Hagee has ties to the powerful, both in the United States and in Israel. His book Jerusalem Countdown contains data which, he claims, comes from top-level Israeli insiders:
Notwithstanding Hagee’s bizarre narrative of the future, certain Jewish leaders value what they call his support for Israel, and appreciate his pledge not to actively proselytize Jews -- a promise that sets him apart from other evangelicals. Rudin says that while he welcomes Hagee’s support for Israel, he is uneasy “with what I feel is placing Jews and Judaism and the state of Israel into somebody else’s divine play.”Hagee hopes to establish a Christian pro-Israel PAC, more powerful than AIPAC itself.
Money also seems to play a huge role in Hagee's theocratic politics. He counsels his flock to give endlessly, since donations to his ministry constitute "the only proof you have that the cancer of greed has not consumed your soul.” This, from a guy who is worth millions.
If investigations of the current Washington scandals run deep enough, Hagee's name may show up. He broadcasts on the TBN network run by Pat Crouch, the close friend of the corrupt congressman Duke Cunningham. (Incidentally, gay rumors have swirled around both Crouch and Cunningham, who have both displayed an affection for ornate, effeminate furnishings.) Not only that. Hagee is a close associate of Tom Delay:
In 2002, DeLay visited pastor John Hagee’s Cornerstone Church. Hagee preached a fiery message as simple as it was horrifying: “The war between America and Iraq is the gateway to the apocalypse!” he said, urging his followers to support the war in order to bring about the Second Coming. After Hagee finished, DeLay rose to second the motion. “Ladies and gentlemen,” he said, “What has been spoken here tonight is the truth from God.”Hagee sends millions to Israel. DeLay, we now know, has involved himself with money laundering. The previous two sentences may have a connection.
With those words -- broadcast to 225 Christian TV and radio stations -- DeLay placed himself squarely inside the End-Time camp, a faction willing to force the Apocalypse upon the rest of the world.
And if that conspiratorial insinuation strikes you as over-the-top, I would counter that Hagee deserves to receive what he dishes out. He happens to be quite the conspiratorialist in his own right -- in fact, this page claims him as a proponent of the Illuminati conspiracy theory. I'd like to see some confirmation of this, since the Illuminati-spotters tend to be thinly-disguised anti-Semites (their cited sources usually head in the direction of Nesta Webster and William Guy Carr) -- while Hagee is the most ardent supporter of Israel on the Christian right.
8 comments:
Great job Mr. Cannon. Much more of this info needs to come out and come out now. With the way that mainstream media has been spinning the news so blatantly lately with Iraq, Gaza, and Lebanon, we all need to do our best to force the truth to come out anyway we can. I commend you.
Joseph,
I am no expert on any of these subjects,but I'll throw in what I know.
-My understanding of Illuminati is that they are anti religious establishment which explaines anti-Semitic but not pro-Christian.
-But then most higher ups in the Christian Right aren't real believers of Christianity or the End-Times, and just merely use the believers to amass money and power. The same applies to true Zionists. As a matter of fact, the ultra ortodox Jews believe that the promised land is not returned to the Jews till after the Saviour returns, which would put a hole in the theory of existance of Isreal today.
-AIPAC has always served as an allience between America and Israel, two nations that have mutually benefited from it and the religious aspect in reality has nothing to do with it, the same way that NATO was a pact with no religious undertones.
-Furthermore Illuminatis have always believed that a)they ought to keep their true natures hidden from the public and b)the best way to fight the religious establishment and/or any other establishment is to infiltrate it and work from the inside. Using any idea from religion to patriotism to nationalism does not make one a true believer in the cause.
-Is'nt the idea of anti-Christ in christianity simillar to this concept? Isn't the anti-Christ suppose to pretend to be God fearing and the promised saviour?
-None of this proves that Hagee is an Illuminati, but does prove that if he were one, none of what he professes to be would dis-qualify him. On the contrary, it would explain his ties to the powerful and his quest for power.
I'll help you out, beeta. The Illuminati is a myth.
There once was a real group by that name -- an anti-monarchist society run by one Adam Weishaupt. He was a former Jesuit who turned against religion, and sought to bring about the Enlightenment virtues of democracy and freedom of thought. Weishaupt spread these ideas through Bavarian masonic lodges, and through student associations at the University of Ingolstadt (where he taught). He had to operate in a clandestine fashion, for obvious reasons.
The Illuminati was eventually crushed by authorities in Bavaria; Weishaupt had to flee. His society did not last even a decade.
After the French Revolution, the displaced aristocrats toyed with the theory that the revolt was prompted not by their own misdeeds, but because a secret society -- the Illuminati -- had secretly engineered events. This theory, which soothed their egos (even though it had little or no basis in fact), was expounded by the Abbe Barruel.
Illuminati theories by John Robison and Barruel had a vogue in America in the early days of the Constitution. The idea was popular primarily with those who had supported England in the Revolutionary war.
You may want to look up an old book (1918, if memory serves) called "New England and the Bavarian Illuminati") which details the spread of the myth at that time.
The myth soon died out. But it was resurrected in the early 20th Century by an anti-Semitic conspiracy theorist named Nesta Webster, who believed that the Illuminati had survived its repression, and survived the death of Weishaupt. There were others who took up the torch, but Webster remains the best known anti-Illuminati writer of her generation.
After World War II, anti-Semites such as Myron Fagan, Gerald L.J. Smith and William Guy Carr needed to repackage their anti-Semitic myths under a new name. So they switched from denouncing the "Elders of Zion" to denouncing the Illuminati.
Bottom line: There is no Illuminati. I have studied conspiracy theories for over twenty years, and I have not seen any evidence that Weishaupt's group survived him. Those who claim otherwise will stomp and whistle and scream and shout imprecations and insult the nay-sayers -- but they never present hard evidence.
I did all of this from memory, but if you Google Weishaupt's name you will find confirmatory pages. I once found, in the Manley Palmer Hall library, a very old book in French (from the 1790s) which tied the Illuminati in with occultism. However, to judge from Robison (woho republishes some of Weishaupt's original letters), the original Illuminati was, in fact, strictly rationalist.
If ever you visit D.C., pop into the Library of Congress and ask to see the original edition of Weishaupt's "Apologie." It's signed by the author!
Joseph,
Tnx for the refresher...I had read about theories behind Illuminati and origins of it....but not in any lenght before....
Having said that, my comment was not so much about Illuminatis or my belief in thier actual existance today. I used that analogy since you had thrown it in the mix yourself to point out that what you see is not what you get, specially when it comes to the Christain Right. The point is that the powerful stick together and feed off of each other be it individuals or nations. I do not beleieve that poeple behind the scenes or rather in plainveiw of Christain Right or AIPAC have true religious convictions. If one were to believe that the Jewish God or the Christian God or the Moslim God would approve of these atrocities, then none of us should be his followers. Politicians and Preachers have the highest potential for "Evildoing" to borrow a word from our Prez, throw them in together and you get one scary creature.
AIPAC is not a religious organization; it's a lobbying group, like legions of others, and is very narrowly controlled. It is not expressive of the views of Americans Jews, and it doesn't solicit the views of Americans Jews. This is not the Sierra Club or the AARP.
A recent article published in London by two American academics goes into the matter of AIPAC in some detail (the fact that such an article couldn't be published in the U.S. says a great deal). Unfortunately, I can't remember the authors. Interested parties can check recent issues of the New York Review of Books for a discussion, including the usual outraged follow- up letters, that the topic is even raised. But at any rate, AIPAC represents a very small and self-interested cabal.
That AIPAC has so successfully combined its own narrow interests with the shame which accrues to anti-Semitism is a remarkably astute and effective piece of information control. Free and open discussion is utterly beyond the pale in this country.
anonymous,
I totally agree with you, and I didn't mean to imply that AIPAC is a religious group either. But as per your decription, the kind of treatment AIPAC recieves in this country, is much aided by hijacking both Judeism and Chritianity as perfect cover. After all, all religions are absolutist in demanding no questions, discussion or logic.
geez, ESTHER?? there is not a single mention of god in that entire book! it's generally considered propaganda about the origin of the feast of purim. it was not included in the biblical canon for a long time because it was so controversial. and you're right, joe; no prophecies! none.
here's an interesting exercise. try to get your mind in a place that would buy hagee's crap without scrutiny. instead of going to the book to check for facts, you'd be going to the book to get confirmation. how do they do that?? but they would find it, and i know how they do that.
as for aipac, it has never pretended to be religious; it's all about israel. and as far as i know, the reason the two authors mentioned published in london was not because they could not publish in the us, but because the particular journal they wanted to submit it to was in the uk. that caveat does not alter the fact that the us went into spasms over the piece.
Ill,
No mainstream American publication, including so-called leftist publications like The Nation, will take on AIPAC. It's unusual that the NY Review of Books even dared refer to the original article.
This subject is simply verboten in American public life. There is far more open discussion of Israeli policy inside Israel, than in the U.S., including large number of reservists and military personnel who won't serve in occupied territories.
AIPAC's power would seem to represent a nasty convergence of interests in this country: U.S. control of oil and of Arab nationalism, being the primary ones. But even AIPAC knows it's limits: the interests of American corporate elites will prevail, if there's any conflict between the two.
Post a Comment