UFOs or Demons (UPDATED)

(This post is tied to a similar discussion of Ghost)

Take note I do not endorse everything noted in this documentary or the articles, but the similarity between alien encounters, spiritism (like mediums), ghosts, the occult, and the like, is the important issue here ~ NOT “government conspiracies” or the like.

While this documentary is dated, the DVD for purchase (I did edit it a bit), and here.

Two decent articles on the issue of UFOs and the Christian worldview, are as follows:

And the best books on the subject are by William Alnor!

Another great book, and a quick read, is Ron Rhodes book,

A note from my Facebook about this and my other post:

I posted two older documentaries (they are from the 80’s, so expect the pat narrator and eerie music) and some links of my own thoughts on the matter.

These two posts give a theistic-Christian interpretation to UFOs, ghosts, spirit mediums, and the like. You can break the world’s 10,000 religious beliefs down to a handful of worldviews and each worldview has a distinct interpretation of the evidence. So if you are a Christian, you cannot believe a ghost is a departed love one or a soul lost and wandering the earth (Hebrews 9:27[note]).

So what is the explanation for these apparent metaphysical encounters?

Well, you will have to see and watch for yourself:

UFOs or Demons
Spiritism and Ghosts ~ The Christian View


[Note] Mind you, it seems clear that before their real conversion to the idea of who Jesus was (God Almighty), the Disciple also believed in ghosts (https://carm.org/did-the-disciples-of-Jesus-believe-in-ghosts).

So I am not saying the person who does believe in these things are retarded or dumb. All I am saying is in the Christian worldview these interpretations do not fit the evidence. I would challenge the believer to mature in their understanding of what their view says and how believing in ghosts being departed people, ETs that posses people, etc,…

…are borrowing from other worldviews and cutting-n-tapping it into the worldview of Christianity.

Do You Believe in Ghosts? The Christian View of the Paranormal

Excellent two part video series by God and Science:

– the author of these videos id Richard Deem


UPDATE


Here are two recent article about an OXFORD study using Drake’s Equation:

Drake’s work can be expressed thus: N = R ∗ fp ∗ ne∗ fl ∗ fi ∗ fc ∗ L

  • R* = How frequently are suns born whose light could conceivably sustain intelligent life?
  • fp = What fraction of those stars have planets?
  • ne = How many of those planets, per solar system, have environments suitable for life?
  • fl = What fraction of those planets actually host life?
  • fi = What fraction of those life-bearing planets have intelligent life?
  • fc = What fraction of those intelligent civilizations broadcast detectable signals into space?
  • L = How long do those civilizations broadcast detectable signals into space?

Here is the first article via Michael Guillen at FOX NEWS:

According to a team of researchers at Oxford University’s Future of Humanity Institute, it’s because we’ve been using the wrong factors in the Drake Equation. We – including usually hard-nosed scientists – want so badly for there to be LGM, we’ve been grossly overestimating the values of Drake’s factors, resulting in a flagrant overestimation of the number of civilizations that should exist out there.

When the Oxford folks assign realistic numerical values to the seven factors – based on an honest evaluation of the uncertainties in our very best chemical, biological, physical, and astronomical knowledge – Frank’s famous equation predicts a much, much, much smaller number than 1,000 – 100,000,000 intelligent civilizations per galaxy. The median number plummets to something as low as 0.00000000000000000000000000000000008 (that’s an eight preceded by thirty-four zeroes).

In plain English, explain the authors in a paper submitted to the Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, “we find a substantial probability that we are alone in our galaxy, and perhaps even in our observable universe.” If any LGM do exist out there somewhere, the researchers conclude, it is somewhere over the rainbow, so to speak – “quite possibly beyond the cosmological horizon and forever unreachable.”

So, next time you look up at the night sky and say to yourself, “There has to be someone out there!” think again. Even though it sounds like a possibility more fantastic than the Tooth Fairy, science itself is presently telling us we are very likely it – the only intelligent creatures inhabiting this immense and incredible universe.

The other is from COSMOS:

….Sandberg, Drexler and Ord use a different approach in their modelling, incorporating current scientific uncertainties that produce values for different parts of the equation ranging over tens and hundreds of orders of magnitude. Some of these concern critical questions regarding the emergence of life from non-living material – a process known as abiogenesis – and the subsequent likelihoods of early RNA-like life evolving into more adaptive DNA-like life.

Then there is the essential matter of that primitive DNA-like life undergoing the sort of evolutionary symbiotic development that occurred on Earth, when a relationship between two different types of simple organisms resulted in the complex “eukaryotic” cells that constitute every species on the planet more complicated than bacteria.

The results are depressing enough to send a thousand science-fiction writers into catatonic shock. The Fermi Paradox, they find, dissolves.

“When we take account of realistic uncertainty, replacing point estimates by probability distributions that reflect current scientific understanding, we find no reason to be highly confident that the galaxy (or observable universe) contains other civilizations,” they conclude.

“When we update this prior in light of the Fermi observation, we find a substantial probability that we are alone in our galaxy, and perhaps even in our observable universe.

“‘Where are they?’ — probably extremely far away, and quite possibly beyond the cosmological horizon and forever unreachable.”

Farrakhan’s Batshit Crazy UFO Sermon (Updated w/Ayatollah)

Islam in Iran has joined the wacky world of the NEW AGE UFO CULTS category via the Ayatollah. Remember, the Nation of Islam is already in this category (among others)…

Iranian Ayatollah: The ‘Hidden Imam’ Will Come To Earth In A Vessel ‘Like A Spaceship’

TEL AVIV – An Iranian Grand Ayatollah recently said that the Mahdi – the Shi’ite version of the messiah – will arrive in a “super-modern vessel like a spaceship” and that until that time there will be no “peace, security, or decency” on earth.

Ayatollah Naser Makarem Shirazi was answering questions about the arrival of the Mahdi, otherwise known as the Hidden Imam, who according to Islamic eschatology will conquer the world before the Day of Judgment, ridding it of evil. Shirazi’s explanations, translated and published Friday by the Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI), were based on Islamic teachings and hadiths, as well as quotes from preceding Imams.

[….]

When this vessel moves, it sounds like thunder and has the speed of lightening, the Ayatollah said, “slashing the heart of the sky with extraordinary force, and in this way it can advance to any point in the firmament.”

“Therefore, this is a super-modern vessel, and there is none like it today. It is like a spaceship and like other swift and amazing space vessels that are found [only] in stories today, but nobody knows how close [these vessels] come to truth and reality. Maybe it will be like [a spaceship], but in any case it is not a spaceship.”

Spiritism and Ghosts ~ The Christian View

(This is connected with my post on UFOs, they are a related topic.)

Are there ghosts? Spirits that can posses a mediums body? Spirit guides? This is an interesting video that attempts to answer this with eyewitness encounters.

(For more documentaries like this you must visit Jeremiah Films.)

Take note I do not endorse everything noted in this documentary or the articles, but the similarity between alien encounters, spiritism (like mediums), ghosts, the occult, and the like, is the important issue here, NOT “government conspiracies” or the like.

Here is a poorly referenced paper of mine (really, it was part of a letter to a family member):


Ghosts


Defining Terms

Most poles of late show that only about 5 to 7 percent of the American public are bona fide atheists.  This leaves quite a bit of room for people who believe in some form of “life-after-death.”  However, before I venture into this subject of life-after-death, and all the implications that follow (i.e., ghosts, specters, the paranormal, etc.), lets define some terms.  According to the Dictionary of Cults, Sects, Religions and the Occult, the word Ghost means: “(occult).  An APPARITION; a manifestation or appearance of a spirit being, usually one who has departed this life.”

Occult [in the same resource] is defined as: “Beyond the realm of empirical knowledge; the supernatural; that which is secret or hidden, the study of the occult is generally classified into three different areas: (1) SPIRITISM, (2)FORTUNE-TELLING, and (3) MAGIC.”

The word “occult” comes from the Latin word “Occultis” and it carries the idea of things hidden, secret and mysterious.  David Hoover, in his book How to Respond to the Occult, lists three distinct characteristics of the occult:

  1. The occult deals with things secret or hidden;
  2. The occult deals with operations or events which seem to depend on human powers that go beyond the five senses;
  3. The occult deals with the supernatural, the presence of angelic or demonic forces.

Under the above definitions, the following practices can be listed under the occult (not meant as a complete list): witchcraft, magic, palm reading, fortune telling, ouija boards, tarot cards, Satanism, spiritism, demons and the use of crystal balls.

Avoiding Extremes

C. S. Lewis once commented,

  • “There are two equal and opposite errors into which our race can fall about the ‘devils.’  One is to disbelieve in their existence.  The other is to believe, and to feel an unhealthy interest in them.  They themselves are equally pleased by both errors and hail a materialist or a magician with the same delight” (The Screwtape Letters, preface). 

Of course, C. S. Lewis believed in the Biblical form of life-after-death and all that that belief encompasses (i.e., fallen angels and the like), as do I.  So for someone who doesn’t hold to the belief in situ that “demons” could be behind supernatural occurrences, I sympathize, but only ask that you read on.

Two Examples of “Hauntings”

#1) Milbourne Cristopher, known as one of America’s foremost magicians, was also a psychic researcher.  He was convinced that the accounts of ghosts and haunted houses could be explained on a natural level. He wrote in his book, ESP, Seers and Psychics, about an undated clipping, preserved by Houdini about a once attractive two-story cottage that was rented out to a family who lived there for quite a few years, undisturbed by anything unusual, they moved out…

[This is a paraphrase]  The following family, however, complained to the real estate agent that a wailing cry could be heard through the house at night.  After the agent gave the house a “once over,” and the howling continued, the tenants moved out.  The next family that rented the house came to see the agent a week after moving in.  The man asked if there was a murder at the residence, the agent said he knew of none.  Three more families were in and out within the year.  By this time, the story of the “haunted” house had spread all over the little town of Union, New York.  It became impossible to rent the house out anymore and it went uncared for, and gradually took on an appearance that only a ghost would relish.

Early in December, a man came by to see the real estate agent about renting the house for a short time, explaining that he was interested in haunted houses.  The agent obliged and the man went his way.  About a week later the man returned and the agent asked, expecting the same old story: “Have you found the ghost?”  His visitor replied: “I have, and here it is.”  The man reached in his pocket and took out a small metal object he had found in the garret.  “A child’s whistle had been fastened in a knothole,” he said.  The first tenants children were the source of this house being haunted.

#2) Allen Spraggett describes the following event in his book, The Unexplained.

One winter night, in Northern Ontario, Canada, during the early days of World War Two, a middle-aged widow awakened from a troubled sleep to see her younger brother standing at the foot of the bed.  The eerie thing was that she knew her brother was in England serving with the Royal Canadian Air Force.  Yet, she saw him clearly, dressed in his pilots flying suit, his face deathly pale and solemn beyond description.  The effect was horrific.  The woman screamed.  Abruptly the strange phantasm vanished.

When the woman’s three teen-aged children rushed into the room, they found her sobbing, “He’s dead, I know he’s dead.”  The premonition proved to be correct.  Sometime later, word came that the brothers Spitfire had been shot down over the English Channel on the same day – possibly the same hour – that the woman saw the specter in her room.

Two stories, one shown to be of a natural cause, the other, not.  The real question is, can we contact the dead?  Alternatively, can they contact us?

From a Diary to the Big-Screen

One of the most famous stories known of a lost loved one being contacted is that of a fourteen-year-old boy named Douglas Deen.  The movie The Exorcist was based on this boy’s well-documented experience.  The boy’s parent reported odd occurrences in the boy’s room, marks appearing on him, as well as noises coming from his room at night.  Then objects were seen moving and thumping about in the boy’s room.  The boy was studied at two hospitals (Georgetown University Hospital and the other was St. Louis University), by multiple psychiatrists, therapists, and other medical personnel who all reported seeing objects being moved, thrown, or people knocked down by unseen forces.

Skeptical neighbors even had the boy stay at their “un-haunted” house, only to see the same.  “Brandings” appeared on the boy that spelled words such as SPITE, HELL, and EXIT.  Dr. J. B. Rhine, director of the famed parapsychology laboratory at Duke University, came out to study the case.  He was quoted as saying it was “the most impressive case of a poltergeist [German for: noisy ghost] phenomenon that had come to his attention” in his years of celebrated investigation in the field.

The Exorcism

The ultimate process of deliverance was lengthy and difficult.  During the ordeal, the exorcist – Rev. William Bowdern – underwent a fast of bread and water (referred to as the “black fast”) and subsequently lost more than forty pounds.  The process of exorcism took about two months and twenty to thirty performances of the rite itself.  The final exorcism was performed in May, of 1949, when the possessing spirit identified itself as one of the fallen angels mentioned in the Bible and then departed.

Was the boy really demon possessed?  The doctors at two catholic hospitals, various catholic authorities, and other specialists were unable to help the boy through medical or psychiatric means.  The parents exhausted every possible medical or psychiatric avenue before they turned to the ritual of exorcism.  Permission to use the ritual is granted only when there is strong physical, emotional, and spiritual evidence of demon possession (my dad was an observer, of sorts, in one of these authorized exorcisms).

William Freidkin, director of The Exorcist, spent almost a year researching for the film before shooting began.  His information and reaction on the case are very interesting:

This particular boy in the 1949 case on which the film was based met all the requirements for exorcism as set forth by the church.  He was speaking in a voice not his own, a language not his own.  He was possessed of superhuman powers.  He broke the arm of the priest performing the exorcism [and another priests nose].  His bed shook up and down….

The priest spent the night in the room on a mat that slid all over the floor.  The furniture tried to attack him.  A bottle jumped off the wall and broke the tiles on the floor at his feet and yet the bottle didn’t break.  The boy would vomit strange-smelling fluids.  Doctors, psychiatrists, everyone they could get, examined him and nobody could figure out what was wrong….

The original exorcism was performed at a hospital in St. Louis.  It didn’t happen in someone’s house or in a church or some place private where someone might’ve been carried away.  Doctors and nurses were in attendance and I have day-to-day account of what happened.  It’s the most incredible thing I have ever known.

The Root of the Problem

“How did this all begin?” is the next logical question I can see being asked.  It all began when the boy’s beloved aunt (who used a Ouija board and tarot cards and other New Age items on a regular basis) died, and he missed her so much that he tried to contact her through the Ouija board.  And it worked!  The “spirit” identified itself, at first as his aunt, and even told the boy things that only he and his aunt knew or talked about.  However, the contact became more prominent until this spirit inhabited the boy’s body.

Let me break here to recommend two books on the incident, one by an investigative journalist (a non-Christian) and the other by the ex-Professor (Ed Gruss) of history and apologetics at Masters College, in Santa Clarita, California.  Professor Gruss is a local resident, a past acquaintance, and a Christian.

  • Book One: Possessed: The True Story of an Exorcism, by Thomas B. Allen
  • Book Two: The Ouija Board: A Doorway to the Occult, by Edmund C. Gruss

Okay, let me begin this part with an interesting factoid: The December 1994 Consumer Reports published the results of a survey among 17,000 young people ages 10 to 14.  They answered a query concerning what games they played with and which they enjoyed the most.  Out of 83 games listed, Monopoly was number one and the Ouija Board was number two.

~ Side Note: Some of the following quotes are by “psychics,” who, I would contend, are involved with the same entities; the psychics, at least, that seem to give information above and beyond their realm of knowledge (which is very few).  Non-the-less, even they realize the dangers of occultism (or at least some forms of it, of course not the kind that pays their bills)

Some Quotes

Psychic Alan Vaughan points out the following information,

  • “It is significant, however, that the greatest outcry against the use of Ouijas has come from the Spiritualists [and] not the parapsychologists.  In England, Spiritualist groups are petitioning to ban the sale of Ouijas as toys for children–not because of vague dangers of ‘unhealthy effects on naive, suggestible persons’–but because they fear that the children will become possessed.”

Psychic / spiritist Harold Sherman, president of ESP Research Associates Foundation in Little Rock, Arkansas, agrees:

  • “The majority who have become involved with possessive and other entities came by this experience through the ouija board.”

The irony however, is that, despite the warnings, most people continue to view the Ouija board as a harmless pastime:

“Spiritualists, psychologists, psychiatrists, medical doctors, theologians, and other informed persons have all given warnings on the hazards of using the ouija board and similar devices.  In spite of all they have said, it is evident that many persons are still ignorant that dangers exist. Those who know little or nothing about the occult and ouija board experiences do not understand these warnings concerning the “innocent” use of the board.  One who speaks of physical, mental, spiritual, or other problems which might relate to Ouija use is often viewed as an extremist, obsessed with groundless fears.  How could the use of so simple a device result in anything detrimental to the user?  This is often the attitude until, through personal involvement, the reality of the dangers is experienced, and the warnings are then remembered.  Often by this time permanent damage has occurred.”  (Edmond Gruss, The Ouija Board: Doorway to the Occult).

“Indeed, the dangers of the ouija board have been noted long before our modern revival of the occult.  Almost seventy years ago, the medium Carl Wickland, M.D. referred to his own encounters when he wrote of ‘the cases of several persons whose seemingly harmless experiences with automatic writing and the ouija board resulted in such wild insanity that commitment to asylums was necessitated…. Many other disastrous results which followed the use of the supposedly innocent ouija board came to my notice’” (Carl A. Wickland, Thirty Years Among the Dead).

Professor Gruss refers to a clipping from the files of the famous magician Houdini concerning a Dr. Curry, a medical director of the State Insane Asylum of New Jersey, who stated the Ouija board was a “dangerous factor” in unbalancing the mind and predicted that insane asylums would be flooded with patients if interest in them did not wane.

Noted psychic researchers Ed and Lorraine Warren refer to one instance where the Ouija board was used “as little more than a joke” – and yet it led to the house becoming “infested” with evil spirits.  Noted occultist Manly P. Hall founder of the Philosophical Research Society is considered as one of the leading authorities on the occult in this century.  In Horizon magazine for October-December 1944, pages 76-77 he recalls,

  • “During the last 20-5 years I have had considerable personal experience with persons who have complicated their lives through dabbling with the Ouija board.  Out of every hundred such cases, at least 95 are worse off for the experience….  I know of broken homes, estranged families, and even suicides that can be traced directly to this source.”

Ed and Lorraine Warren, whom I cited above, state in their book Graveyard that (pp. 137-38):

  • “Ouija boards are just as dangerous as drugs.  They’re not to be played with… just as parents are responsible for other aspects of the children’s lives, they should take equal care to keep the tools of the devil from their children… especially in an error when satanic cults are on the rise.  Remember: Seances and Ouija boards and other occult paraphernalia are dangerous because evil spirits often disguise themselves as your loved ones – and take over your life” (Edmond Gruss, The Ouija Board: A Doorway to the Occult)

Dr. Thelma Moss, a parapsychologist on the staff of UCLA’s Neuropsychiatric Institute prefaced her discussion of the Ouija board in The Probability of the Impossible with: “Warning!  For certain persons, the Ouija board is no game and can cause serious dissociation’s of personality.”

To Conclude

Why such a long treatise on the Ouija board?  Because this is the most popular way to call up the spirits of the dead, as well as loved ones… or so-called.  These occurrences of contacting spirits via the Ouija, is very similar to those of spirits contacted by mediums, or in seances, or even – believe it or not – UFO abductions.  After the initial contact, the entities are either violent, or most often, lie and mislead.  And they lie and mislead on one subject more than any other… the religious subject. They most often give a religious message (mostly by automatic writing, like the Urantia Book, A Course In Miracles, or Conversations With God, to name a few) that always deals with Christ not being God, but an “avatar” or a “good teacher”, like Buddha or Confucius.  These messages are relevant because, if, and what a big if, the Biblical account of spiritual warfare is true, then this would be proof – of sorts – that these “spirits” main goal is to get people involved in doctrines that would lead people away from the one true God.  How many people have you known that have been contacted by a spirit, or a departed “loved one” join a healthy, well-balanced church and become a member?  How many start getting involved in New Age metaphysics that include the Ojai Board, tarot readings, meditations, and the like?

Again, for those who don’t believe in the Christian (theistic) presupposition or worldview, I sympathize, but after studying this array of supernatural events, and investigating story after story of abductions, possessions, and spirit contact, there is no better explanation that I have found.  Mind you, there are other explanations, but most are reached by people who neither take the time to really investigate all avenues of research, or feel complacent with where they are with they’re own beliefs and lot in life.  With the recent rise and popularity of neo-paganism and in all that the New Age movement encompasses, is it any wonder that spiritual contacts, UFO sightings, ghosts, etc.,  (real and fraudulent) are on the rise?

Biblography

  • Testing the Spirits, by Elizebeth L. Hillstrom
  • The Culting of America, by Ron Rhodes (especially chapter 12)
  • Alien Obsession: What Lies Behind Abductions, Sightings, and the Attraction to the Paranormal, by Ron Rhodes
  • Dictionary of Cults, Sects, Religioons and the Occult, by Mather and Nichols
  • Occult Invasion: The Subtle Seduction of the World & the Church, by Dave Hunt
  • Biblical Demonology: A Study of Spiritual Forces at Work Today, by Merrill F. Unger
  • Encyclopedia of New Age Beliefs, by Ankerberg and Weldon
  • The Facts on the New Age Movement, Ankerberg and Weldon
  • Occult ABC, by Kurt Koch
  • Christian Counseling & Occultism, by Kurt Koch
  • Occult Bondage and Deliverance, by Kurt Koch
  • Demonology, Past & Present, by Kurt Koch
  • Handbook of Today’s Religions, by McDowell and Stewart
  • The Occult Shock and Psychic Forces, Wilson and Weldon
  • Cults: And the Occult, by Edmond Gruss
  • The Ouija Board: A Doorway to the Occult, by Edmund Gruss
  • Ouija: The Most Dangerous Game, by Stoker Hunt
  • The Beautiful Side of Evil, by Johanna Michaelsen
  • The Occult Roots of Nazism, by Nicholas Goodrick
  • Witchcraft: Exploring the World of Wicca, by Craig Hawkins
  • UFO’s and the Alien Agenda: Uncovering the Mystery Behind UFO’s and the Paranormal, by Bob Larson
  • Encounters with UFO’s, by Weldon and Levitt
  • UFOs in the New Age: Extraterrestrial Messages & the Truth of Scripture, by William Alnor
  • UFO Cults & the New Millennium, by William Alnor
  • Alien Encounters: The Secret Behind the UFO Phenomenon, by Missler and Eastman
  • The New Age Cult, by Walter Martin
  • Beware! Deception & Delusion in the Church, by Bill Rudge

A note from my Facebook about this and my other post:

I posted two older documentaries (they are from the 80’s, so expect the pat narrator and eerie music) and some links of my own thoughts on the matter.

These two posts give a theistic-Christian interpretation to UFOs, ghosts, spirit mediums, and the like. You can break the world’s 10,000 religious beliefs down to a handful of worldviews and each worldview has a distinct interpretation of the evidence. So if you are a Christian, you cannot believe a ghost is a departed love one or a soul lost and wandering the earth (Hebrews 9:27[note]).

So what is the explanation for these apparent metaphysical encounters?

Well, you will have to see and watch for yourself:

UFOs or Demons
Spiritism and Ghosts ~ The Christian View


[Note] Mind you, it seems clear that before their real conversion to the idea of who Jesus was (God Almighty), the Disciple also believed in ghosts (https://carm.org/did-the-disciples-of-Jesus-believe-in-ghosts).

So I am not saying the person who does believe in these things are retarded or dumb. All I am saying is in the Christian worldview these interpretations do not fit the evidence. I would challenge the believer to mature in their understanding of what their view says and how believing in ghosts being departed people, ETs that posses people, etc,…

…are borrowing from other worldviews and cutting-n-tapping it into the worldview of Christianity.

Do You Believe in Ghosts? The Christian View of the Paranormal

White Racism Bad / Black Racism Good

“White religionists are not capable of perceiving the blackness of God, because their satanic whiteness is a denial of the very essence of divinity. That is why whites are finding and will continue to find the black experience a disturbing reality.”

~ quoted from James Cone’s book, A Black Theology of Liberation, page 64.

A recent story by the Blaze brings to mind some older posts that I will partially import from my old blog to this newer post… combining it with the newer information. The Blaze (video and more at their site) bullet points some of Rev. Wrights new rants, which causes me to import some older posts to this site:

♆ Rev. Jeremiah Wright delivered three fiery sermons about faith, race and politics at Metropolitan Baptist Church in S.C.
♆ Wright said Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas worships “some other God” outside of “Allah and Yahweh” (who are the “same” he says)
♆ Obama’s former pastor called Thomas Jefferson “a pedophile”
♆ He sees “white supremacy” driving “world policy”
♆ Wright condemned the U.S. military, saying, “fighting for peace is like raping for virginity.”

Obama’s Pastor went to Libya with Farrakhan to meet Islamisists! Yet, other are the extremist, not his view of theology and God. Hannity and Colmes years ago had the Reverend Jeremiah Wright on their show, and this is how the reverend defended himself:

“How many books of Cones have you read!?”
(Money quote from the interview above with Obama’s pastor.)

Take note the Rev. Wright camps out on the point of reading James Cone’s books, books that were sold in his churches book store the entirety of Obama’s time at Trinity United Church of Christ.

(This section was updated 12-4-2014, see below the links for the update)

Link to Africentric Theology at Trinity United Church of Christ;

Also the Akiba Bookstore main page.

The churches bookstore has been sanitized since this was written. I managed to grab a couple of cached pages. Not nearly what it was, but the few I could find are here: Page 1, page 2, page 3. On page three for instance there are some resources for women, one of the books, “Feminist Theologies: Legacy and Prospect” ~ by Rosemary Radford Ruether, has this review: “it is a collection of academic papers and perspectives from a feminist conference…. Some essays are clearly stronger than others – particularly on Islam.” Strong on Islam? This author has written books on Gaia and God, pro Palestinian (anti-Israel) books, and books on “Goddesses and the Divine,” as well as radically left leaning feminist theology.

E.g., not a Christian book or author at all. More Marxist and Islamic in reality.

So got on Trinities website and bought Dr. Cones’ books, and read them. This lead me to make an early “documentary” (Sept of 2008) called Obama-Con. In it I mention some of the following ideas that Obama’s church paralleled:

...See For Yourself

(From an older post) Of course the money quote is the Rev. Wright recommending some authors/books. I love books, so I went out and bought them and read them. I was amazed the media didn’t do what I had just done! Could you imagine if McCain or Bush went to a church for twenty years headed by a pastor whom — a) brought you to your faith, b) married you and your wife, c) baptized your kids, and was d) on your campaign staff — sold Hitler’s Mein Kampf in the church’s bookstore. Not only that but on national television recommended this same book? We would never hear the end of it. Never. In fact, this fictitious person would never make it on a ballot.


“The personification of the devil as the symbol of all evil assumes the living shape of the Jew” ~ Adolf HitlerMein Kampf

  • “The goal of black theology is the destruction of everything white, so that blacks can be liberated from alien gods” ~ James Cone, A Black Theology of Liberation, p.62
  • “White religionists are not capable of perceiving the blackness of God, because their satanic whiteness is a denial of the very essence of divinity. That is why whites are finding and will continue to find the black experience a disturbing reality” ~ James Cone, A Black Theology of Liberation, p.64

“I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator: by defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord” ~ Adolf HitlerMein Kampf

  • “There is no place in black theology for a colorless God in a society where human beings suffer precisely because of their color. The black theologian must reject any conception of God which stifles black self-determination by picturing God as a God of all peoples” ~ James ConeA Black Theology of Liberation, p.63
  • “Christianity is not alien to Black Power, Christianity is Black Power” ~ James Cone, Black Theology & Black Power, p.38
  • “In contrast to this racist view of God, black theology proclaims God’s blackness. Those who want to know who God is and what God is doing must know who black persons are and what they are doing” ~ James Cone, A Black Theology of Liberation, p.65

“The [Nazi party] should not become a constable of public opinion, but must dominate it. It must not become a servant of the masses, but their master!” ~ Adolf HitlerMein Kampf

  • “These new theologians of the Third World argue that Christians [liberation theology accepting Christians] should not shun violence but should initiate it” ~ James Cone, Black Theology & Black Power, p.32
  • “It is important to make a further distinction here among black hatred, black racism, and Black Power. Black hatred is the black man’s strong aversion to white society. No black man living in white America can escape it” ~ James Cone, Black Theology & Black Power, p.14
  • “It is this fact that makes all white churches anti-Christian in their essence. To be Christian is to be one of those whom God has chosen. God has chosen black people!” ~ James Cone, Black Theology & Black Power, p.151
  • “It [black liberation theology] is dangerous because the true prophet of the gospel of God must become both “anti-Christian” and “unpatriotic.”…. Because whiteness by its very nature is against blackness, the black prophet is a prophet of national doom. He proclaims the end of the American Way” ~ James Cone, A Black Theology of Liberation, p.55-56

Here is The New Yorker commenting on some of the issues herein I concern myself with:

The rise of Jeremiah Wright, in the seventies and eighties, coincided with the rebirth of the Nation of Islam under Minister Louis Farrakhan. In fact, the uproar over Obama and Wright has been, in part, an uproar over Farrakhan, who keeps sneaking into the frame. He and Wright were twinned at the Democratic Presidential debate in Cleveland, on February 26th, when Tim Russert, of NBC, ascribed to Wright the claim that Farrakhan “epitomizes greatness.” (Actually, the statement came from an article by Rhoda McKinney-Jones in Trumpet, a Trinity-associated magazine published by Wright’s daughter Jeri L. Wright; as has been widely noted since then, Farrakhan was given a lifetime-achievement award at a Trumpet banquet in November.) Last summer, the Trinity Bulletin reprinted an open letter by a Farrakhan ally convinced that Israel and apartheid South Africa had “worked on an ethnic bomb that kills blacks and Arabs.” Yet Wright seems to have a complicated relationship with Farrakhan, whose national headquarters are in the South Shore neighborhood, a few miles from Trinity. His remarks about Farrakhan veer from the fulsome (the minister’s analysis of America’s racial ills is “astounding and eye opening”) to the equivocal (he is “sincere about his faith and his purpose”), but for the most part Wright chooses his words with tactical care, the way Cone did when he wrote about Elijah Muhammad. It is the language of a respectful, and possibly anxious, rival. Like Cone in the nineteen-sixties, Wright may have worried that he would be judged, and found wanting, by purer and less forgiving forms of black nationalism. Farrakhan represented the threat; his followers—particularly the young black men whom churches sometimes had trouble reaching—represented the prize.

Wright attended (but didn’t address) the Million Man March, the 1995 gathering in Washington that Farrakhan convened to promote self-reliance and “spiritual renewal” among black men. In the months afterward, Wright delivered a series of sermons that were reprinted in a book, “When Black Men Stand Up for God,” which presents a Christian response to the challenge posed by the Nation of Islam. In it, he lambastes the preachers who opposed the march on political or religious grounds: they had missed a prime opportunity to present their case to African-American men. And, by way of establishing his bona fides, he reminds readers that he studied Islam at the University of Chicago. “I have a different perspective on Islam than the average preacher,” he writes. “Islam and Christianity are a whole lot closer than you may realize. Islam comes out of Christianity.” That’s interfaith dialogue, served with a hint of one-upmanship.

But remember, the reverend says “I’m not divisive, the media is divisive,” which merely redefines anti-Semitic/racist statements as non-divisive:

While reading these books cover-to-cover and doing some looking around, I also noted that Louise Farrakhan was given a lifetime achievement award at Obama’s church. Not only that though, but Farrakhan was given three cover spreads on the church’s magazine, the Trumpet. One of those his face shot put alongside Obama as well as Elijah Muhammad, the second leader of the Nation of Islam. His [Elijah Muhammad’s] many books are sold by the Nation of Islam not Old Testament mention being taught by Louise Farrakhan as theological doctrine. Since Obama’s church gave such a prestigious award to the current leader of the Nation of Islam, whom Obama’s pastor was a part of in his younger years, let us see what some of these books they tout say as well:

“It is due to your ignorance of God, or you are one deceived by the devil, whose nature is to mislead you in the knowledge of God. You originally came from the God of Righteousness and have the opportunity to return, while the devils are from the man devil (Yakub) who has ruled the world for the past 6,000 years under falsehood, labeled under the name of God and His prophets.   The worst thing to ever happen to ‘the devils is: The truth of them made manifest that they are really the devils whom the righteous (all members of the black nation) should shun and never accept as truthful guides of God! This is why the devils have always persecuted and killed the righteous. But the time has at last arrived that Allah (God) will put an end to their per­secuting and killing the righteous (the black nation).”

~ Elijah Muhammad, Message to the Blackman In America, p.6  [Yakub is an evil scientist who created the white race 6,000 years ago in Nation of Islam theology]

“…they are a prey in the hands of the white race, the world’s archdeceivers (the real devils in person). You are made to believe that you worship the true God, but you do not! God is unknown to you in that which the white race teaches you (a mystery God).   The great archdeceivers (the white race) were taught by their father, Yakub, 6,000 years ago, how to teach that God is a spirit (spook) and not a man. In the grafting of his people (the white race), Mr. Yakub taught his people to contend with us over the reality of God by asking us of the whereabouts of that first One (God) who created the heavens and the earth, and that, Yakub said, we cannot do.”

Elijah Muhammad, Message to the Blackman In America, p. 9

According to Elijah Muhammad, Jesus was a black African and only a mortal man like the Prophet Muhammad of Islam. He also taught that Jesus was the product of sexual intercourse between Mary and Allah (who is a black man). Louis Farrakhan said this of the second leader of the Nation of Islam:

  • “The Honorable Elijah Muhammad, I am here to declare, is risen. The Jesus you have been seeking and waiting for His return has been in your midst for 40 years, but you knew not who He was. A Holy One was working among us, and It is only now, after He is gone, that we realize who He was.” ~ Louis Farrakhan

Again, for clarity:

  • “If you understand the Bible right, you will agree with me that the whole caucasion race is a race of devils. They have proved to be devils in the Garden of Paradise and were condemned … by Jesus.” ~ Elijah Muhammad, Message to the Blackman In America, p. 23-24.
  • “Christianity is the Devil’s religion created to mislead black people.” ~ Elijah Muhammad, Message to the Blackman In America, p. 11.

Louis Farrakhan, the guy who was given an award by Wright, knew personally that Elijah Muhammad had risen because…

Obama’s church gave a “Lifetime Achievement Award” to this guy. Remember that he believes he was taken up in a UFO and told explicit things about himself and white people. Here are four pages from the book, Cults, New Religious Movements, and Your Family: A Guide to Ten Non-Christian Groups Out to Convert Your Loved Ones, (click on them to enlarge – and again to get it even bigger):

So you can see that there are some very occultic beliefs tied to Rev. Wright. Which may explain why the Reverend Wright believes Allah and YHWH are the same God, something you would never hear a Christian minister say. One reason is the Rev. Wright use to be a part of the Nation of Islam, and often times Black Panthers and Nation of Islam adherents would sit in on these “Christian” services. But remember, it isn’t the Rev. Wright that is divisive, it is the media:

An Apologetic “Aside”

What are some of the differences between Yahweh and Allah?

How do the Democrats let this type of stuff slide… year after year? One reason is that the Democratic party has become more-and-more leftist every year:

Democrats More Left Every Year

…..congressional Democrats have not moved to the political center — they have all but deserted it. Employing statistics from the Americans for Democratic Action, a self-defined liberal activist group, we analyzed House and Senate voting records dating back to 1974. Using as a definition of ”liberal” someone who votes with the ADA recommendation at least two-thirds of the time, we found that in 1995 nearly four out of five Democrats in the House (78 per cent) qualified as liberal. That is more than double the 34 per cent of 1974.

In fact, the liberal quotient for Democrats has risen steadily over the past 11 Congresses, while the percentage of Democrats qualifying as conservative has shrunk to virtually nil. Even the number of moderate Democrats is dwindling. According to the ADA’s ratings there are now only 45 moderate Democrats, down from 75 in 1980

In short, last year House Democrats’ voting record was more liberal than it had been in at least twenty years. The Democrats were more left-wing in the 104th Congress than when the House was under the command of Speakers like Tip O’Neill or Jim Wright; and more left-wing than it was during the ascendancy of the post-Watergate class of 1974.

In the Senate, the statistics are equally grim. In 1974, only 55 per cent of Democrats were classified as liberal; by 1995, that figure had risen to 93.5 per cent. Only Sam Nunn of Georgia, Bennett Johnston of Louisiana, and James Exon of Nebraska (all of whom are also retiring this year) are not liberal — contradicting the conventional wisdom that the Senate Democrats are a pack of political pragmatists. How’s this for a depressing statistic: nine of Ted Kennedy’s Senate colleagues had more liberal voting records than he did last year.

Let’s examine some key votes. Back in 1977 there were 63 House Democrats who voted against increasing the minimum wage; in almost every subsequent vote on the issue that number has declined. In this summer’s vote, only 2 Democrats (the aforementioned Hall and Geren from Texas) opposed the mandatory-job-loss bill. When the Balanced Budget Amendment was defeated in 1982, President Reagan told American voters to ”count heads and take names” — to make note of who in Congress was fiscally rational and who was not. Those voters who took the President’s advice counted 69 Democrats in support of the amendment and 167 opposed to it. In contrast, in the landmark January 1995 vote in which the House finally passed the Balanced Budget Amendment, a record-low 33 Democrats voted in favor.

A recent comprehensive study by political analysts Mark Melcher and David Tappan of Prudential Securities examined vote ratings by the ADA and the American Conservative Union and came to much the same conclusion as we did: the political center in Congress is shrinking. The ACU ratings, for example, tell us that, in 1995, 47 House Democrats had more liberal voting records than Bernie Sanders of Vermont — an avowed socialist. If this trend keeps up Sanders will have to stop caucusing with the Democrats: he’s too anti-government for them….

What are the numbers today of those Democrats calling themselves, voluntarily, anti-American?

The Socialist Party of America announced in their October 2009 newsletter that 70 Congressional democrats currently belong to their caucus. This admission was recently posted on Scribd.com:

American Socialist Voter–

Q: How many members of the U.S. Congress are also members of the DSA?
A: Seventy

Q: How many of the DSA members sit on the Judiciary Committee?
A: Eleven: John Conyers [Chairman of the Judiciary Committee], Tammy Baldwin, Jerrold Nadler, Luis Gutierrez,
Melvin Watt, Maxine Waters, Hank Johnson, Steve Cohen, Barbara Lee, Robert Wexler, Linda Sanchez [there are 23 Democrats on the Judiciary Committee of which eleven, almost half, are now members of the DSA].

Q: Who are these members of 111th Congress?
A: See the listing below

Co-Chairs

Hon. Raúl M. Grijalva (AZ-07)
Hon. Lynn Woolsey (CA-06)

Vice Chairs

Hon. Diane Watson (CA-33)
Hon. Sheila Jackson-Lee (TX-18)
Hon. Mazie Hirono (HI-02)
Hon. Dennis Kucinich (OH-10)

Senate Members

Hon. Bernie Sanders (VT)

House Members

Hon. Neil Abercrombie (HI-01)
Hon. Tammy Baldwin (WI-02)
Hon. Xavier Becerra (CA-31)
Hon. Madeleine Bordallo (GU-AL)
Hon. Robert Brady (PA-01)
Hon. Corrine Brown (FL-03)
Hon. Michael Capuano (MA-08)
Hon. André Carson (IN-07)
Hon. Donna Christensen (VI-AL)
Hon. Yvette Clarke (NY-11)
Hon. William “Lacy” Clay (MO-01)
Hon. Emanuel Cleaver (MO-05)
Hon. Steve Cohen (TN-09)
Hon. John Conyers (MI-14)
Hon. Elijah Cummings (MD-07)
Hon. Danny Davis (IL-07)
Hon. Peter DeFazio (OR-04)
Hon. Rosa DeLauro (CT-03)
Rep. Donna F. Edwards (MD-04)
Hon. Keith Ellison (MN-05)
Hon. Sam Farr (CA-17)
Hon. Chaka Fattah (PA-02)
Hon. Bob Filner (CA-51)
Hon. Barney Frank (MA-04)
Hon. Marcia L. Fudge (OH-11)
Hon. Alan Grayson (FL-08)
Hon. Luis Gutierrez (IL-04)
Hon. John Hall (NY-19)
Hon. Phil Hare (IL-17)
Hon. Maurice Hinchey (NY-22)
Hon. Michael Honda (CA-15)
Hon. Jesse Jackson, Jr. (IL-02)
Hon. Eddie Bernice Johnson (TX-30)
Hon. Hank Johnson (GA-04)
Hon. Marcy Kaptur (OH-09)
Hon. Carolyn Kilpatrick (MI-13)
Hon. Barbara Lee (CA-09)
Hon. John Lewis (GA-05)
Hon. David Loebsack (IA-02)
Hon. Ben R. Lujan (NM-3)
Hon. Carolyn Maloney (NY-14)
Hon. Ed Markey (MA-07)
Hon. Jim McDermott (WA-07)
Hon. James McGovern (MA-03)
Hon. George Miller (CA-07)
Hon. Gwen Moore (WI-04)
Hon. Jerrold Nadler (NY-08)
Hon. Eleanor Holmes-Norton (DC-AL)
Hon. John Olver (MA-01)
Hon. Ed Pastor (AZ-04)
Hon. Donald Payne (NJ-10)
Hon. Chellie Pingree (ME-01)
Hon. Charles Rangel (NY-15)
Hon. Laura Richardson (CA-37)
Hon. Lucille Roybal-Allard (CA-34)
Hon. Bobby Rush (IL-01)
Hon. Linda Sánchez (CA-47)
Hon. Jan Schakowsky (IL-09)
Hon. José Serrano (NY-16)
Hon. Louise Slaughter (NY-28)
Hon. Pete Stark (CA-13)
Hon. Bennie Thompson (MS-02)
Hon. John Tierney (MA-06)
Hon. Nydia Velazquez (NY-12)
Hon. Maxine Waters (CA-35)
Hon. Mel Watt (NC-12)
Hon. Henry Waxman (CA-30)
Hon. Peter Welch (VT-AL)
Hon. Robert Wexler (FL-19)

Radical does as radical is! Some quotes from James Cone’s book, A Black Theology of Liberation (A book sold in Obama’s church the entire 20-years he attended).

“It is dangerous because the true prophet of the gospel of God must become both ‘anti-Christian’ and ‘unpatriotic.’ (55) …. Because whiteness by its very nature is against blackness, the black prophet is a prophet of national doom. He proclaims the end of the ‘American Way…'” (56) ~ James Cone, A Black Theology of Liberation (A book sold in Obama’s church the entire 20-years he attended).

But this does not mean that religion is irrelevant altogether; it only means that religion unrelated to black liberation is irrelevant. (58-59)

… it is that whites are incapable of making any valid judgment about human existence. The goal of black theology is the destruc­tion of everything white, so that blacks can be liberated from alien gods. The God of black liberation will not be confused with a blood’ thirsty white idol. Black theology must show that the black God has nothing to do with the God worshiped in white churches whose primary purpose is to sanctify the racism of whites and to daub the wounds of blacks. Putting new wine in new wineskins means that the black theology view of God has nothing in common with those who prayed for an American victory in Vietnam or who pray for a “cool” summer in the ghetto…. There is no place in black theology for a colorless God in a society where human beings suffer precisely because of their color. The black theologian must reject any conception of God which stifles black self-determination by picturing God as a God of all peoples. Either God is identified with the oppressed to the point that their experience becomes God’s experience, or God is a God of racism…. Because God has made the goal of blacks God’s own goal, black theology believes that it is not only appropriate but necessary to begin the doctrine of God with an insistence on God’s blackness. (62-63)

White religionists are not capable of perceiving the blackness of God, because their satanic whiteness is a denial of the very essence of divinity. That is why whites are finding and will continue to find the black experience a disturbing reality. (64)

In contrast to this racist view of God, black theology proclaims God’s blackness. Those who want to know who God is and what God is doing must know who black persons are and what they are doing. (65)

God comes to us in God’s blackness, which is wholly unlike white­ness. To receive God’s revelation is to become black with God by joining God in the work of liberation…. Becoming one of God’s disciples means rejecting whiteness and accepting themselves as they are in all their physical blackness. (66)

Black theology cannot accept a view of God which does not represent God as being for oppressed blacks and thus against white oppressors. Living in a world of white oppressors, blacks have no time for a neutral God. The brutalities are too great and the pain too severe, and this means we must know where God is and what God is doing in the revolution…. What we need is the divine love as expressed in black power, which is the power of blacks to destroy their oppressors, here and now, by any means at their disposal. Unless God is participating in this holy activity, we must reject God’s love. (70)

God is black because God loves us; and God loves us because we are black. Righteousness is that side of God which expresses itself through black liberation. God makes black what humans have made white…. Love is a refusal to accept whiteness. (73-74)

If creation “involves a bringing into existence of something that did not exist before,” then to say God is creator means that my being finds its source in God. I am black because God is black! God as creator is the ground of my blackness (being), the point of reference for meaning and purpose in the universe…. Rather it is incumbent upon me by the freedom granted by the creator to deny whiteness and affirm blackness as the essence of God. That is why it is necessary to speak of the black revolution rather than reformation. The idea of reformation suggests that there is still something “good” in the system itself, which needs only to be cleaned up a bit. This is a false perception of reality. The system is based on whiteness, and what is necessary is a replacement of whiteness with blackness. (75-76)

Being white excludes them from the black community and thus whatever concern they have for blacks will invariably work against black freedom…. Certainly if whites expect to be able to say anything relevant to the self-determination of the black community, it will be necessary for them to destroy their whiteness by becoming members of an oppressed community. Whites will be free only when they become new persons—when their white being has passed away and they are created anew in black being. When this happens, they are no longer white but free, and thus capable of making decisions about the destiny of the black community. (97)

  • “Born Again” redefined: They [white people] would destroy themselves and be born again as beautiful black persons. (103)
  • “Sin” redefined: This means that whites, despite their self-proclaimed religiousness, are rendered incapable of making valid judgments on the character of sin…. In a word, sin is whiteness… (106, 108)
  • “Salvation” redefined: Salvation, then, primarily has to do with earthly reality and the injustice inflicted on those who are helpless and poor. To see the salvation of God is to see this people rise up against its oppressors, demanding that justice become a reality now, not tomorrow. (128)

LaRouchites In The SCV (from UFOs to KGB death squads-Democratic Nuts)

We have some LaRouchite’s in our valley, and I hope to “stake out” there sites here-and-there as they talk to unsuspecting people. One lady today said she was just fed up with Obama, and I presume just grasping at straws in her political dissatisfaction. When I mentioned that they are technically a political cult she responded that, “she doesn’t judge the way ‘he is’ [Larouche] because she wants the government to run properly.” I can only laugh to myself and wag my head at the thought of how bad government would be (worse than Obama’s made it) if these guys were in charge. She later said “I want what God wants me to do,” somehow equating her giving $25 dollars to a political cult who practices brainwashing techniques, anti-Semitism, large swings in policy, and its members indicted in murder as something God wants her to do. The lack of thinking in today’s culture (religious, non-religious, Democratic or Republican) never ceases to amaze me. Never. (It reminds me of the recent story of Pastor Terry Jones saying God told him to burn the Qur’an and then telling him to not burn it, and then saying God said to postpone it with a possibility of burning [rain]. God is made into a weather forecaster for the person’s current emotional likes or dislikes and the exegetical study of the Bible and the already spoken “plan” for us is rejected in light of these emotional whims.)

So lets deal with a few items of interest for those walking up to their table. Anti-Semitism:

Given such views, it should be no surprise that the LaRouche organization has demonized the U.S. Justice Department unit charged with tracking down and deporting Nazi war criminals; indeed, the LaRouche organization, including such fronts as the Schiller Institute and the Fusion Energy Foundation, went all out in the 1980s to defend (as patriotic Americans and innocent victims of a Zionist vendetta) the likes of John “Ivan the Terrible” Demjanjuk of the Treblinka death camp; Karl Linnas, the butcher of the Tartu camp; Waffen SS mass murderer Tscherim Soobzokov; and Nazi rocket engineer Arthur Rudolph (who ran the an underground factory using slave labor from the Dora-Nordhausen camp—over 5,000 of his slaves died or were killed by the SS). (See “Old Nazis and New Dreams” in Dennis King, Lyndon LaRouche and the New American Fascism, pp. 75-81.)

9/11 Trutherism:

“This Israeli spy network inside the United States was unable to achieve their objective [war with Iraq] until President Bush was entrapped by the events of Sept. 11, 2001….Lyndon LaRouche demands to know:  Is this not the motive that explains the who and why of the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001?” — “The Pollard Affair Never Ended!” leaflet issued in 2002 by “LaRouche in 2004” (LaRouche’s Democratic primary Presidential campaign committee).

Under no circumstances, LaRouche assesses, could the attacks of Sept. 11 have been organized and directed by Osama bin Laden and his al Qaeda apparatus, based out of Afghanistan. […] LaRouche also emphasizes that the recent years’ massive Israeli espionage against and covert-operations penetration of the United States—including the U.S national security and military institutions—may suggest a more direct Israeli involvement in the military coup activities that facilitated the Sept. 11 attacks on New York and Washington. […] This apparatus is part of the “Mega” network of prominent wealthy North American Zionists led by Edgar Bronfman, Ronald Lauder, Michael Steinhardt, et al., who are the leading promoters of Ariel Sharon’s suicidal war drive, and who wish to draw the United States into that effort to assure a global conflagration on a scale of the First World War or worse.” “Lyndon H. LaRouche Exposes Sept. 11 Coup-Plotters: “Zbigniew Brzezinski and Sept. 11th””, by Jeffrey Steinberg, Press Release, Jan. 2002

Conspiracy Theories:

LaRouche steered the NCLC away from the Marxist left while retaining some of the slogans and attitudes of the left. LaRouche’s critics, particularly Dennis King and Chip Berlet, characterize his new orientation as being a conspiracy theory worldview, or conspiracism. They say the Marxist concept of the ruling class was converted by LaRouche into a conspiracy theory, in which world capitalism was controlled by a cabal including the Rothschilds, the Rockefellers, Henry Kissinger, and the Council on Foreign (Source Watch)

In 2002 the LaRouche campaign issued a press release titled “Israeli Moles Behind 911 and Iraq War,” claiming Israeli government policies had been “foisted on the President by a nest of Israeli agents inside the U.S. government.”3 That this “Israeli spy network inside the United States” 4 was related to the policy formulations of the group of Bush advisers known as the Neoconservatives was made clear later when the LaRouchites began issuing a series of pamphlets with the running title “Children of Satan.” (PublicEye)

AIDS:

The best example is the AIDS issue. By the fall of 1985, LaRouche recognized that it was about to become the scariest issue of the decade. He concocted the slogan “Spread Panic, not AIDS!” The entire human race, he claimed, would face extinction if stern measures weren’t taken immediately against gay people and mosquitoes. Offering himself as the only leader willing to act with the necessary ruthlessness, he picked California as his first battleground. In the summer of 1986 his followers fanned out through most of the state’s fifty-eight counties. Operating through a committee called PANIC, they collected over 700,000 signatures for a ballot initiative calling for quarantine of AIDS victims. The signatures withstood all legal challenges, and the measure was placed on the ballot as Proposition 64. It received nationwide publicity and became a major issue in California politics. Congressman William Dannemeyer (R.-Cal.) championed it and became its respectable front man. Ironically, Dannemeyer had chaired the Republican Study Committee two years earlier when it produced a report warning conservatives not to be taken in by LaRouche propaganda and pointing out that LaRouche’s intent was to “disrupt our democratic system.” Dannemeyer now said, as did some other California conservatives, that he was supporting Proposition 64 solely on its merits. Gay organizations, the health professions, labor unions, and the Democratic Party launched a counter-effort, warning the public that “political extremist Lyndon LaRouche” was behind the measure. (One of the anti-Proposition 64 groups was even called “Stop LaRouche.”) Gay organizations charged that when LaRouche said quarantine he really meant concentration camps.

LaRouche’s cadres were preprogrammed for the quarantine campaign. For years words like “faggot” and “queer” had peppered NCLC publications, along with allegations that child molesters, Satanists, and Communists control the gay rights movement, The articles also suggested that homosexuality is a characteristically Jewish condition and that rich Jews encourage it to undermine Western civilization. When the AIDS crisis erupted, LaRouche blamed the “shylocks” for being too cheap to pay for research crash programs.

His gay-equals-Jewish canard dates back to the 1970s, when New Solidarity raved against the “faggot politics” of “Zionist-supporting” gay activists. New Solidarity published a cartoon series in which prominent New York Jews were shown in Roman togas at a banquet sponsored by the “Emperor of Homohattan,” Mayor Ed Koch. In the early 1980s LaRouchian publications accused prominent Jews and pro-Zionist Gentiles of being part of an international “Homintern.” LaRouche wrote “Kissinger: The Politics of Faggotry,” a crude and defamatory leaflet on his longtime Symbolic Jew. According to LaRouche, Kissinger’s alleged “heathen sexual inclinations are merely an integral part of a larger evil,” and Kissinger is “psychologically” part of a “distinct species.” In the context of LaRouche’s biological-racial theories about the Jewish “species,” the equation of Jewishness and “faggotry” was unmistakable.

LaRouche also taught that the alleged pathology of the Jewish family, especially the mother’s possessiveness, produces psychosexual aberrations in young Jews. A 1986 New Solidarity item, “Jewish Mothers in the Age of Aquarius,” joked that homosexuality is the natural result.

That the Jewish oligarchy deliberately promotes homosexuality is suggested by LaRouche’s references to “sodomic,” “pederastic,” and “lesbian” practices within oligarchy-controlled “cults” such as Freemasonry and the Quakers. In a November 1985 speech, he said AIDS was a “man-made evil” linked to these “cults out of Babylon.” He further developed this theme in “The End of the Age of Aquarius?,” a rambling discourse on AIDS that included attacks on the “Babylonians,” the “British,” “usurers,” and “cabalists.” His conclusion; “Homosexuality was organized in the United States. It wasn’t something that sprang from the weeds. . . .It was organized. . .” (an excerpt from New American fascists, chapter 16)

The Re-Writing of History

True, about a million and a half Jews did die as a result of the Nazi policy of labor-intensive “appropriate technology” for the employment of “inferior races,” a small fraction of the tens of millions of others – especially Slavs – who were murdered in the same way Jewish refugee Felix Rohatyn proposes today.

Even on a relative scale, what the Nazis did to Jewish victims was mild compared with the virtual extermination of gypsies and the butchery of Communists. The point is that Adolf Hitler was put into power largely on the initiative of the Rothschilds, Warburgs and Oppenheimers, among other Jewish and non-Jewish financial interests centered in the City of London. [….] The Jews who did die at the hands of Nazism were the victims of fascism, the victims of the Schactian form of “fiscal austerity.”

The “Holocaust” simply proves that the failure of the Nuremberg tribunal to hang Hjalmar Schacht made the whole proceeding a travesty of justice. The murderers of the million and a half or more Jews who died in the “holocaust” are any group, Jewish or non-Jewish, which supported then or now the policies advocated by Felix Rohatyn or Milton Freidman [sic]. Either you, as a Jew, join with the U.S. Labor Party to stop Rohatyn, Friedman the Mont Pelerin Society now, or you are implicitly just as guilty of the death of millions of Jews as Adolf Hitler. (New Solidarity, 8 Dec.1978, p.4) A scanned version available online

…(read more)…

Brainwashing Techniques:

I AM GOING TO MAKE YOU ORGANIZERS – by taking your bedrooms away from you … What I shall do is expose to you the cruel act of your sexual impotence … I will take away from you all hope that you can flee the terrors of politics to the safety of ‘personal life.’ I shall do this by showing to you that your frightened personal sexual life contains for you such terrors as the outside world could never offer you. I will thus destroy your rabbit-holes, mental as well as physical. I shall destroy your sense of safety in the place to which you ordinarily imagine you can flee…Can we imagine anything much more viciously sadistic than the Black Ghetto mother.” (“Ideological Odyssey: From Old Left to Far Right,” and, “No Joke“)

“Don’t let her leave!” The group leader had thoroughly worked her over, hammering her with guilt about her previous actions, accusing her of being delusional, telling her to confess, until she was no longer recognizable as a woman, but only as a blubbering mess of tearful convulsions. The tearful woman got up to flee the room.

“Don’t let her leave! Keep her in here!” Someone got up and physically blocked her from leaving the room.

“SIT DOWN. Now M—–,” the leader said in a calm voice, “You know you’ve got to stop doing this…” She went on calmly for some time, and then everyone else left the room. I sat across the room and watched her sob hysterically with her face in her hands, and not for the first time wondered what the LaRouche organization was all about.

Throughout the summer I witnessed similar scenes over and over again in different forms; in personal meetings with the leadership, in small group meetings, Sunday “Field Meetings,” at “retreats,” and one-on-one conversations. There was a clear pattern being used in each case; the sowing of guilt (real or imagined), fear, confusion, and the use of “sore spots” (personal shames or shortcomings) to browbeat someone into an extremely worked up emotional state. Once the person has been whipped up she is then questioned until she contradicts herself on some minute point. This contradiction is then used as a stick to beat her with until there is a complete emotional breakdown, then they admit their faults (confess), after which the leadership then redefines the “mission” for them. I recognized it as manipulation. I recently took interest in a book by William Sargant, “The Battle for the Mind,” and he had another name for it: Brainwashing. (Freedom of Mind Center)

I realize I only put two conspiracy quotes, but the LaRouches pretty much believe in most of them. A short bio from an article about Lyndon LaRouche displays a quick synapsis of some hisghlites from Larouche’s political career:

  • 1976: Lyndon LaRouche makes first bid for U.S. presidency under the U.S. Labor Party.
  • 1982-83: LaRouche engages in exploratory talks with the Soviet Union which lead to the development of President Ronald Reagan’s Strategic Defense Initiative
  • 1984: LaRouche founds the Schiller Institute, a non-profit formed to “defend the rights of all humanity to progress –material, moral and intellectual”
  • 1986: LaRouche followers draft California ballot initiative calling for the isolation or quarantining of people infected with AIDS
  • 1987: Roy Frankhouser, former Klu Klux Klan grand dragon and LaRouche advisor, convicted of obstruction of justice.
  • 1988: LaRouche and six associates convicted on federal conspiracy charges. LaRouche spends five years in prison.
  • 2004: LaRouche makes his fifth bid for the U.S. presidency, this time running a candidate under the Democratic Party.

This movement, and the young men and women involved in this group, is considered a cult (some say more than a cult). In fact, a site put together by former LaRouchites (LaRouche Planet) defines this topic well in their From a Political Sect to a Political Cult:

It is NOT a political democratic organization that respects individual freedom. It is a cult that uses politics to its own ends, it is a political cult which uses cult method of mind-control.

It is therefore totalitarian by definition (LaRouche would say “authoritarian”). A “cult of personality” reminiscent of the cults of personality which Stalin, Mao or Hitler once enjoyed.

The nearest representation of LaRouche’s world is the world described in George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four novel. Politically, it shares many (not all) features with the so-called “Third Position” of our contemporary political spectrum.

Similarly to the world of Nineteen Eighty-Four, in the LaRouche cult, politics is not just “war-like”, IT IS WAR; a never ending war between “Oceania” and “Eurasia”, or between “Eastasia” and “Oceania” etc., a war against the enemies of Mankind and Civilization, i.e. the enemies of LaRouche. These enemies are “exposed” by LaRouche and his obsessive and wild “conspiracy-theories”. The world is about to be plunged at any time into the abysses of a New Dark Ages, a World War III, etc. Their clock always shows “One minute to midnight” for the last thirty-five years and LaRouche (a self-professed economist) has “predicted” a world financial crashnearly every year… for the last thirty-five years! The larouchies believe that “saving the world” is the “end-goal” of the “LaRouche organization”.

So, to use this lady (who is probably very nice) as my whipping boy, would God have anything to do with the above? Murder, hatred of Jews, brainwashing, quarantining people, multiple conspiracy theories, etc??? And their comparison of Obama’s health plan — horrible monstrosity that it is — is like Hitler’s T4 program is just plain weird.

The medias lack of care for the LaRouchites showing up at meetings with Obama/Hitler signs (as mentioned in a previous blog) is pointed out by the Weekly Standard as well:

CNN’s Larry King showed the above video of Barney Frank laying the smack down on a woman at a townhall meeting who compared Obama to Hitler. CNN left out the fact that this woman is a Lyndon LaRouche Democrat.

In the full video (via Allahpundit), the woman says, “This policy is already on the way out. It already has been defeated by LaRouche.” She also underscores her crazy LaRouchite beliefs by claiming that the U.S. has “30% real unemployment”. No one disputes that LaRouchites are on the fringe — but it’s indisputable that they are fringe Democrats. They oppose Obamacare because they want a single-payer plan.

While Nancy Pelosi and liberal talk-show host Bill Press have been smearing protesters as fascists and Nazis, left-wing bloggers have been attacking protesters for comparing Obama to Hitler. It seems townhall attendees just can’t win….

I have nothing but contempt for their organization and bewilderment at people who say they love Glenn Beck and want to do what God wants them to, and then proceed to write checks to this wacky organization.

Ideological Swings:

In 1977-78, LaRouche initiated an ideological change, an evolution from “socialism” to “nationalism”, well documented by Denis King and Chip Berlet.

This “evolution” was marked by a radical re-definition of “Fascism”. To this purpose he wrote in 1977 “What Actually Is Fascism?” where he said:

“The Nazi propaganda emphasis on “Krupp steel” and other symbols of industrial development points up the fact that to rule Germany the Nazis were obliged to play upon the deep desire for industrial and technological progress within even the ranks of numerous layers of nominal Nazi supporters and party members. There was a profound discrepancy between the systematic destruction of industry and the labor force under Schacht and the nationalist impulses of important varieties of German citizens who went over to support of the Nazis largely on the basis of hatred of Versailles and a commitment to restoration of Germany’s industrial progress.” “In short, all of those features of Nazi Germany’s policy which are generally attributed to fascism are not the ideological excretion of a fascist “sociological phenomenon” but are properly termed Schachtianism in its natural course and consequences. The essence of fascism, if we mean by fascism the deprecated features of the Nazi order, is Schachtian economics.” (6)

In other words there are “good” and “bad” Nazis:

“The majority of Nazi supporters were not fascists, but nationalists.” (6)

and consequentially:

“What is to be stressed most emphatically in this connection is the fallacy of the “conservatism tends to fascism” argument.” (6)

To confirm his ideological move from “socialism” to “nationalism”, he wrote that year:

“I never had the conception of founding a “true Marxist” association. […] We have never been Marxists, except as regarding Marx as the highest preceding advancement of essential human knowledge. […] More profoundly, as we change we do not change.” (7)

contradicting himself from what he wrote a year earlier:

“Labor Committee and allied Communist forces within the capitalist sector generally are working overnight, constantly, to bring into being a new Marxist International throughout the capitalist sector.” (11)

when he wanted to establish “socialism” world-wide:

“The important point to be added to that, is that such a form of society is within reach during this century. We have before us the immediate need and possibility to establish an intermediate form of society known as workers’ government, out of which in approximately a generation’ s time, an actual socialist form of human existence can emerge.” (4)

LaRouche redefined Marxism from a “higher”, philosophical standpoint; “higher” Marxism meant “good” industrial Capitalism, Marx and Benjamin Franklin were said to share the same, common ancestry and philosophical outlook: Plato’s Republic, trying to combine “socialism” (Soviet Republics) and… the Republican party! ({“republican” in LaRouche’s code-words, meaning Plato’s “Republic”).
In his “Creating a Republican Labor Party” pamphlet, LaRouche wrote:

“The republican party is thousands of years old. It is traced in terms of formal historical knowledge available to us today to the writings of Plato and Plato’s Academy at Athens, and to Alexander the Great’s city-building policies.”

The “new” Karl Marx was redefined in “The Karl Marx Karl Marx Did Not Know” (Fall 1977).

His 1980 U.S. presidential election was based on an alliance between “labor” (socialist) forces and “republican” (nationalist) forces and geopolitically between the “East” (USSR) and the “West”.

This ideological and philosophical reshaping can be measured with help of three key-documents during that period: 1/ “The Case of Walter Lippmann” (May 1977), 2/ “Two Tactics of the Inner PCI” (April 1978) and 3/ “The Secret Known Only to the Inner Elites” (May-June 1978). This last document is still considered by the LaRouchies as the real founding document of LaRouche’s Organisation.

In this 1977 revisionist document “What Actually Is Fascism?” he explained that “Fascism” was in fact synonymous with… “financial austerity” imposed by Hjalmar Schacht, a “cannibalization” of the German economy which led to Hitler’s war!

Capitalism therefore still leads to Fascism/Imperialism…
The “real enemy” is still “Capitalism” or rather “Capitalists”, not Fascists who are victims of these “Capitalists”.

But who was Schacht? What really happened to the German economy under his influence? Why does LaRouche focuses exclusively on somebody who was a German financial expert and Minister of Economics from 1935 until 1937 only (and who began to lose power after the implementation of the Four Year Plan in 1936 by Hermann Göring which put Germany on the brink of bankruptcy)?

Because by reducing “nazism” only to one single cause: “Hjalmar Schacht”, it is more convenient to re-write History. Forget about Hitler’s and the Nazis’ open intentions to start a war against their neighbors from the onset…\\ LaRouche only needs to claim Hjalmar Schacht was a “British agent”, an “environmentalist” or a “Jewish protege” and then, LaRouche could conclude that “Nazism” was an “ecologist”, a “British” or a “Jewish” conspiracy (and vice-versa)! Consequently, any economic policy or economist or politician could be labeled as “schachtian” or “nazi”!…

…(read more and follow footnotes)…

Swastikas:

…The LaRouche committee has staged dozens of protests nears Trader Joe’s entrance and exit doors, of which there are usually only two, the grocer claims in Superior Count. It says LaRouche’s members display pictures of Obama with a Hitler-style moustache and of Obama Photoshopped next to Hitler.

“At the Trader Joe’s in Irvine, the LaRouche Activists wore swastikas, which brought some customers to tears,” according to the complaint.

Tension between activists and customers nearly led to a fistfight outside one store, and in screaming matches have forced police to be called to remove the activists, driving customers away, the complaint states…

…(read more)…