For Acharya's Main Website, go to

TBK News Table of Contents

Bookmark and Share
Join the TBK Mailing List!
Enter your name and email address below to receive news and cutting edge commentary from Acharya!

Subscribe  Unsubscribe 

Monday, September 18, 2006

The Bible is Repulsive

This is a great video that everyone should watch immediately! The fact is that the Bible is repulsive, and this bizarre psychosis that not only prevents people from seeing this fact but actually allows them to view the Bible as something "sacred" and "holy" needs to be treated as a collective mental illness that is destroying the world.

The people who created this video are wonderful.

Proving the Bible is Repulsive

Tuesday, September 12, 2006

Is Lance Armstrong a Psycho - or a Victim?

When I first heard about Lance Armstrong's testicular cancer years ago, my immediate thought was, "He's been using steroids." At the time, I figured many people must have had the same thought. Not knowing much about Armstrong or the sport of cycling but basing my thoughts on the doping scandals in other sports, such as the Olympics, I also figured that it was well known and admitted that Armstrong had been using steroids. I found it unfathomable that someone so young and a world class athlete could be riddled with testicular cancer if he had not been doping. Even though the stigma of such activity is quite heavy, I still was quite surprised to learn that Armstrong, when confronted with the issue, had actually denied using steroids and other performance enhancement drugs. Even with such a stigma, many athletes over the years had come clean, so to speak, when confronted with evident difficulties associated with doping - including getting busted. And then there was the sad story of NFL player Lyle Alzado, cut down in the prime of life at age 42 by brain cancer that may have been caused or exacerbated by doping. The assertion that he caused his brain cancer by heavy use of steroids was made by Alzado himself, but it is claimed that no scientific studies have found a solid link. Said Alzado, "Ninety per cent of the athletes I know are on the stuff."

And so, it would seem, are the majority of cyclists on steroids and other such drugs, if the testimony of ex-cycling trainer Willy Voet has any merit. This fact makes Armstrong's denial all that more implausible, particularly with the testimony by his former friend Frankie Andreu and his wife, Betsy, who both claimed they overheard Armstrong tell his doctor that he had used "steroids, testosterone, cortisone, growth hormone and EPO." Armstrong's doctor, however, denies the claim.

The question needs to be asked, is Lance Armstrong a psycho - or a victim? As has been pointed out, he is a role model for athletes and cancer survivors the world over, and he is doing a tremendous disservice to both, if he is lying. How many impressionable kids became cyclists because of him, and then were possibly drawn into the seedy doping world, to risk side effects that could have been prevented if their hero had copped to his use, supposing that he is guilty? Moreover, when my own mother became fatally ill with ovarian cancer, she took strength in Armstrong's recovery, although I did caution her about my suspicions regarding his cancer cause. She was quite disappointed to hear that, and I could sense her becoming deflated in her battle. My beloved mother was very strong, so she turned her mind to other inspiration, but she finally succumbed to the cancer in 2004. In any event, it would behoove Armstrong to tell the truth, presuming he is not.

Perhaps Armstrong is telling the truth and is merely a victim of jealous and vicious gossip? Considering what trainer Voet has said about non-doping cyclists ending up at the "back of the pack," if Armstrong is being truthful, he would have to be hailed as one of the greatest athletes ever. If not, well, he would have to be considered a psycho.

P.S. I'm appending this entry to state that, after careful consideration of information provided by others (thank you, Steve P.), I do believe we must give Lance Armstrong the benefit of the doubt, especially since he's never tested positive for anything. He was apparently a world class athlete long before he began in cycling, when he was a youth who evidently could not have used drugs. As someone who has been on the receiving end of hideous, false rumors from very vicious and vindictive people, I can relate if Armstrong is being unfairly maligned.

P.P.S. The assertion in the following article that "one of the possible side effects of prolonged steroid use is testicular cancer" appears to be controversial, as other claim there has been no scientific evidence linking steroid use to testicular cancer:
"Fears about steroid use also include other cancers, heart enlargement, increased blood pressure, elevated cholesterol levels, and musculoskeletal injuries. Upon closer examination, these too turn out to be overblown. Reports associating heart enlargement, or cardiomegaly, with steroid use often ignore the role of natural, nonthreatening enlargement brought on by prolonged physical exertion, not to mention the effects of alcohol abuse. The relationship is unclear at best. Evidence supporting a link between steroids and ligament and tendon damage is weak, since steroid-related injuries are virtually indistinguishable from those occurring normally. And blood pressure problems, according to Yesalis, have been exaggerated. There is some associative evidence that steroid use can increase the risk of prostate cancer, but this link has yet to be borne out in a laboratory setting. No studies of any kind link the use of anabolics to testicular cancer."

Source: Pumped Up Hysteria
The truth is out there - Cycling - Yahoo! Sports
E.M. Swift,

Is the truth finally catching up with Lance Armstrong, and is this one race the seven-time Tour de France champion may not be able to win?

In Tuesday's New York Times, two of Armstrong's former U.S. Postal Service teammates admitted to having used EPO, an illegal performance-enhancing drug, at some point in 1999, the first year Armstrong won the Tour de France. While neither said they saw Armstrong do the same, the implication was that the drug use was common knowledge within the team. 'The environment was certainly one of, to be accepted, you had to use doping products,' said one of Armstrong's teammates, who requested anonymity, fearing reprisals from the notoriously vindictive Armstrong, who still wields considerable power in cycling.

The other teammate was 39-year-old Frankie Andreu, a domestique who competed professionally for 12 years and was once Armstrong's close friend and roommate. He's now a motivational speaker and real-estate dealer in Dearborn, Mich. He said he only used EPO 'for a couple of races' and was speaking out in hopes of cleaning up his tainted sport.

More interesting -- to me, anyway -- was the testimony the Times uncovered that Andreu and his wife, Betsy, gave last fall during a lawsuit between Armstrong and SCA Promotions. The company had withheld a $5 million bonus it owed Armstrong after he won the '04 Tour because of doping allegations.

The suit was eventually settled out of court in Armstrong's favor, but in their sworn testimony the Andreus said that when they visited Armstrong in the hospital after he'd been diagnosed with testicular cancer, they'd heard him tell his oncologists that he'd used 'steroids, testosterone, cortisone, growth hormone and EPO.' Their testimony was disputed by the doctor who administered Armstrong's chemotherapy at Indiana University Medical Center. In the same trial, Armstrong testified that his doctors never asked him if he'd used performance-enhancing drugs, and that he'd never used those substances.

Which testimony is more credible? The Andreus' or Armstrong's? Ask yourself which party had the most to gain by lying. And why is that particular testimony significant? Because one of the possible side effects of prolonged steroid use is testicular cancer. It's impossible to prove, but if what the Andreus testified to under oath is true, than Lance Armstrong, role model and hero to so many cancer survivors, may very well have helped bring about his own cancer through his use of performance-enhancing drugs. Young athletes tempted to go down that road need to know if that's the case."

Monday, September 11, 2006

Courageous Woman Criticizes Religious Addiction

Taslima Nasreen is a famous Bangladeshi woman who was compelled to flee her native country because she dared to criticize Islam and to raise up secular ideals in that fanatically Muslim nation. She is especially concerned with the oppression of women, the true extent of which is so appalling it is impossible to look at it for too long without feeling deathly ill. Such courageous and honorable individuals are sorely needed on this planet of vast madness.

Religion has proved itself repeatedly throughout history to be a deleterious addiction that is no respecter of persons or cultures but impels its crazed junkies to destroy anyone and anything in their path for a fix.
Taslima concerned by `addiction to religion
Kolkata, Sept 11: Expressing concern at the rise in 'addiction to religion' among different communities, Bangladeshi author Taslima Nasreen has said Muslim countries should embrace secularism and modern values, including in the Madarasa system of education.

Taslima said the 'addiction to religion' could be seen among Muslims, Hindus, Christians and others, and was manifested in the greater number of youths regularly visiting places of worship.

'This shows that youths are becoming conformists, going by conventions, customs and superstitions and not following their own powers of rational reasoning. This does not augur well for a country. One should have the power to debate, to argue, to reason,' she said in an interview.

At the same time, she said, Muslim nations need to embrace secularism and reform their educational systems.

'Muslims countries should embrace secularism, work for instilling modern values among the backward sections and carry out reforms in education, which is mostly centered in Madrasas at present,' Taslima said.

Only by helping the average Muslim to join the mainstream of life could their seclusion be avoided, she said.

Pointing out that she was not against any religion, Taslima said she did not believe in any faith and was a secularist and a humanist who believed in protecting the rights of the oppressed through her writing.

She asserted that she spoke out against the 'pitiable condition' of women in every society, every community - be it Hindu, Muslim or Christian.

Bureau Report

Monday, September 04, 2006

Crocodile Hunter Steve Irwin killed

Oh no! How very upsetting. I loved this guy. He was so exciting and amiable, and he brought so much light to the world. The world is poorer tonight. How very, very sad. My heart goes out to his family.

Om shanti shanti om.
Crocodile Hunter Steve Irwin killed
37 minutes ago

BRISBANE, Australia - Steve Irwin, the hugely popular Australian television personality and environmentalist known as the 'Crocodile Hunter,' was killed Monday by a stingray during a diving expedition, Australian media said. He was 44.

Irwin was filming an underwater documentary on the Great Barrier Reef in northeastern Queensland state when the accident occurred, Sydney's The Daily Telegraph newspaper reported on its Web site.

The Australian Broadcasting Corp. said Irwin was diving near Low Isles Reef near the resort town of Port Douglas, about 1,260 miles north of the state capital of Brisbane.

Queensland ambulance service spokesman Bob Hamil confirmed that a diver had been killed by a stingray off Lowe Isles Reef but refused to say who the victim was until relatives had been notified."

Saturday, September 02, 2006

In Search of Religion's Rosetta Stones

I've just had part one of a brand-new three part article published in "The New Archaeology Review," which is a VERY slick magazine. To my knowledge, TNAR is only available online, unfortunately, as a PDR file. I have uploaded it to my site.

My article is entitled "In Search of Religion's Rosetta Stones" and deals with the correspondence between ancient megalithic ruins and astrotheology.

Here is an excerpt:

Today we are in a very exciting period of the relatively new science of archaeology, which has only been in serious development in the modern era for the past couple hundreds years. I say "modern" because it is clear that in ancient times some members of society were as fascinated with the human past as they are today, setting up, for example, remarkable museums and libraries to rival our own. In any event, perhaps it would not be unfair to state that we moderns are just now catching up to our ancestors in some of our scientific capacities, such that we can peer more clearly into our own captivating past. One of the areas in which we are slowly but surely uncovering our amazing roots is the science of archaeoastronomy, or "the study of the knowledge, interpretations, and practices of ancient cultures regarding celestial objects or phenomena," which reveals that many ancient societies were not composed of the barbaric cavemen commonly depicted but possessed astoundingly advanced scientific capabilities. Of course, anyone who has studied the Great Pyramid for even a short while cannot doubt the accuracy of that statement, as concerns the engineering abilities of the people who built it. In addition to such an astonishing building capacity came knowledge of the heavens and earth that even by our supposedly sophisticated standards of today is impressive. I am referring specifically to the astronomical alignments of the world's megalithic ruins, as well as other edifices, structures and sites found around the globe dating back hundreds to many thousands of years. Along with this very profound ancient knowledge of astronomy comes an equally profound, if mystifying, religious development also appearing worldwide. It is to this ancient religion or astrotheology that I would like to turn the reader's attention. It is my conviction that one cannot understand the world's major religions without placing them firmly within their astrotheological context. Devoid of the astrotheological underpinnings, these religions are all shadowy fallacies, no matter how hard one tries to make sense otherwise of them or how much falsified history is attached to them."