by Uri Dowbenko
Mel Gibson’s ‘Passion’: Religious Pornography for Christians
Recovering Catholics beware. You know you’re in trouble when Mel Gibson has to get a Parkinson’s addled
Pope John Paul II to officially endorse his movie.
The programming you have tried to escape is not finished with you yet.
Mel Gibson’s movie, ‘The Passion of the Christ,’ described as a “vivid depiction of the last 12 hours of Jesus Christ’s life,”
has all the makings of religious pornography for Christians, just as ‘Schindler’s List’ was characterized as emotional pornography
Writer-director David Mamet, author of Make-Believe Town, calls Steven Spielberg’s movie ‘Schindler’s List’ -- “’Mandingo’ for
Jews, a slave epic made for those interested in watching well-built black men being mistreated.”
“‘Schindler’s List,’ ostensibly an indictment of the German murder of the Jews, is finally just another instance of their abuse,”
writes Mamet in his essay “The Jew for Export.”
“The Jews in this case are not being slaughtered,” he continues. “They are merely being trotted out to entertain. It’s not the
Holocaust we are watching. It is a movie, and the people in the film are not actively being abused. They are acting out a drama
to enable the audience to exercise a portion of its ego and call this exercise ‘compassion.’”
So it is with Gibson’s so-called Passion, defined as the “agony and suffering of Jesus during the Crucifixion.”
Catholic (Universal) Programming
It should be remembered that the Roman Catholic Church did not celebrate the victory of Christ in the Ascension. They do not show
the apotheosis of Christ, rising into another dimension, into the clouds and out of sight. They chose to portray the suffering man
hung on a cross, bleeding and broken, an icon of guilt and shame and a stark warning to anyone who would buck the Vatican’s iron-fisted
control of the spiritual evolution of humanity on Earth.
The crucifix -- an image of a tortured man, strung up on a cross, head hung down -- has become the most powerful symbol of religious
and political mind control ever conceived by the dark forces that prey upon the Children of Light and the Sons and Daughters of God on
The Vatican has outlawed and ignored the teachings of Christ on karma and reincarnation because it would reveal the origins of those
who have hijacked the spiritual community of lightbearers.
According to the New Testament, Jesus taught about the metaphysical reality of reincarnation, as in the parable of the man who was
blind from birth. The disciples asked him if it was the blind man’s sin or was it the sin of his parents, implying that they knew the
principles of karma and reincarnation. In other words, whose karma was it that the man was blind? Jesus replied that it was neither.
The man chose to be blind from birth in order for Jesus to heal him when they met later at that time and space.
Instead the Roman Church is focused on the horror story. Lifetime after lifetime, the agony and suffering of Christ has been used
to indoctrinate people into believing the lie that we are sinners -- and not Sons and Daughters of God.
Good and Evil are constantly inverted in this never-ending attack on the spirituality of men and women, born again and again into
the bondage of the Roman Church -- and other pretenders of Christianity (or Churchianity
So is this movie just another “theatrical mission” by the Jesuits? Mel Gibson has not publicized his connections with the sub rosa
societies known as Opus Dei and the Jesuits.
‘The Passion’ has all the earmarks of a Jesuit classical ‘spiritual exercise,’ in which the Jesuits subject the imagination of the
supplicant with all the pain and suffering of the Christ,” says Tupper Saussy, author of Rulers of Evil (www.tuppersaussy.com).
Designed by Ignatius Loyola, the founder of the Jesuits, “The ‘Spiritual Exercises,’” explains Saussy, “was an intensive program of
psychological indoctrination designed to align individual thought with papal authority.”
How strong was this so-called “psychological indoctrination”? Jesuit obedience “alters the perception of reality according to the
superiors’ dictates,” writes Saussy. “Section 365.13 declares, ‘We must hold fast to the following principles: ‘What seems to me white,
I will believe black if the hierarchical Church so defines.’ Francis Xavier would later describe this quality of submission in a vow that
unintentionally summarized the Jesuit mission: ‘I would not even believe in the Gospels were the Holy Church to forbid it.’”
In his book detailing the sinister history of the Jesuits, Saussy writes, “Embedded in the ratio studiorum
[Jesuit educational process] were the elements of entertainment, of dramatic production – composition, rhetoric and eloquence. These
courses interlinked with the Spiritual Exercises to intensify the experientiality of Catholic doctrine over Scripture and Protestantism.
They resulted in a genre of spectacular plays that won distinction as ‘Jesuit theatre.’”
Jesuits are historically known for their deceptions and political-religious conspiracies. Webster’s dictionary defines “Jesuitry”
as “principles or practices ascribed to the Jesuits as the practice of mental reservation, casuistry and equivocation.”
It should also be noted that President Bill Clinton was educated at the foremost Jesuit training center, Georgetown University.
According to Saussy, Clinton’s biographer David Maraniss said “the President owed his formidable skills as a criminal defendant to
‘his training in casuistry at Georgetown University.’” Casuistry is equivocal to rationalization, “to cause something to seem reasonable,
to provide plausible but untrue reasons for conduct.”
Under the guidance of the Black Pope (the Jesuit Superior General), the first western translation of Sun Tzu’s Art of War was
published in 1772 as The Thirteen Articles Concerning Military Art. Saussy’s position is that anyone knowing the Jesuit mission,
and knowing the nature of Jesuitic obedience could observe world events which followed with an increased understanding of geo-political
Did this military-political classic become the de facto Jesuit handbook for conquering the world?
The Church Militant, i.e. the Roman Catholic Church, has been rocked by scandals of moral and ethical depravity for two thousand
years, yet it has remained seemingly impervious.
According to the old Spanish proverb, “Don dinero, es muy catolico.” Obviously so is Mel.
What is Mel Gibson’s Belief System?
Tampering with a commonly held Belief System (BS) is, of course, quite dangerous. Mel Gibson’s role in ‘The Passion’ seems to be
reinforcing religious indoctrination. Think of it as S&M for Christians – Sadism for those who love to inflict pain and Masochism for
those who love the pain. Watching a pretend Jesus suffering a pretended agony is about as twisted as it gets.
The Metaphysical Conspiracy
Did Mel Gibson ever read Malachi Martin’s roman a clef called Windswept House in which the Roman Catholic Church is formally
dedicated to Satan in a ceremonial ritual? (An interview with the late Jesuit operative Malachi Martin is included in
Bushwhacked: Inside Stories of True Conspiracy.)
What is Mel Gibson’s agenda in producing and directing such a film that glorifies death, albeit the death of Jesus?
Does Mel Gibson believe he will win converts for the Roman Church by showing the torture of Jesus by those he called
“the synagogue of Satan”? (The synagogue of Satan is not to be confused with the synagogue of the Jews.)
Will Mel Gibson be battling with Quentin Tarantino, as Kill Bill fights it out with Kill Jesus (also known as ‘The Passion’)
in the movie theaters of the world?
In the Hebrew text of the Old Testament, the conspiracy of fallen angels is referred to as the Nephilim. The Bible and Strong’s
Concordance does not mention the Nephilim specifically by name, but Nelson’s Concordance has several listings.
The biblical verses from Genesis 6:4, for example, have been translated as, “The Nephilim were upon the Earth, in those days and
thereafter too, when the sons of the gods cohabited with the daughters of Adam and they bore children unto them. They were the Mighty
Ones of Eternity.”
“Nephilim” has been usually translated into English as “giants,” though the word stems from the Semitic root NFL (‘to be cast down’).
It means exactly what it implies: “Those who were cast down upon Earth.”
Contemporary theologians and biblical scholars have tended to avoid them, even though Jewish writings of the time of the Second
Temple recognized in these verses the echoes of ancient traditions of “fallen angels.”
Remember that the Nephilim have hidden their tracks quite well so far. They have tampered with the Bible, cut and pasted, added
and deleted text to suit their purposes. The Old and New Testaments have been written and rewritten many times.
The all-important Book of Enoch was removed from the officially sanctioned version of the Bible. Why? Because it revealed the
origin of these fallen creatures who left their high estate to cause mischief on earth.
“It happened after the sons of men had multiplied in those days, that daughters were born to them, elegant and beautiful. And
when the Watchers, the sons of heaven, beheld them, they became enamoured of them, saying to each other, Come let us select for
ourselves wives from the progeny of men, and let us beget children.” (Book of Enoch)
But it wasn’t so simple. “Their leader Semyaza said to them; I fear that you may perhaps be indisposed to the performance of
this enterprise and that I alone shall suffer for so grievous a crime. But they answered him and said, we all swear and bind ourselves
with mutual execrations, that we will not change our intention, but execute our projected undertaking. Then they swore all together,
and all bound themselves by mutual execrations. Their whole number was two hundred, who descended in the days of Jared, to the top of
mount Hermon.” (Enoch 7:1-8).
In other words, it took an actual pact for this pack of fallen angels to “fall” in love with humans.
In a book called Forbidden Mysteries of Enoch: Fallen Angels and the Origins of Evil, Elizabeth Clare Prophet writes that
“the Book of Enoch explains where these devils [fallen angels] get the energy to do their despicable deeds. Since they have already
lost the divine spark and their place in heaven -- God told them, ‘Never shall you ascend into heaven,’ and ‘Never shall you obtain
peace,’ they have nothing else to lose and everything to gain from the shedding of blood, the life essence of the sons of God.”
“They have no remorse for their misconduct,” Prophet continues, “for the way of penance and forgiveness is not open to them.
Without a heart flame they have no pity for their victims, no ability to feel for them. They do not identify with them in murder,
or in the mass murders the Watchers legitimize with the term ‘war.’”
Expurgating the “Scriptures”
Another case in point is the story of Abraham and Isaac. In the words of Bob Dylan, “God said Abraham kill me a son; Abe said,
man you must be putting me on.”
The bothersome “authorized” version in the Bible has “god” commanding a father to slaughter his own son -- but nobody asked,
Which of the hundreds of Sumerian gods would order such a horrendous act?
According to Hebrew Myths: The Book of Genesis by Robert Graves and Raphael Patai, “sacrifice of first-born sons was common in
ancient Palestine and practiced not only by the Moabite King Mesha, who burned his eldest son to the god Chemosh (2 Kings III. 26-27)
but by the Ammonites who offered their sons to Moloch (Leviticus XVIII.21).” This tradition continues today in the practice of abortion,
as well as the “selective service” in which young men are sent to die in war.
The Book of Jubilees -- another politically incorrect book of scriptures that didn’t make the cut -- describes a fallen angel called
Mastema “testing” Abraham. In other words, it was not the “Lord” who told Abraham to kill Isaac. A fallen angel named Mastema was allowed
to whisper in his ear to tell Abraham to snuff his own kid.
In another instance, “Abraham expressed fear lest he be enslaved by evil spirits who have dominion over the thoughts of human
hearts.” He prays, “Deliver me from the hands of evil spirits and do not lead me astray from my God.” (Jub. 12:20)
The point is discrimination -- to discern the will of God from the will of fallen angels.
This is the real story of Abraham and Isaaac, according to the Book of Jubilees, “It came to pass in the seventh week, in its
first year, in the first month of this jubilee, on the twelfth of that month, there were voices in heaven concerning Abraham that
he was faithful in everything which was told him and he loved the Lord and was faithful in all affliction. And Prince Massena came
and he said before God, ‘Behold Abraham loves Isaac, his son. And he is more pleased with him than everything. Tell him to offer him
as a burnt offering upon the altar. And you will see whether he will do this thing. And you will know whether he is faithful in
everything in which you test him.” (Jub 17:16-17)
Abraham, of course, was clueless. He could not distinguish the commands of demons from the voice of the angels, and so he set out
to murder his son.
Elsewhere in the Book of Jubilees, Prince Mastema is mentioned as the leader of evil spirits who tempt, accuse and destroy men.
According to the Dictionary of Angels by Gustav Davidson, Mastema is the accusing angel, bringing injustice and condemnation to
humans. He is also called “the angel of adversity” and the “father of all evil,” yet he’s supposed to be subservient to God.
If fallen angels had tampered with the scriptures, wouldn’t they leave this part out -- to sow confusion in the minds and hearts
of the readers?
Of course, you could always rationalize this gruesome story by saying that this was Abraham’s test of loyalty or obedience, but
the inconceivability of such a horrific request would eventually sow the seeds of doubt in a “god” that would even conceive of such
a “request” -- unless it came at the behest of a fallen angel. This is precisely the modus operandi of fallen angels who try to
undermine love and trust. It ain’t no accident, baby.
Losing His Religion
And so it was with Mel Gibson’s Signs. In this one, Mel Gibson plays a priest who’s Losing His Religion. And it’s not only his
religion. He’s actually lost his BS -- his entire Belief System. Poof. It’s gone. Why? Because his wife had been killed in a
At the end of the movie, after battling an alien invasion in his house, Mel puts his priest collar back on and marches back
to his “job.” End of story.
The problem with this bogus scenario is simple -- if Mel Gibson had a crisis in conscience or even faith, nothing happened
during the movie that would restore it. He didn’t crack open the Bible – not even the Talmud. He didn’t say a prayer and no
angels appeared to his rescue. As a matter of fact, the fool didn’t even have enough sense to have a shotgun around the house to
fight off the aliens.
But somehow his belief system has been mended, the aliens have been beaten back and how this relates to his “crisis,” God only knows.
Signs is a new age movie pastiche of assorted paranormal phenomena, including Crop Circles, Synchronicity and Aliens.
Crop circles are those mysterious beautiful patterns engraved in fields of grain, mostly in England. They first started
appearing in the 1980s, and, for the record, crop circles have never been rationalized by the Grand Poobahs of Science. The
problem, of course, is that crop circles literally transcend three-dimensional physics.
When Mel Gibson wakes up one day in his Pennsylvania farmhouse, he sees a crop circle in his very own cornfield. His younger
brother Merrill (Joaquin Phoenix) thinks the crop circle was made by pranksters, a bunch of “nerds” who don’t have anything
better to do. His son Morgan (Rory Culchan) thinks it’s the aliens. His daughter Bo (Abigail Breslin) says, “I think God did
it.” That is the extent of the “discussion” regarding the origin of crop circles.
Signs tries to be spooky and supernatural with no success. A TV scientist, commenting on the appearance of crop circles in
India and then mysterious lights over Mexico City, pontificates -- “Either it’s one of the most elaborate hoaxes ever created,
or it’s for real.”
“Everything they wrote about in science books is about to change,” says the talking head scientist, referring to some momentous
paradigm shift, which is supposed to presage the alien invasion. “Some people think it could the end of the world.” You know, like
Then there’s the obvious knock-off of The Celestine Prophecy, when the Mel Gibson character asks his son, “Is it possible that
there are no coincidences?” That is supposed to pass for a mystical comment in this waste of film stock of a movie.
The clueless inhabitants of the movie first try to communicate with the aliens through a baby monitor (?), then finally put
aluminum-foil pointed hats on their heads to keep the aliens from reading their thoughts. Then for some reason, they board up
the windows to keep the aliens out – as if boards are going to protect them from ET technology.
Alien ‘Signs’ of Disinformation
Written and directed by M. Night Shyamalan (‘Sixth Sense), of “I see dead people” fame, ‘Signs’ tries to insinuate the
idea that crop circles are landing strips for aliens who have come to conquer the earth. As if technically advanced beings
from another galaxy need such mundane markers.
(By the way, the best online reference to crop circles, those beautiful elaborate geometric patterns, is Crop Circle Connector
So are crop circles the work of hoaxers -- or aliens with too much time on their hands? Not very likely. Some crop circles
may be created by Terra-based technology that incorporate gravity waves or other esoteric science.
Former aerospace engineer Brian Desborough, in his book, They Cast No Shadows: A collection of essays on the Illuminati,
revisionist history and suppressed technologies (iUniverse) says that crop circles are in many cases due to Mossbauer Beam technology.
"Some UFO writers and lecturers who lack a scientific background claim that humans lack the technology to create such complex
crop circles," he writes. "For the record, the basic crop circle characteristics outlined above are exactly the evidential signs
that would remain if the crop circle were to be created by means of a low powered gamma ray beam device. Such technology was only
implemented into widespread use by the military during the past two decades -- the same time period that elaborate crop circles
first began to appear."
"The swollen nodes of grain stalks are of high moisture content; the high frequency gamma ray beam would cause the moisture in
the nodes to convert to super heated steam, swelling and softening the nodal cells and causing the stalks to bend in the direction
swept by the beam," he continues. "Such beams are capable of creating extremely fine detail; the high frequency clicking sound
which is emitted from newly formed circles strongly suggests that the beam systems employed in this duplicitous act
incorporate Mossbauer beam technology. The soil within the circle would emit radiation and any creature unfortunate
enough to be irradiated by the beam would be carbonized."
Desborough's conclusion about crop circles remains the most logical explanation on the topic. He writes, "In order to
add to the illusion that crop circles are the creation of a technologically superior race of extraterrestrials, the Mossbauer
beam units probably are mounted in terrestrially manufactured flying saucers," echoing the conclusions of Bill Lyne, author of
Pentagon Aliens: Flying Saucers Are Man Made Electrical Machines and Occult Ether Physics.
“Signs,” however, comes up with lame-looking aliens.
Mel Gibson’s Dad
Then there’s the Mel Gibson story. In a previous movie ‘We Were Soldiers’ (based on that memorable book called We Were Soldiers
Once… and Stupid), Mel Gibson plays a Vietnam-era soldier who doesn’t even question the propriety of the Vietnam War Scam,
but marches off to kill “gooks” just because.
Ironically Mel Gibson’s father, Hutton Gibson, actually had enough sense to immigrate to Australia -- so his boys wouldn’t
Understanding the Jesuit mindset, Hutton Gibson actually wrote a book called The Enemy Is Here! (Distributed by Flatland B
Flatland Books distributor Jim Martin describes it like this – “(1994) This is a fairly obsessive 500-page tirade,
self-published by movie star Mel Gibson's father, about the false Church doctrines emanating from Rome since Vatican II. Gibson, Sr.,
has spent the last 20 years or so publishing a periodical in Australia which serves as a vehicle for his fulminations against the
"liberalization" of the Catholic Church.”
“This book compiles the most significant of Gibson's articles. Being myself a confirmed heathen,” Martin continues,
“most of the doctrinal recriminations go completely over my head, but I can glean that Gibson has no truck with the “new mass”
in which grape juice is substituted for wine, nor for any alteration of Catholic strictures against divorce, evolutionary theories,
birth control (even “natural” birth control) and “ecumenicalism.”
“Since all the popes since 1958 have been heretics, Gibson says, the post has been ipso facto vacant all these years. Yet the
Catholic Church remains the One and True Church, whose mission is to convert every human on the planet to its original,
“traditional” teachings. It is the obligation of militant Catholic laymen, like Gibson, to set the record straight and abandon
false teachings of blasphemous, wicked men in clerical garb who have gone so far as to allow Freemasons into the Church. Even the
excommunicated ‘traditionalist’ priest Marcel Lefebvre is dismissed by Gibson, since ‘the enemy always creates its false opposition.’
“As a prose stylist, Gibson does have his moments. ‘It washes the brain. It slithers by and leaves the great majority
unaware of its slimy passage, unaware its rulers have emerged from deep-laid plots and introduced massive subversion.’ Yet there
is something profoundly disturbing about the book. After reading a few pages, you can close your eyes and easily imagine the
sounds of the crackling fire, the cries of agonized repentance, and maybe even catch a whiff of human flesh burning at the stake.
498 pages, paperback, $15.00”
Gibson pere’s other book is called oddly enough -- Is the Pope Catholic? Martin describes it like this – “(1978) Mel
‘Braveheart’ Gibson's dad, Hutton, has a bone to pick with the Catholic Church, and its recent line of false Popes.
In this book he focuses on Paul VI as the anti-pope who has softened the Church's intolerance of heretics. Heretics are
everyone who has heard Catholic teachings but didn't sign on. They are all going to hell, the traditionalists say. Maybe not,
said Paul VI. You're the Anti-Christ, says Gibson.”
Hutton Gibson’s rants are illuminating, if not entertaining. “The object of our war is victory,” writes Gibson.”It is no game
to win or lose. Shirked wars are irretrievably lost. Limited wars end like Korea or Vietnam. Compromise equals treachery, which
requires neither intent nor even consciousness on the part of the traitor. More often it grows out of ‘normal’ mistaken attitudes
developed in the modernist climate fostered by subversives. Treachery, then, is not necessarily subjective, overt, or culpable; it
remains treachery, nevertheless, in fact.”
Martin continues— “Gibson doesn't like the changes he sees in the Church at all, especially its drift into ‘liberation theology’
communism. Hutton Gibson, according to one report I've heard, took his union-guaranteed disability payment from New York to
Australia, to keep his sons, including Mel, out of the Vietnam War. 181 pages, paperback IPC, $11.00”
Mel Gibson’s Roles
It makes you wonder if Hutton Gibson understands the cosmic irony of his son Mel Gibson’s roles.
In Conspiracy Theory, Mel Gibson plays a victim of CIA mind control experiments -- who finally ends up back in the hands of
In Air America, he plays a drug smuggling CIA pilot – who has lots of fun running CIA dope in Vietnam.
In We Were Soldiers, Mel Gibson plays a gung-ho Vietnam soldier -- when it’s your good karma, in real life, for your dad to
whisk you away to Australia.
And in Signs, he plays a priest who has to battle aliens -- without a prayer or even a shotgun. “Father” Mel doesn’t perform an
exorcism in this one.
Of course, Mel Gibson has drawn the line. He’s not playing Jesus in ‘The Passion of the Christ.’ He’s just directing
What does that tell you?
‘The Passion’ might be a Jesuitical masterpiece – by definition, cunning, deceitful and prevaricating. That’s why you
don’t have to see it.
Copyright © 2004 Uri Dowbenko. All Rights Reserved.
* URI DOWBENKO is one of Alternative Media’s foremost writers and media analysts and the author of
Bushwhacked: Inside Stories of True Conspiracy.
A distinctive voice of modern American journalism, he is also the founder of Alternative Media websites:
Conspiracy Planet.com, Al Martin Raw.com,
Steamshovel Press.com, and
Conspiracy Digest.com. His latest book to be published in Spring 2004 is called
Hoodwinked: Watching Movies with Eyes Wide Open, the most politically incorrect movie reviews ever published. He can be reached at
Mark Lombardi: Global (Conspiracy) Networks
Kill Bill: Disney's Bloody Gore Fest
Bob Hope: Thanks for the (Sordid) Memories
Books In Your Office
Cleaning Up Office Clutter
Organize Office Books