Michael W. Smith--Christian Pop Star/Satanist?

by **rothbardian** » Mon May 22, 2006 5:24 pm

WolfMoonLady-- I didn't see your post at first. Sorry. Wow, thanks for a few of those insights. I realize you and I may be looking at this from completely different angles but...I appreciate the interpretation you were able to provide. I had no idea what Smith was trying to signify. I didn't undestand your question about the researcher's "manger" comment. He was just saying that for a supposedly 'Christian' Christmas CD geared towards conservative evangelical Christians, the cover art was oddly ambiguous and enigmatic. Now, when you say his choice of runes signifies the 'sky god' and that is being placed above 'mankind'...that is very significant to me...as the ancient manuscripts which make up the so-called Bible, refer to Lucifer as "the prince and power of the air". Furthermore, they indicate that for the time being, all of the world is virtually under his dominion (although not complete control). I don't know what you see from your particular cultural perspective but I can tell you that for Smith to indicate that message...is spectacularly and utterly in opposition to his purported 'conservative Christian' philosophy. And once again, given what I have observed in his kindly, charitable demeanor...it's indicative to me of an ominous 'Jekyl and Hyde' thing, going on. Thanks for your insights. By the way- here's a thought: If there's an ancient (and malevolent) superhuman entity out there, he wouldn't necessarily have to wait for the appearance of Jesus Christ and the beginning of Christianity, to introduce himself to the Vikings. Granted, he may not have been known as Satan or Lucifer. I only dare to comment like this, because there are a number of you (Jeff included) who have wondered out loud if there is indeed some kind of human/superhuman interaction that exists out there. That theory, of course, falls neatly into the 'Christian' worldview.

by **professorpan** » Mon May 22, 2006 6:39 pm

Roth, Thanks for the considered reply. "Cribbing" wasn't meant to be derogatory. I also try not to demonize entire websites, but I do like to point out where the potential biases when I see them. As far as the triangle goes, I didn't see the CD title 12(EYE) in the corner. That does make it more intriguing. My apologies. <blockquote>Quote:<hr>Keep in mind- particularly with someone who has a 'Mr. Pan'-type orientation (no offense intended), I know from the outset I am probably only going to be able to go so far, in a discussion. You are steeped in a particular worldview, that I respect but disagree with. It is a 'disconnect' for me when folks like yourself can't make the connection between the ancient Egyptian religions...and Luciferianism:<hr></blockquote> I don't think I'm "steeped in a particular worldview." I try to base my ever-changing worldview on evidence. So if I have any worldview, it could be called "evidence-based." Too often, people like yourself view me as a debunker or a self-avowed skeptic. That is absolutely not the case. But I do take great pains to separate speculation (which is fine, as long as it is understood to be speculation) from assertions of fact. So, the "connection between the ancient Egyption religions" and "Luciferianism" is not proven to me. Many occult, and non-occult, people and groups have co-opted Egyptian art and symbolism. And the idea of widespread Luciferianism among the elite, while an attractive theory, is far from proven. <blockquote>Quote:<hr>Firstly, you have all this satanic RA going on (Franklin, Shadow Ridge Church -per the Hamlins, Hosanna Church, ad infinitum). <hr></blockquote> I'm an agnostic when it comes to the widespread, networked SRA that many people discuss here. Yes, there are examples of ritual abuse in a satanic or occult context. But the jury's out about how far or deep it extends. And the subject has been horribly complicated with bogus cases -- if you haven't familiarized yourself with them, you really should. I also question how important the "satanic" element is in many ritual abuse cases, or whether it's just a convenient framework for the abuse. I do see evidence of a particular worldview among many on this board -- a worldview in which a cabal of elites, working within a Luciferic religious system, uses techniques of ritual abuse and mind control to usher in a fascist New World Order. Or something like that. There are many variations of the theme, but it is considered by many to be the "way it is." As an evidence-based agnostic, I'll certainly entertain the possibility that it is true. But I can't just accept it because it "makes sense" or because it is a convenient explanation for why the world is so utterly fucked. <blockquote>Quote:<hr>Secondly, we're constantly seeing connections to the 'power elite' in that regard (the Jeff Gannon/JohnnyGosch/Barney Frank thing, the Finders, Marc Dutroux etc.etc.) <hr></blockquote> The Gannon/Gosch theory seems to have not panned out. The Dutroux case is very disturbing, but I don't think it can be assumed to be connected to other cases such as the Finders. <blockquote>Quote:<hr>And thirdly, these elites obviously love this ancient and/or occultic symbolism because they're having it crop up absolutely everywhere...everything from the Washington monument obelisk to the illumnist Statue of Liberty, and the fifty little pentagrams on the American flag etc. (And all of that is just for openers.)<hr></blockquote> More assumptions and speculation. Many of the founders of the U.S. were Masons, which accounts for their use of esoteric symbolism in the examples you mentioned. That's an fascinating subject in its own right. But whether current "elites" (a broad term) utilize estoeric or occult symbolism is arguable. Again, it's an interesting topic, and some evidence suggests *some* very powerful people are interested in symbolism. But it's hardly a slam-dunk. <blockquote>Quote:<hr>I would think that at the very least, one has to ask why this Triangle/Eye thing is cropping up on the dollar bill, on a Smith CD cover, a Hollywood movie cover (Aeon Flux shown above) and absolutely all over the place. <hr></blockquote> Okay, this is where I keep slamming my head against the wall. Assuming that the Aeon Flux movie image is engineered by the Illuminati/PTB/Luciferians is a serious stretch. . . equally as farfetched as suggesting that a Jack Black comedy film with the word "Nacho" in the title was created to reinforce something about Mexican politics (an assertion recently posted on the board -- apologies to Hugh, who I think is very perceptive in spite of his occasional daft connection). I hope I can get this point across: Images of an eye in the pyramid, a rose and a cross, the Eye of Horus, the Ankh, The Hermit from the Tarot, and other esoteric symbols have been part of Western culture for a very long time. Artists in particular like to take resonant imags and use them -- witness all the alleged "occult" record and CD covers the fundies like to point to as examples of satanic music (as in the Alan Parsons example in your original post). So it's quite easy to imagine the producers of Aeon Flux would incorporate an eye/pyramid image into their film. The image resonates with people, and suggests conspiracy themes. After all, do you think only people who visit this board are clued in to the pyramid/eye imagery? Certainly not. The idea of a giant conspiracy/cabal has been part of popular culture for a very long time. I know, because I've been reading this stuff for decades, in popular fiction as well as factual books. That's what gets me so frustrated -- when people make illogical jumps like "Aeon Flux is using the eye/pyramid image, therefore it's a signal/clue/joke of the Illuminati." And they lump every instance of a symbol together into a messy theory that has no coherency and is completely speculative. <blockquote>Quote:<hr>Somebody like Smith may very well have been taken from early childhood (similar to "sw", "havangilla" and many others) and subjected to mind control (via DID) and then used in this manner. Like I said, I've watched Smith for years. He has a very mild-mannered, charitable, kindly demeanor that doesn't jibe with a stereotypical satanic personality.<hr></blockquote> And that's jumping off a very long limb into sheer, unsupported speculation. Which is *fine.* But I've seen too many people assume such speculation is fact. <blockquote>Quote:<hr>P.S. I disagree with you about Alan Parsons. They have a very heavy occultic emphasis. Almost every cover has the symbolism. They write songs about Satan. It goes well beyond a MotlerCrue guy, flashing the 'horns'. (Not that there's much at stake in this disagreement.)<hr></blockquote> So what if they use occult imagery? It proves nothing. Same with the song Lucifer, which is an instrumental. Maybe Alan Parsons likes occult symbols. Maybe he is a practicing occultist. Maybe it's a joke. It proves nothing about his philosophy, and it certainly doesn't signal malign intentions. Lots of heavy metal bands use Satanic imagery -- it sells t-shirts to disaffected youths. But is there an orchestrated effort to sell Satan by the puppeteers at the record labels? I doubt it very much. I do agree that Christianity has been usurped and polluted with fascist ideology. But I've seen no evidence that Luciferians are behind it. The evidence is pretty easy to follow, from Rushdoony and the Dominionists through Falwell and Robertson. Please understand I'm not trying to put the lid on speculation. But too much speculation passes for "the way it is" ideology on this board. When I chime in to voice my opinion, I try to be fair, and you and others can ignore it when you disagree, or challenge me to back up my assertions. And I must say you've presented some interesting material about Smith and his ties to right wing politics. It's intriguing, to be sure, and worth more digging.

by **rothbardian** » Mon May 22, 2006 9:59 pm

Pan-- Thanks for your response. I'm still developing a few thoughts. WolfmoonLady-- Thanks again for your insightful observations. thoughtographer-- From your earlier comment, I hope your not misreading something there. I'm basically just agreeing with most people on this board, that there are evil people out there doing sneaky things. It's just that they may have been even sneakier than we might've thought.

by **Dreams End** » Mon May 22, 2006 11:31 pm

I found this really interesting. Wolfmoon Lady is right, of course, but the point is that MWS's following would have the same reaction you are seeing on this website. I'm from the South, folks...in fact, Nashville, where "Michael W." as we like to call him, resides. So having these images are very strange. Around here, when I was a kid, rumors of satanic influence (the band KISS = Knights in Satan's Service, new treasury bonds are about to be issued with 666 as the serial number, etc etc) were kinda like telling ghost stories around the campfire...and I didn't even grow up in a church environment. Mother is right about Christian rock/pop. It's as corrupt and venal as its secular counterpart...and with less integrity as it often simply mimics popular trends...badly. exhibit a is a certain famous female Christian singer who was having an affair with my wife's ex husband before divorcing her first husband. I'll let fans of the genre chew on that one. the stories I've heard from those inside that industry are not much different from those inside the secular music industry...and I get more upset about the hypocrisy of it all. But I"m fascinated by these album images. And I believe one could, on a cloudy day, discern a sort of eye of horus abstracted within that triangle...but which came first, the design or our looking for it? I've actually battled Michael W indirectly. While working at a youth organization, his organization, (he's on the board and I think he founded it) called Rocketown was building up it's youth services. They have a skateboard park and performance space and were going to provide a youth stage at a weekly music festival downtown. I objected to this as it was city funded. Rocketown was no secular organization, but actively practiced what they called (I kid you not) "bounty hunting" where they'd find kids who were alienated and work to bring them to Jesus. Well, that's fine, but not on the city's dollar. I had a word with a councilman, but I don't even know what the outcome was. It wasn't just this stealth evangelism (they don't mention any of that in their public materials, but they do talk about it in their newsletter), there was a certain creepiness factor. I met their director at a meeting of youth workers. WE all had name tags. His said SEAN! All in caps with the exclamation point included. He really didn't have much to say and gave me a creepy (not necessarily in THAT way, but creepy) kinda feeling. A later quote in the paper about them..."we're just about lovin' and huggin' on kids' didn't make me feel much better. One strain of "Satanism" of course, is alienated kids within a dominant Christian culture (and I"m sorry...but I grew up around here...and it is the non-Christians who feel put down, judged, etc. With more churches per capita than I think any other American city, maybe that's just here, but I had more attempts to "save" me than I care to count. It was THIS approach, in fact, that ALIENATED me from Christianity for so long...so those of you who think you are helping the cause by such evangelism might want to keep that in mind.) who often turn to heavy metal, wear black and paint "demonic symbols" on abandoned buildings. Some go further. None of these concern me, except for the sadness for the alienated young people I feel...my big concern is the higher ups who may engage in such. So it is really interesting about these album covers. I don't know what it means. Let me also caution Rothbardian, who really does seem to be looking high and low for the big picture, that blanket unsupported statements like "known occultist Karl Marx" are not helpful. I remember you announced in another thread that he had "invented" communism at the behest and employment of the "Illuminati". Really? Which Illuminati? How much was he paid? These are rhetorical questions, because the assertion is unsupportable. Marx was an atheist, or at least anti-religion ("opiate of the masses"), but given the role of the church so often in history as siding with the ruling class, it would be hard to be anti-capitalist and not be anti-church: Catholic AND Protestant. It was the protestant movement, remember, that somehow got us thinking that material wealth was a sign of God's favor. The elect, don't ya know. So when you connect such dots with such BROAD brusthstrokes, it hurts your own quest for truth and your credibility. Oh, and the backwards = Satan stuff...pure pop culture/ pre-internet urban legends....well, I think back fondly on evenings with my Christian friends of breathless stories of backward masking and the imminent return of the anti-Christ. This generation DID pass before all these things were fulfilled, as have countless generations before them. Anyway, the album is interesting. By the way, a remake of the Omen is released in a few days. 6/6/06 to be precise. A tad less subtle than a few runes.

by **thoughtographer** » Tue May 23, 2006 1:07 am

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>thoughtographer-- From your earlier comment, I hope your not misreading something there. I'm basically just agreeing with most people on this board, that there are evil people out there doing sneaky things. It's just that they may have been even sneakier than we might've thought.<hr></blockquote> From my earlier comment about this being used to "piss off fundamentalists", it seems that I said exactly the opposite of what I meant, but that's what I get for working on three things at once while trying to eat while also posting here. What I'm seeing here is an intentional lowjacking of what is commonly viewed as "occult" symbolism to further a religious agenda that is most probably of the evangelical Christian variety. I don't think I need to go much farther than the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christmas_Tree#History">Christmas Tree</a> to illustrate my <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yggdrasil">point</a> that cultures syncretistically adapt to shifting religious control structures either by overt force through imperialism, or by subtle manipulation by bait-and-switch tactics; from what I know of the Vikings, they were no strangers to absorbing the belief systems of the remaining people of their plundered lands. Some people consider that "kind", but I consider it "sneaky". Maybe you're right about them being sneakier than we've imagined -- I'll agree with that much -- but it's a question of how and why they're being sneaky, and to what extent. I just don't think this goes very deep. I see this as adopting the same methodology used by the wave of "Christian" "punk" music that had adopted a cleaned-up version of the generic "rebellious" attitude that was gleaned from remainder of the warmed-over corpse that the "underground" music world had become after being destroyed by vanity, greed and stupidity decades ago. My best guess at the moment is that this sort of reaction is only one of many intended reactions, and the ultimate destination of these breadcrumb trails is not the cannibalistic witch's house made of bread, but an evangelical musician's ideas about what "traditional" Christmas "values" -- based on the track listing alone. Weird symbols? Strange poses? Minimalistic, "artsy" photography and design? Where's Santa Claus? Wild speculation leads to people posting on the Internet leads to more wild speculation leads to this CD in someone's home and money in (one of) this jerkoff's bank accounts. I don't know what his intended meaning is, and I honestly don't care. I just marvel at the tactics, and wonder what it's doing to (or for) people. Smells like NuChristmas to me. "A crooked stick will cast a crooked shadow."

by **Sepka** » Tue May 23, 2006 1:57 am

Does Smith even design his own covers? Most musicians don't. The musician will generally get to look at it, and can disapprove it if need be, but most will defer to the art and marketing directors. The album cover is usually put together by an art director who's trying to incorporate suggestions and themes raised by the marketing director. The marketing director in turn is working from market studies. It wouldn't surprise me a bit to find that there's a study that people buying contemporary Christian music are intrigued by possible hidden meanings in the album covers. -Sepka the Space Weasel

by **thoughtographer** » Tue May 23, 2006 2:07 am

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>It wouldn't surprise me a bit to find that there's a study that people buying contemporary Christian music are intrigued by possible hidden meanings in the album covers.<hr></blockquote> Once again, I scattershot babble while others encapsulate the issues so much more compactly. I was speaking from a broader perspective, but this is part of what I was trying to get at. "A crooked stick will cast a crooked shadow."

by **rothbardian** » Tue May 23, 2006 4:24 am

DreamsEnd-- Very interesting post. I still am brewing up a response post to Pan's insights (and now yours, and thoughtog and Sepka). For me it is (I think) all about the issue of how others insist on 'remaining uncertain' about any number of these issues. I hold fairly firmly to a number of positions, and now it's just a matter of clearly defining those in my own thinking and then trying to successfully relate that. Is it worth the effort? I think so, time permitting (although I have yet to get to my long threatened Karl Marx data dump). I enjoy a good discussion and...I'm trying to 'save the world' for my children's sake (or like to think so), if nothing else. Very, very interesting stuff about Nashville and Smith. Given my extra-conspiratorial view of things (compared to most, I guess) , I have understood Nashville to be a virtual beehive of creepy PTB shenanigans. In the FWIW department, I don't know that I have much of a dog in this particular hunt but...as to 'backwardsness' in the occult, besides this recent possible example with MWSmith...I've read in a number of places that Aleister Crowley promoted such. I suppose he has as much authority to define occultic orthodoxy as anyone. My point being-- contrary to what you may think, I didn't hear about this from a breathless Sunday School teacher. Here's a quote: "Crowley felt that becoming an expert in reading, writing, speaking and understanding words backwards was essential...:" <a href="http://www.ezlink.com/~perry/CoS/Theology/crowley2.htm">www.ezlink.com/~perry/CoS...owley2.htm</a> Here's another quote from "The Confessions of Aleister Crowley" (authored by Crowley)-- "When the angel had finished, the message was rewritten backwards. (It had been dictated backwards as being too dangerous to communicate forwards --- each word being in its nature so powerful that its direct communication would have evoked forces which were not wanted at that time.) These Keys or Calls being rewritten backwards, there appeared conjurations in a language which they called "Enochian" or Angelic." <a href="http://www.hermetic.com/crowley/confess/chapter66.html">www.hermetic.com/crowley/...ter66.html</a> Then from the good ol' days of the Franklin Cover-up, there are the fine folk of the Aks-Ar-Ben 'social club' (Nebraska spelled backwards) over in Nebraska, who had quite a few complaints from young children about their SRA activities. (Again...FWIW.) As far as Marx is concerned...that might be a touchy subject for some and I don't want to unnecessarily alienate anyone, but I have seen significant evidence. I've just been too busy playing Xbox with my little son. You can understand that.

by **blanc** » Tue May 23, 2006 5:39 am

I think that Rothbardian demonstrated a possible use of incorporating symbols associated with one set of rites into presentations ostensibly linked with another, when he indicated that it was his children who spent time on these videos. In looking at cases of ra, at first I often wondered why the perps used specific mainstream films and pop videos in their abuses, and loaded family festival occasions such as easter, but also birthdays with a second meaning. close contact with survivors provides one answer, they suffer every time there is a reminder out there; and as children, the perp message which helped to make the victimised child hide the abuse from potentially protective adults was sometimes of the 'they all know' or 'they are all doing it too' kind. So don't think necessarily of adults being led into evil practices by being duped by contaminated mainstream material - think of children growing up with symbols around them which they associate either with harmless, approved and good events (if they are safe); or with a duality (if they are not safe. Then to what use are these symbols put? Christian pop merchants should be questioned on their choice of album cover artwork if it could offend, this would happen if they used overtly sexual or violent imagery, if you bought the stuff why not ask him to explain? Profpan I value your scepticism about prevalence of ra because it strikes as the genuinely open minded kind, but I must tell you again, the cases which come into the public domain are a very very very small sample of all the allegations, and that even when a case gets as far as prosecution the muddying of waters continues. There is no reason I can give why you should take my word for it when I say there are many cases of ra which you don't get to hear of - but consider for a moment the flood of sadistic imagery which is part of the blossoming pornography industry, that police monitoring this wearily speak of thousands of new images every week - consider its bedfellow, the people trafficking sex trade industry - where do you think the victims come from? why aren't they speaking out? Read at least more than is on the internet of ra, read at least some accounts of persons working in the therapeutic professions, before you set your scepticism in waterproof cement and walk away.

by **albion** » Tue May 23, 2006 5:42 am

I'd actually never heard of this guy until today, so I don't know much. But if he's a friend of the Bushes AND some kind of pagan or occultist masquerading as a Christian, that's interesting. I'm not convinced that that's the case though. The I2(EYE) cover could quite easily mean nothing. Eye and triangle is a very common symbol. Backwardsness aside, most of the letters in the name on the "Big Picture" cover aren't runes, so that could simply be a decorative typeface. Alone, it doesn't mean much. What's interesting is that those same two runes appear in another, somewhat more obvious form on the "Christmastime" cover. That's where it begins to seem intentional, to me. That still doesn't mean Smith is a Satanist or a Luciferian or a Norse Pagan. As others have pointed out, it could simply be the cover designers using symbols for visual effect, or else somebody may have been deliberately deploying hidden symbolism as a form of "stealth marketing." It's probably worth pointing out that IF the repetiton of the 2 runes is in fact intentional, it's not something that someone just thought up one day, it's a conspiracy that's spanned 12 years, since (according to online discographies) "The Big Picture" was released in 1986, "Christmastime" in 1998. I don't have enough information to say what it means, if anything. Smith's relationship with Bush, on the other hand, seems fairly well documented. Here's a few links, though nothing that would clearly demonstrate anything strange or sinister about the relationship. <blockquote>Quote:<hr>How did you get to know President Bush so well? Smith: I met his dad in 1989 when I did the Christmas in Washington TV special. My wife and I ended up going to the White House and have been family friends ever since. I think it was when I visited Kennebunkport in 1992 that I first met George W. Bush over the weekend. At that time, he wasn't even governor of Texas—he was involved with the Texas Rangers. And I remember it was me and some other guy who took on father and son in a game of tennis. And we kicked their tails. We absolutely annihilated them. I'm extremely competitive, but they're even more so. And I was thinking that after that, my relationship with the Bushes was over. Apparently it wasn't! Smith: Since then I've been an encouragement in his life. I think he likes me because he knows I've meant a lot to his father, but I think it's also because he knows that I don't want anything from him. Everyone in D.C. has an agenda and wants something from someone. The two of us try hard to preserve the friendship and not talk politics—although I'd love to share a few thoughts with him, but I try to remain sensitive to our relationship. He actually calls me "Dubya." He snickers and calls me "The real Dubya." Whatever! Is the man you know the same man we see in the news and on the television? Smith: I think he's a strong leader and tough, but there's also a sensitive side to him that you don't get to see enough of on TV. And that would be my advice to him—I think it's okay to let America see more of that sensitive side. I've seen him tear up recounting stories of soldiers and sacrifice. We also get to talk more about faith and spiritual things, which you won't usually see on issues oriented television. He's committed to his faith, and he reads devotionals every morning. I've occasionally sent books—the modern English version of My Utmost for His Highest, one of Max Lucado's books, and John Eldredge's Wild at Heart—and wondered if he ever took the time to read them. But then the next time I'd see him, he'd thank me and tell me he read them. <a href="http://www.christianitytoday.com/music/interviews/2004/michaelwsmith-1004.html">www.christianitytoday.com...-1004.html</a><hr></blockquote> <blockquote>Quote:<hr> ROSS: I understand that the president of the United States asked you to write a song? SMITH: He did. ROSS: Mr. Smith, I’d like you to write a song? SMITH: Well, it’s so funny because he calls me 'W'. When he sees me, he says, 'There’s the real W.' We kind of kid around with that. It was six weeks after 9/11, and we were sitting in the Oval Office with him and we were talking about what went down. ROSS: OK, wait a minute. This goes flying by. I have to stop. We were sitting in the Oval Office together? SMITH: Yes. ROSS: Where are you from? SMITH: I’m a little runt from West Virginia. ROSS: Here I am, Mr. President and me sitting in the Oval Office. That’s pretty heady stuff. Michael W. Smith and George W. Bush SMITH: I can’t explain it. I have no idea why I got picked. I know I’m in his life for more than shooting the breeze. ROSS: As a friend, a confidant? SMITH: Yeah, I pray with him, I pray over him, I send him from time to time encouraging e-mails. ROSS: So you’re walking in some pretty big shoes? SMITH: I guess I am. <a href="http://www.cbn.com/cbnmusic/interviews/700club_mwsmith112404.asp">www.cbn.com/cbnmusic/inte...112404.asp</a><hr></blockquote> <blockquote>Quote:<hr> President Bush asked Michael to write a song dealing with the tragic events of September 11, 2001. The song is titled "There She Stands." MICHAEL W. SMITH: It was great to go back and play the song for President Bush. First time, I believe it was when we were in Kennebunkport. LISA RYAN: How did he respond? MICHAEL W. SMITH: He got teared up. He always tears up (laughter). That’s where we’re a lot alike. We’re emotional. And it was so funny because when I played it for him, I said, 'You remember that conversation we had?' I said, 'I think this is the result of it.' So I played it, and, obviously, everybody got teared up: Daddy Bush and Mrs. Bush. I’ll go out on a limb and say this: I think my best work is still to come. That’s a really good feeling being the age that I am. (Laughter) <a href="http://www.cbn.com/700club/guests/interviews/MWSmith_20years_100903.asp">www.cbn.com/700club/guest...100903.asp</a><hr></blockquote> What the heck, here's a few more: Smith talks to Larry King about substance abuse: <a href="http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0602/10/lkl.01.html">transcripts.cnn.com/TRANS...kl.01.html</a> Bush Names Michael W. Smith To President’s Council on Service and Civic Participation <a href="http://christianmusic.about.com/od/musicnews/a/mwsbushnomSCP.htm">christianmusic.about.com/...nomSCP.htm</a> "There She Stands" music video: <a href="http://www.ccmmag.com/Media/Mov/index.php?Show=ALEGROlogy&DocPor=&DocPro=http&DocNam=MichaelWSmith.de_ThereSheStands.Htm&DocDir=/Media/Mov/&DocHoN=www.ccmmag.com">www.ccmmag.com/Media/Mov/...ccmmag.com</a> On the face of it, all very wholesome, if a bit bland. Could be nothing. I don't know. Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=albion@rigorousintuition>albion</A> at: 5/23/06 4:01 am

by **Dreams End** » Tue May 23, 2006 10:18 am

I bring up Rocketown again because Bush Sr. was, in his time, pumping another "help the youth" organization called "Straight Inc." which eventually had to shut down because it was so incredibly abusive. Not saying Rocketown is like that...my only case against them now is this stealth evangelizing and a genuine creepiness factor. As for nashville as a hub of PTB...bring on any and all evidence. I live here and would love even vague rumors. However, don't add Cathy O'Brien to your list. There may be something to her story (she lives here now) but almost all of it is disinfo. I return to my one interaction with her when I read that her daughter had been forcibly committed to a mental hospital in Knoxville. I wrote O'Brien asking if she ever spoke here in Nashville and could I help in a campaign to free her unjustly committed daughter. The only thing I could do, she wrote back, was buy her book. I guess I shouldn't project, but if MY daughter were in similar straights, I'd be chained to the capitol door by now. Nashville is a hub of various drug transport routes, due to several interstates converging here. The same ex who dated that famous Christian singer used to be involved. One of the men he worked with was found shot in the face in Mexico some years back. When my wife starts to really recover memories..as seems to be happening, she may start to remember a bit more from her adult life as well. Her ex is small time and I think he's out of all that now (he's also a nice guy since he stopped drinking) but they were running in some dark circles. The link between drugs, organized crime and the country music industryis also known. My wife says that this is primarily among the older (I'd say "real") country musicians. I can't imagine why that would go away, though as it's never been busted up...if you don't count Willie's infamous dope smoking.

by **professorpan** » Tue May 23, 2006 11:00 am

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>There is no reason I can give why you should take my word for it when I say there are many cases of ra which you don't get to hear of - but consider for a moment the flood of sadistic imagery which is part of the blossoming pornography industry, that police monitoring this wearily speak of thousands of new images every week - consider its bedfellow, the people trafficking sex trade industry - where do you think the victims come from? why aren't they speaking out? Read at least more than is on the internet of ra, read at least some accounts of persons working in the therapeutic professions, before you set your scepticism in waterproof cement and walk away.<hr></blockquote> Blanc -- I have read quite a bit of "non-Internet" research into RA, including books and reports from therapists. As I've stated on multiple occasions, I don't deny that RA exists. How prevalent it is, and how organized and networked the abusers are, is where I find the evidence to be lacking to make firm statements. And to complicate matters, the bogus cases and examples of obvious hysteria muddy the waters considerably. My skepticism is *not* set in waterproof cement. True skepticism is the opposite of such cement. Belief is what I often find firmly cemented.

by **Wolfmoon Lady** » Tue May 23, 2006 12:33 pm

Very interesting posts, folks. Sorry I couldn't add more yesterday, but I had too much to do. I totally 'get' that MWS's Christmastime cover is inappropriate for mainstream (and particularly fundamentalist) Christian culture. It is bizarre, in that respect. Is he a Satanist? I would not know by the cover. What the cover's symbology tells me is that he considers himself a spiritual warrior, perhaps a go-between for humanity and God, and music is the weapon he intends to use in his personal calling as a spiritual warrior. Remember, Tyr is not the same as Lucifer, at least not within the mythology of the Norse people. I cannot say what MWS thinks, obviously. I agree with both Roth and DE that I am basing my reading of the runic symbology on my understanding of the runes and their meanings, rather than from the viewpoint of fundamentalist Christians. Certainly, I cannot speak with the same authority as an anthropologist who has studied and then documented the sub-culture of contemporary Christian rock music. Trust me, if I were still doing fieldwork, I'd be on this in a heartbeat. The phenomenon of Christian rock is a rich topic that needs some ethographic study. In a general way, however, I can make observations about the phenomenon of 'othering' because it's something that occurs cross-culturally and is a useful tool for understanding this situation. This particular incident is obviously upsetting to many who are perplexed by MWS's behavior, which does not conform to the way fundamentalist Christians, as a distinct cultural group, with an attending set of expectations, should behave. In that respect, I can certainly see why MWS has shaken so many Christians who have come to trust him as one of them. He is 'othering' himself - in a significantly bizarre fashion - from a fairly conservative group of people. The phenomena of 'othering' often draws accusations of evil-doing. It is how people with a fairly standard set of cultural norms make meaning of deviant behavior. I'm very careful about attributing evil intentions when I don't know anything about the individual. In this case, I know next to nothing about MWS. I don't like what I'm hearing, tho, and suspect he's become susceptible to the hubris that often takes over when someone who is very talented (and powerful) begins to imagine they have messianic powers (uh, this happen in politics, as well, LOL). If MWS is into occult practices, I hope someone 'outs' him. If he isn't, and really does consider himself a spiritual warrior FOR God, then he should be very careful about the messages he imparts to a vulnerable and youthful audience. As for MWS being a friend of the Bush family, I don't know if that's sinister, but I might be wrong. I tend to think Georgie Boy collects famous people like Imeda Marcos collected shoes. Lance Armstrong is one example. (Funny how Cheryl Crow dumped Lance quite soon after the famous cycling with the Prez incident.) BTW: Although I didn't have time to do an extensive, peer-reviewed, literature search on the topic, I did a quick web search, using the keywords "phenomenon christian rock music" and got over 5 million hits. There seems to be a lot of stuff out there isn't scholarly but still provides valuable insight into the movement. Here are two items: <a href="http://www.popmatters.com/books/reviews/b/body-piercing-saved-my-life.shtml" target="top">BODY PIERCING SAVED MY LIFE: INSIDE THE PHENOMENON OF CHRISTIAN ROCK</a>, by Andrew Beaujon. Here's a snippet:<blockquote>Quote:<hr> Beaujon's excursion into that hip new world forms the heart of Body Piercing Saved My Life. The new generation of Christian rockers lays claim to a cool that was absent from earlier faith-based music, witnessed in the clever t-shirt that gave the book its title (picturing a drawing of Jesus' crucified hands). A visit to the Seattle label Tooth & Nail finds it as image-conscious as any other indie label but virtually unknown outside religious circles in comparison to secular hometown labels Sub Pop and Barsuk, despite comparable sales. Beaujon also profiles David Bazan of the popular emo band Pedro the Lion at great length, probably because Bazan proves endlessly interesting. While other Christian artists skirt controversial issues, Bazan openly interrogates what it means to be a Christian in today's society, finding himself frequently opposed to what passes for the "Christian" consensus. In a telling moment at a Pedro show, Bazan tells a rapt Christian crowd he doesn't even accept the religious classification, because he doesn't want his identity to suggest he voted for George W. Bush. Cheers turn to boos as he continues, "or against gay marriage." The refusal of the Christian community at large to confront such homophobia and other forms of bigotry and extremism goes somewhat underplayed in Beaujon's accounting. When a representative of the anti-choice group Rock for Life makes the outlandish claim that contraceptive devices like the pill and the patch constitute "chemical abortions," Beaujon leaves it without editorial comment, which is fine -- the zealot hangs himself effectively enough with his own words. 1 But when the author casually mentions a band with a song comparing same-sex marriage to "murder, date rape, and car theft," the topic demands a bit of analysis: why do these young bands so unthinkingly accept homophobic dogma? How are these lyrics being consumed and experienced by their audiences? Are the bands or the fans cognizant of the Orwellian perversion of Jesus' teachings of love and acceptance that institutionalized evangelism has perpetrated? <hr></blockquote> Here's a lengthy (23-pages) article, from GQ. Lots of info about what goes on at the festivals and how the audience's world view is pandered to by the musicians, who (in the following passage) are presented as mercenary opportunists. <a href="http://men.style.com/gq/features/full?id=content_301" target="top">Upon This Rock: Rock music used to be a safe haven for degenerates and rebels. Until it found Jesus</a> Here's a snippet (on page 9 of 23): <blockquote>Quote:<hr> For their encore, Jars of Clay did a cover of U2's "All I Want Is You." It was bluesy. That's the last thing I'll be saying about the bands. Or, no, wait, there's this: The fact that I didn't think I heard a single interesting bar of music from the forty or so acts I caught or overheard at Creation shouldn't be read as a knock on the acts themselves, much less as contempt for the underlying notion of Christians playing rock. These were not Christian bands, you see; these were Christian-rock bands. The key to digging this scene lies in that one-syllable distinction. Christian rock is a genre that exists to edify and make money off of evangelical Christians. It's message music for listeners who know the message cold, and, what's more, it operates under a perceived responsibility—one the artists embrace—to "reach people." As such, it rewards both obviousness and maximum palatability (the artists would say clarity), which in turn means parasitism. Remember those perfume dispensers they used to have in pharmacies—"If you like Drakkar Noir, you'll love Sexy Musk"? Well, Christian rock works like that. Every successful crappy secular group has its Christian off-brand, and that's proper, because culturally speaking, it's supposed to serve as a stand-in for, not an alternative to or an improvement on, those very groups. In this it succeeds wonderfully. If you think it profoundly sucks, that's because your priorities are not its priorities; you want to hear something cool and new, it needs to play something proven to please...while praising Jesus Christ. That's Christian rock. A Christian band, on the other hand, is just a band that has more than one Christian in it. U2 is the exemplar, held aloft by believers and nonbelievers alike, but there have been others through the years, bands about which people would say, "Did you know those guys were Christians? I know—it's freaky. They're still fuckin' good, though." The Call was like that; Lone Justice was like that. These days you hear it about indie acts like Pedro the Lion and Damien Jurado (or P.O.D. and Evanescence—de gustibus). In most cases, bands like these make a very, very careful effort not to be seen as playing "Christian rock." It's largely a matter of phrasing: Don't tell the interviewer you're born-again; say faith is a very important part of your life. And here, if I can drop the open-minded pretense real quick, is where the stickier problem of actually being any good comes in, because a question that must be asked is whether a hard-core Christian who turns 19 and finds he or she can write first-rate songs (someone like Damien Jurado) would ever have anything whatsoever to do with Christian rock. Talent tends to come hand in hand with a certain base level of subtlety. And believe it or not, the Christian-rock establishment sometimes expresses a kind of resigned approval of the way groups like U2 or Switchfoot (who played Creation while I was there and had a monster secular--radio hit at the time with "Meant to Live" but whose management wouldn't allow them to be photographed onstage) take quiet pains to distance themselves from any unambiguous Jesus-loving, recognizing that this is the surest way to connect with the world (you know that's how they refer to us, right? We're "of the world"<img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/wink.gif ALT=";)"> . So it's possible—and indeed seems likely—that Christian rock is a musical genre, the only one I can think of, that has excellence-proofed itself.<hr></blockquote>. Gotta go! Morgan

by **rothbardian** » Tue May 23, 2006 2:05 pm

blanc-- Was that an attempted insult? Mentioning me, my children and ritual abuse in almost the same breath? I think I smell hatred. Correct me if I'm wrong. Some (and only some) of the libs here need to get over their bigotry against non-libs just long enough to have a civil discussion. Your proposition is, of course, absurd. There is no place on this planet to get away from all the symbology, bumpersticker slogans, leftwing propaganda in the schools, rightwing propaganda slipped into the sermon at church (although I don't go to that kind of church), at the grocery store, on discussion boards riddled with disinfo agents (so I'm told), billboards on the highway, television, radio, music, on and on. The key is the matrix through which one views the world and which can largely screen out the bad stuff, and allow you to enjoy the good stuff. To give one simple example of how this works for my children, my wife and me-- we enjoy watching the TV-edited version of a movie entitled "The American President". This movie is absolutely riddled with what is, for me, utterly outrageous leftwing propaganda, and there is maybe one bedroom scene where I will flick the remote to a different channel, if the kids are in the room. There is also the silly idealized way in which the President and the White House are presented. (There've been nothing but vampires residing at that place going back hundreds of years.) But the movie is charming, and it is funny (at least for us). So we watch it, we enjoy it and, far from being adversely affected, we actually derive added entertainment by seeing who can spot the silly propaganda snippets first. blanc-- if you're going to assign such sweeping magical powers to the PTB, then in order to be consistent, I hope you are not so much as reading the instructions on your toothpaste tube. Wolfmoon Lady-- Thanks for that extra research material about Smith. I plan to read through that.

by **rothbardian** » Tue May 23, 2006 3:13 pm

Wolfmoon Lady-- Just a quick comment. You stated: "I can certainly see why MWS has shaken so many Christians who have come to trust him as one of them." Actually...the interesting fact of the matter here is that literally 99.99% of the 'Christian' community are utterly unaware of any of this stuff regarding Smith. This has been almost completely unnoticed. That's one of the reasons this is very intriguing to me. Albion-- I noticed you provide some interesting reading material. Thanks from me. I'm going to read through that.

Michael W. Smith--Christian Pop Star/Satanist?

the sky god

Re: Smith and MPD/DID

in the oven

Re: in the oven

Re: in the oven

Re: Michael W. Smith--Christian Pop Star/Satanist?

Re: Michael W. Smith--Christian Pop Star/Satanist?

Re: Michael W. Smith--Christian Pop Star/Satanist?

usefulness of symbols

Re: Michael W. Smith--Christian Pop Star/Satanist?

Re: Michael W. Smith--Christian Pop Star/Satanist?

Re: usefulness of symbols

Re: Michael W. Smith--Christian Pop Star/Satanist?

Did I hear that right?

the invisible Smith

Who is online