added land to existing reservations, and encouraged tribes to adopt their own constitutions and become self-governing.

Federal Indian policy shifted course again in 1953 under a congressional resolution known as “termination.” The new policy was an attempt to assimilate Native Americans into white society and to encourage self-sufficiency by terminating federal benefits to the tribes and by abolishing the reservations. Under this policy, federal benefits for more than one hundred tribes were eliminated. Many reservations were broken up, tribal assets were distributed among the tribes’ members, and tribal governments were dissolved. Moreover, for the first time Congress gave some state governments full jurisdiction over criminal offenses and partial jurisdiction over civil matters that occurred on the reservations. Up until then, the states had never had any jurisdiction over Native Americans, their land, or their property.

From the 1960s through the 1980s, several laws were enacted that were designed to secure Native American rights and encourage development on Indian reservations. One new law sought to promote self-determination and economic development by forbidding states to acquire any more authority over tribes without the tribe’s express approval (1968). Other legislation established loan programs to develop Native American businesses and resources (1968); allowed tribes to administer federal programs themselves (1975); granted tribes many of the tax benefits enjoyed by state governments (1982); and permitted tribes to sponsor high-stakes bingo and gambling in states that permitted any other form of gambling (1988).

The Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (IGRA) of 1988 has been the cause of much debate in recent years. The law requires tribes to negotiate agreements, or “compacts,” with state governments about the types of gambling that will be allowed on their reservations. The act also ensures that Indian casinos are wholly owned by the tribe so that the tribe collects the profits. Neither the states nor the tribes are entirely happy with IGRA; the states maintain that the act forces them to accept forms of gambling that they may not want, while the tribes contend that the act limits their sovereignty by forcing them to negotiate with the states.

Another disagreement between the tribes and the states concerns the revenues from Indian casino gambling and other tribal businesses. In 1996, profits from Indian gaming in over 230 high-stakes bingo parlors and gambling casinos in 29 states were about $6 billion. Under IGRA, tribes are required to use their gaming revenues to pay for tribal government operations and services, to improve the welfare of their citizens, to support economic development, and to make charitable donations. The tribes maintain that gaming proceeds have given them the money they long have needed to pull themselves out of poverty, become selfsufficient, preserve their heritage, and take charge of their future. “The tribes don’t have any money unless we do gaming, because we don’t have a tax base,” asserts Rick Hill, a Wisconsin Oneida Indian and chairman of the National Indian Gaming Association. “We have lived in Third World poverty conditions, but gaming has proven to be mutually beneficial to state and tribal governments.” While the states are unable to tax tribal revenues, Hill explains, Indian gaming is beneficial to states because state governments can tax the non-Indian businesses—such as hotels and restaurants and their suppliers—that spring up around the casinos. Native Americans adamantly insist that tribal enterprises remain untaxed by state governments. Ada Deer, assistant secretary of Indian Affairs, asserts that Indian tribes are sovereign governments and, as such, are immune from taxation by the state:

It is a fundamental principle of law that governments do not tax other governments. The logic is that government revenues should be used to support the governmental services, functions, and activities of each respective government.

While the tribes may believe that gaming income benefits both Indians and non-Indians, others think differently. According to some state and local government officials, Indian gaming revenues should be subject to the same taxes as non-Indian casinos. They argue that the high numbers of customers at the reservations’ casinos put a strain on the local roads and police and fire departments. Critics complain that the casinos receive the benefits of improved roads and fire and police protection, yet they do not pay their fair share to support these services. Such a drain on the limited tax revenues is unfair, they maintain.

Furthermore, according to some critics of Indian gaming, the proceeds from casinos and other tribal enterprises put non-Indian businesses at a distinct disadvantage. Indian-owned reservation businesses—such as casinos, hotels, restaurants, gas stations, and stores—do not have to pay business, property, or sales taxes. Non-Indian companies, on the other hand, are required to pay such taxes and must pass on the cost to the consumer in the form of higher prices.

Critics contend that the higher prices charged by non-Indian businesses encourage many consumers to make their purchases on the reservation, thus threatening the survival of non-Indian businesses.
The debate over taxation reflects the broader question of sovereignty—that is, whether or not Indian tribes should be considered independent, self-governing entities. Sovereignty is at the heart of the issues considered in Native American Rights: Current Controversies. Throughout this anthology, authors discuss the rights of Native Americans regarding Indian culture, religion, gaming, and control over natural resources.

http://www.enotes.com/native-american-article

African Chinese

At about 35,000 B.C. a group of these African Chinese; later known to us as the Jomon, took this route and entered Japan, they became the first Humans to inhabit the Japanese Islands. Later, another group; Known to us as the Ainu, followed.

 Oddly Indians were Not part of this group. Today, their genes can still be found in 40% of modern Japanese, as well as Mongolians and Tibetans- Past and Present Kings & Queens's

African Origins of Xtianity

The basis of morality, justice, resurrection, virgin birth, Holy Ghost, Trinity, humanized Trinity, the notion of the last judgment, with Ausar as judge (God) of the dead, myths and philosophies of all religions, law and order in society, what constitutes good governance and democracy, all originated from the ‘Great Quarrel’’ and the ‘Judgment of the Night of Weighing Words,’ of the Mystery System.

Also in the ‘Great Quarrel,’ is the origin of the ‘Virgin Birth,’ and the Immaculate Conception myths, four thousand, four hundred and twenty-five years before the Christian version. Still clearly visible today in the Temple of Ausar (Osiris), in Abydos, are pictures of the ‘Virgin Birth’ and the ‘Resurrection,’ showing Osiris’ joystick perpendicular to his body as the symbol of resurrection and ‘Virgin Birth.’

Africans gave the world the concept against murder as a result of the judgment of the ‘Great Quarrel‘ between Auset, Heru and Set. Heru (who the Greeks called Horus), and all the other Gods, saw the murder of Ausar by his brother Set, as evil. A murder that preceded the Cain and Abel copy story by four thousand, four hundred and twenty-five years.

Godfrey Higgins in Anacalypsis, Vol. 1, tells us “we have found the Black complexion or something relating to it whenever we have approached the origins of nations. The Alma Mater, the Goddess Multimammia, the founders of the oracles, the Memnon or first idols were always Black. Venus, Jupiter, Apollo, Bacchus, Hercules, Ammon, Asteroth, Adonis, Horus, Apis, Osiris, in short all the wood and stone Deities were Black. They remain as they were first made in very remote times.” In the Celtic Druids, Higgins says: “The Greek gods were adaptations of the Egyptian ones, hence the earliest ones of Greece were also Black. ‘Ethiop is a title of Zeus who was the Father of the Gods among the Greeks.”

Council of Nicaea (325 CE). Dr. Martyn Percy, the famous canon expert once wrote and I quote: “The Bible did not arrive by fax from heaven.” The Bible is a creation of man. Man, not God, writes history, and history is always from the perspective of the conqueror, not the conquered. It is the elite, the most powerful in society, that defines the society’s reality, and that is exactly what Constantine did after subduing African influence in the world.

In Emperor Constantine’s days, the official Roman religion was Sun worship (i.e. the African Egyptian cult of Sol Invictus or the Invincible Sun). They called it the Jovian Mystery System and Constantine was the Chief priest. In fact, Constantine, a Pagan throughout his lifetime, was hurriedly baptized on his death bed, too weak to protest. During the reign of Constantine, and over three hundred years after the alleged crucifixion of Jesus, the Christian population had grown to the extent of posing serious threat to the unity of Rome.

The Christians were constantly warring with the Pagans and threatening to tear Rome apart. Constantine, a smart opportunist, decided to side with the larger group. History books on the issue marvel at the way Constantine converted his Sun God worshippers to Christianity. He did it by creating an amalgam, a hybrid, a fusion of Pagan symbols, dates, rituals, and ideas, into the growing Pagan-Christian traditions of the time, to produce something that compromised and overwhelmed both parties. Constantine produced a sacred entity outside the scope of the human world whose power was, therefore, unchallengeable by mare mortals, and called it the Roman Catholic Church. To do this, he conveyed his 325 CE Council of Nicaea that produced the Nicaea creed. The Nicaea Council is claimed by the Church fathers to have been called principally to thwart the Arian heresy and assert the headship of Jesus over Christendom.

The problem really was whether Auset (who was the Virgin Birth Mother in the ancient African Mystery System, imbibed by the Jovian Mystery, which was being adapted by the Church fathers, should continue to take precedence over her son Horus, as in the ancient African myth). In the end, Ausar (re-named Yahweh) retained his double roles as the Holy Ghost or God, (misunderstood by Christians as the universal ‘Spirit’), and as (human ‘Father’ in the African Mysteries 4,425 years earlier), (who became the Christian Ghost Impregnator) of Mother Auset, re-named Mary, with the Virgin Son, Horus, (renamed Jesus).

In other words, “Holy” and “Virgin Birth” were transferred to Jesus and Mary, from Horus and Auset. Jesus became born in Bethlehem and acquired higher rank than his contrived mother. He was supposed to be her first child and to have been miraculously conceived. His foster-father was given the name Joseph, and the carpentry profession, to appeal to humility. The name ‘Christ’ came from the Greek translation of Christos (meaning anointed), taken from the Hebrew title of Messiah. Church fathers at the Nicaea Council in 325 CE, decided that Jesus, who was supposed to have been baptized as and called Emmanuel before the Conference, was born in Bethlehem in Judea. All these were happening some 325 years after the purported death of Jesus.

Nothing in Christianity was original. The Pagan’s Sun disks became the haloes of the Catholic saints, and Auset’s pictogram nursing her Virgin birth son Horus, became the model for the image of Virgin Mary nursing the baby Jesus. All the elements of the Catholic rituals, the mitre, the doxology, the altar, and the communion (act of God-eating), were all taken from African Pagans’ rites. The Christians, whose original holy day was the Jewish Sabbath of Saturday, adopted the Pagan’s holy day, Sunday. Constantine shifted the Christians’ holy day to the Pagans’ veneration day, Sunday. So, when Christians go to Church on Sundays, they are actually there paying tribute to the African Sun God.

St Nicholas, Santa Nikolaus, better known as Santa Claus, the patron saint of children whose feast day is actually Dec. 6, was incorporated into the Christmas festival to liven things up and replace the Sun-god worshippers’ feasting, and exchange of gifts. Ausar (Osiris) was the God of agriculture and Diop says: “The idea of a tree associated with the birth of Jesus is taken from Osiris. Osiris’ symbol was a tree without branches, set up to announce the resurrection of plant life. This was an impressive agrarian rite characterizing a sedentary society. The plant, symbol of Osiris, was called Djed: standing erect, planted upright. Djan: vertical; Djed-Djed oral: very erect (intensification of Djed); Djen: a post. …, once again we see, on retracing the course of time, that more than one feature of western civilization, whose origin has been forgotten loses its enigmatic character when linked with its African source.”

The Egyptian God Ausar (Osiris) was anointed by an Egyptian priest in 4100 BCE. Jesus was allegedly baptized or initiated by John the Baptist in early CE. Egyptian “Ab” – heart, represents Osiris. A person with ‘Pure, Light’ heart is Osiris in the Pagan’s mysteries. He is as ‘Light’ as ‘Feather.’ Every person’s heart is weighed on Isis or Goddess Maat’s feather scale. To balance on it, is to be Osiris pure and sinless. T[b]his is Osiris’ conquering power over all as ‘Lord and God.’ Christianity and other religions adopted these African concepts, replacing the African God Horus with their own intermediaries, (i.e. Jesus, Muhammad, Buddha, etc). [/b]

Six thousand years ago, our primitive ancestors believed that the Moon and the Sun were gods; that Semiramis was hatched from an egg that fell from the Moon; that Auser’s ghost pregnated Auset for the first human Virgin Birth and that Auser resurrected and ascended to heaven to seat in judgment over the dead. These rather infantile ideas now, were sustained by our confused Church fathers who declared surgical operations, devils work in 1302 CE; burnt Nicholas Copernicus at the stake in 1543 CE, for claiming that the Earth is round; burnt Giordano Bruno at the stake in 1600 CE, for claiming that humans would fly one day in machines. The Church said if God wanted humans to fly, He would have given us wings. The Church fathers put Galileo under house arrest until he died in 1642 CE, for saying that the Earth is round and that it is revolving around the sun. The Church said, the Earth does not move, it is like a rooster on water carried by four mighty horses. In 1758 CE, the Church described inoculation and vaccination as Satan’s jobs.

Judeo-Christianity mystified the religious world by elevating their ancestor Gods with the capital letter ‘G’ and down-grading other people’s Gods with the small letter ‘g.’ All Gods, whether spelt with the capital letter ‘G’ or the small letter ‘g’ are ancestors who at one time or the other lived here on earth. Therefore, if intermediary Gods are necessary for anyone, they would not be alien ancestors. Whites and Arabs gave Africans, White ancestors to worship. The ultimate or universal source of spirituality or spiritual energy (Tu-SoS) is a higher spiritual energy source than the Judeo-Christian, Islamic God. Traditional Africans, the ancestors of mankind, instinctively know this. That is why African traditional religion is so powerful. No one in the world worships the ultimate spiritual energy source. That is because, like light, it does not ask to be worshipped. It is not a spirit; it is not transient; it is not a God. All Gods are ancestral spirits that humans create from deities of the spirit world.

Any race that forgets her ancestors is doomed to perpetual slavery and cannot make progress. We can begin right now to reclaim our essence and take back our leadership of the world from where our illustrious ancestors were pushed off inelegantly some 2000 years ago. The place to start is in our hearts and our spirit selves. We must reconcile with our ancestors. We must stop living a lie and individually vigorously, embark on efforts to recover our lost essence and grounds.

also see our post:
Prophetic Ride
Moses Stole the Ten commandments
The Jewish Myth  
Making of a Heretic - The Superfluous Trinity

Being indigenous

Being nice has been the number one cause for the genocide against indigenous people by invading vermins..

If you revise history from the past onto the new age, you will find that those who gave great hospitality to strangers always ended up looking at the barrel of a gun.

Being nice in the wilderness will get the gazelles eating by lions, a wilderbeast attack by an Hyena. Humanity is parallel to the jungle, thus countries build great armies with unbelievable arsenal of weapons, because they don't count on each other's friendship and sincerity.

Europeans invaded New Zealand, Australia, North America, South America and Africa and took possession of great amount of land area, thus marginalized the owners of these lands, yet they set up the most rigid immigration laws on something they stole.

What if indigenous people had the same mentality as Europeans? The belief that, one is superior than everybody on Earth and some fellow in the sky gives them authority on Humanity to be the destroyers, saviors, Jesus and so on. Perhaps, things would have turned out quite differently

The Arab Origins of Asian Muslims.

Every single Muslim in the subcontinent believes s/he is of Arab descent. If not direct Arab descent, then the illustrious ancestor had come from either Iran or Bukhara. Interestingly, the ancestor is always a great general or a saint. Never ever have we heard anyone boasting of an intellectual for a forebear. We hear of the progeny of savage robber kings, but there is no one who claims Abu Rehan Al-Beruni or Ibn Rushd as a distant sire.

Arab origin is the favourite fiction of all subcontinental Muslims. Most claim their ancestor arrived in Sindh with the army under Mohammad bin Qasim (MbQ). But, I have heard of lineages reaching back to Old Testament prophets as well. An elderly Janjua (Rajput), from the Salt Range told me of a forefather named Ar, a son of the Prophet Isaac. Ar, he said, was the ancestor of the races that spoke the Aryan tongue!
Touted as a local intellectual, this worthy was unmindful of the fact that Aryan was not a tribal name but a linguistic classification. Neither could he tell me how the name Ar, not being in the Old Testament, had reached him. He insisted this name headed his family tree and was, therefore true. The chart, written on a piece of rather newish paper had been, the Janjua insisted, copied from an old original. The original was of course destroyed after the copy was made.

The Arains flaunt Salim al Raee as their father — the clan being called after his surname. A great and valiant general in the army of MbQ, this man was from an agricultural family of Syria, so the Tarikh-e-Araian tells us. Closer to our times, the Arains are indeed acclaimed for their green thumb for which reason Shah Jehan relocated a large bunch of them to mind the newly laid out Shalimar Garden of Lahore. Today, they are a very rich clan in Baghbanpura.

The Tarikh expounds on this fictional ancestor’s noble background and courage in battle to the extent that he almost outshines MbQ. But it does not give us any source or reference for the rubbish that sullies its pages. There are two authentic histories of the Arab conquest of Sindh. Ahmad Al Biladhuri’s Futuh ul Buladan (written circa 860) and Hamid bin Ali Kufi’s Tarikh-e-Hind wa Sindh, translated first into the Persian as Fatehnama Sindh and then into Sindhi as the Chachnama (written circa 1200).
There are dozens of names sprinkled across the pages of both works, but no mention is made of a blue-blooded warrior called Salim al Raee. There are other histories besides these two works which also disregard this name for the only reason that such a man never existed.

The Awans, similarly, have a fictional ancestor called Qutb Shah from the line of the last caliph of the Rightly-Guided Caliphs. My friend Kaiser Tufail, an Arain, has had himself genetically tested from the US. He has no trace of Arab blood. His line comes from what is now Uzbekistan and has lived from early historic times in the subcontinent. The rest of us of this clan will see similar results should we go through this exercise. Kaiser had his son-in-law, an Awan, also tested. He, too, is singularly clean of Arab genes.
Most of us are the progeny of converts. In their need to escape the discrimination of the so-called higher castes, our ancestors converted to a religion that in theory claimed to profess human equality regardless of colour or caste. I use the words ‘in theory’ because even as the Arabs converted our ancestors to Islam, they discriminated against them for being “Hindis” as we learn this from Ibn Batuta’s own prejudices. And he is not alone.

Consequently, even after conversion, my ancestors, poor agriculturists, were looked down upon by the Arabs and even those who had converted earlier the same way as they were by the Brahmans when they professed their Vedic belief. Within a generation or two, those early converts began the great lie of Arab ancestry to be equal to other converts and the Arabs. This became universal with time.
The challenge then is for all those, Baloch, Pathan, Punjabi et al, who have invented illegitimate fathers for ourselves to get ourselves tested and know the bitter truth.

From:
The Arab Origins

Moses stole the 10 commandments.

To all Christians; Sorry God didn't give the 10 commandments to Moses.

The Hebrews fabricated what was already there and said god gave it to them. Here are the Original 42 laws of MAAT.

42 Negative Confessions (Papyrus of Ani)

I have not committed sin.

I have not committed robbery with violence.
I have not stolen.
I have not slain men and women.
I have not stolen grain.
I have not purloined offerings.
I have not stolen the property of the gods.
I have not uttered lies.
I have not carried away food.
I have not uttered curses.
I have not committed adultery, I have not lain with men.
I have made none to weep.
I have not eaten the heart [i.e I have not grieved uselessly, or felt remorse].
I have not attacked any man.
I am not a man of deceit.
I have not stolen cultivated land.
I have not been an eavesdropper.
I have slandered [no man].
I have not been angry without just cause.
I have not debauched the wife of any man.
I have not committed acts of sodomy
I have not polluted myself.
I have terrorised none.
I have not transgressed [the Law].
I have not been wroth.
I have not shut my ears to the words of truth.
I have not blasphemed.
I am not a man of violence.
I am not a stirrer up of strife (or a disturber of the peace).
I have not acted (or judged) with undue haste.
I have not pried into matters.
I have not multiplied my words in speaking.
I have wronged none, I have done no evil.
I have not worked witchcraft against the King (or blasphemed against the King).
I have never stopped [the flow of] water.
I have never raised my voice (spoken arrogantly, or in anger).
I have not cursed (or blasphemed) God.
I have not acted with evil rage.
I have not stolen the bread of the gods.
I have not carried away the khenfu cakes from the Spirits of the dead.
I have not snatched away the bread of the child, nor treated with contempt the god of my city.
I have not slain the cattle belonging to the gods.

 

http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=402887966458674&set=a.359505170796954.84512.359503814130423&type=1&relevant_count=1&ref=nf