L. A. Marzulli Endorses Donald Trump for President, Asks If 9/11 Was a "Shadow Government" Inside Job
For a long time now, I’ve noted the way that Nephilim theories seem to dovetail into rightwing politics through the shared medium of fundamentalist Biblical literalism. I’ve noted, for example, that the leading Nephilim theorist, Steve Quayle, explicitly uses belief in the demonic offspring of Fallen Angels and human women to push a radical rightwing agenda that includes repressive social policies and even seems to advocate the extermination of gay people. He does this under the guise of Christian love and charity in outlets like Jim Bakker’s allegedly Christian home shopping program that masquerades as a religious talk show. To that end, it’s worth looking at the outrageous and shocking rightwing statements that fellow Nephilim theorist L. A. Marzulli made this week.
Before we look at his promotion of rightist material, I should note that Marzulli isn’t a doctrinaire conservative. He borrows just as liberally from conspiracy theories that originate on the left, though he folds them into a reactionary worldview. Thus, on September 11, he spun a conspiracy theory that the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks were an inside job, evidence of which he says can be found in the collapse of World Trade Center Building 7. Rejecting the findings of a 2002 FEMA report, Marzulli denies that the collapse occurred due to fires sparked by falling debris from the North Tower that burned within the building for most of that fateful day: “If planes and fires weren’t responsible, was there some weapon used that the American people don’t know about? If there is a shadow government, with a hidden agenda, is it part of the military-industrial complex?”
We know from Marzulli’s other, earlier claims what he thinks really happened: He believes 9/11 was the work of the U.S. government’s secret Nephilim contingent, the secret societies that worship Satan and love the gays.
Here, though, is where things begin to get strange. While Marzulli happily embraces anti-government conspiracy theories that assert that that the U.S. government is run by a secret cabal of Satanists, he nevertheless feels that it is of the utmost importance that America elect Donald Trump immediately. How, one might ask, could he feel so strongly about a decision that his own conspiracies assert would be pointless in stopping the coming of the Antichrist? Consistency is the hobgoblin of mediocre minds.
But Marzulli is incensed by Hillary Clinton, whose remarks last week identifying “half” of Donald Trump’s supporters as a “basket of deplorables” prompted Marzulli to issue multiple blog posts expressing his outrage, weirdly interspersed with advertisements for his latest DVD about the Watchers and the Nephilim. Yet his is the pious hypocrisy of a man who cannot separate himself from his emotions long enough to recognize the fault in his own arguments. Compare, for example, the different approaches he takes to the lifestyles of Clinton and Trump, both of whom are wealthy, privileged members of the American elite, and both of whom have lived for decades cocooned in the luxury of power:
Clinton is completely out of touch with most Americans. When was the last time she actually pumped gas into her car, or driven a car for that matter? When was the last time she had to balance a check book? How about go to the grocery store and decide between two items because she can’t afford them both.
One candidate is out of touch because she doesn’t live in the real world, while the other is in touch, not because he experiences the world directly, but because he sees people at his rallies. Regardless of what you think of either candidate, one must recognize that these arguments are entirely arbitrary. The names and pronouns could be switched without affecting either argument.
In the interest of disclosure, I will remind readers that it is no secret that I find Donald Trump to be an ignorant vulgarian, and I take issue with his promise to “open up” libel laws to make it easier to shut down criticism of public figures, something that would make it much more difficult to offer effective criticism of quacks, frauds, and polemicists like L. A. Marzulli.
The problem is not so much that Marzulli supports one particular candidate but that he dresses up his favoritism in the clothes of the apocalypse. His repeated refrain that we are living in the last days, that the Nephilim are on the march, and that the country “will not survive” a Hillary Clinton presidency is part and parcel of the same belief system. This casts the American election in eschatological terms and in so doing places that mantle of divine choice on Marzulli’s favored candidate. Consider, for example, the act of Christian charity he performs in forgiving Donald Trump his venality because Marzulli claims to be able to see into Trump’s soul:
In closing todays post. Trump has heart and the people see it. You can’t fake that, you can’t summon it up like a magic genie, you can’t turn it on or off. Trump is the real deal and this campaign with all its ups and downs and strenuous scheduling has changed him.
Weirdly enough, he denies Hillary Clinton the same privilege he claims for himself in knowing another’s heart: “How can she possible know the heart of another individual? She can’t,” he wrote. Remember, these lines were all written within the last five days. He cannot see his own double standards.
In other words, Trump’s good intentions supersede the need for good works so long as we believe in his goodness. He is heaven bound by faith alone, a typically Protestant approach to goodness advocated in Evangelical Christianity. Even though James 2:17 states clearly that “faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead,” a position the Catholic Church holds, Protestants since Martin Luther have instead favored Paul in Romans, 5:1-2, which claims that one attains the glory of God solely by faith, and works therefore have no effect. Luther thought that those with faith would perform good acts by virtue of their faith, but some today, especially televangelists, con artists, and criminals, more crudely act as if simple belief abnegates the need to act on that belief. Marzulli, as a self-described religious leader, takes this to its logical extreme, equating the perception of good intentions with a lightness of soul that marks one as a “good” person.
Nor are his reasons for this unclear. Marzulli makes quite plain why he hates Hillary Clinton. He refers repeated to “the gay agenda,” which he says will march “without pause” under her presidency. His comments on the gay issue leave him unable to type coherently:
Millions of Americans were taken aback by the Supreme Court’s decision—which I believe was rigged and is nothing short of judicial fiat—to allow gays to marry. Millions of Americans are against this along with allowing a 6 year old boy who identifies with being a girl into the girls restroom? This is homophobic? How about basic common sense. What about the 6-yearold girls rights? Oops, I guess the Supremes threw her under the school-bus. (typos in original)
He rages as well against tolerance for immigrants and Muslims, but the gay issue is the only time he tries to use the argumentum ad populum and cries conspiracy. It seems to bring out a rage in him that other conservative hobbyhorses don’t elicit to the same degree. Muslims, though, are a clear second, specifically because of his fear of sharia law. The irony that the policies he advocates—from abortion bans to restricting gay rights—are in line with the stereotypical view of sharia law escapes him.
We know, though, from Marzulli’s earlier writings that his fear of the apocalypse is tied intimately with rightist social policy and Nephilim theory. He is strongly influenced by the “days of Noah” theology, which argues that Jesus’s statement in Matthew 24:37 that before the Second Coming things would be “as it was in the days of Noah” means that literally the Nephilim will be rampaging across the world as they did in Genesis 6, not, as the text at 24:39 plainly states, that humanity will be ignorant of the coming destruction. Because of this, he also equates the sexual immorality of the Sons of God in Genesis 6:4 with the presumed sexual sin of the people of Sodom—which he considers to be homosexuality—because Jude 6-7 compares the Fallen Angels to the lustful Sodomites. Consequently, homosexuality is for Marzulli demonic, and rightwing social policy is essential to suppress the Nephilim’s gay agenda.
As I mentioned at the top of this piece, Marzulli’s friend Steve Quayle is even more explicit in his advocacy of rightwing views, and he goes much further in arguing that the Nephilim are responsible for homosexuality so gay people must be destroyed. Marzulli dresses his views up in more conventionally conservative language, but the resulting implications are still the same: Giant bones prove the existence of Nephilim, which prove the truth of the Bible, which condemns homosexuality, so the gays must be suppressed by voting Republican at every opportunity. That such a vote is worthless if his other claim—that a secret Nephilim shadow government really runs America—is true doesn’t seem to cross his mind, mostly due to his overwhelming fear that society might make his preferred sex and gender roles optional rather than legally mandated.
9/16/2016 11:40:27 am
One thing is 100% certain - Vladimir Putin would love to see a female President of USA.
9/16/2016 11:56:18 am
Don't the Democrats and Republicans know they are a couple of dorks.
9/16/2016 11:58:54 am
How exactly does angelic sex with human women (clearly a heterosexual act) imply that gays (who could never produce offspring through homosexual sex) are evil?
9/16/2016 12:00:58 pm
Gays would not exist without heterosexuality.
9/16/2016 01:34:16 pm
Heterosexuals would not exist without heterosexuality.
9/16/2016 01:37:44 pm
Heterosexuals do not owe their origin to gays.
9/16/2016 02:08:42 pm
NOBODY would exist without heterosexuality. (Well, there is mitosis.)
9/16/2016 02:23:59 pm
Well, one thing that I feel certain of is that gays do not exist because fallen angels ravished earthly women. The rest is apples and oranges to me.
Day Late and Dollar Short
9/16/2016 06:01:38 pm
"Heterosexuals do not owe their origin to gays."
9/16/2016 02:20:10 pm
Great question! The argument is that Jude specifies that human-angel sex in Genesis 6 is sinful and also that God gave the same punishment to the people of Sodom for lusting after "strange flesh"; therefore, since Sodomites were gay the Nephilim (offspring of the angels) must be at the root of sexual perversion, being conceived in sin. The argument fails because Jude was actually condemning angel-human sex in both cases, but the preexisting belief that gay = evil influenced the interpretation of the Sodom episode and thus the Nephilim myth. Confusing, isn't it?!
9/16/2016 04:02:59 pm
9/17/2016 07:46:15 am
9/18/2016 12:39:22 am
I want to preface this by saying that I am an atheist and am by no means a biblical scholar. I have read several articles and discussions and watched some debates on biblical topics though and one of the most well thought out and researched arguments made about Sodom and Gomorrah, that I found to be incredibly interesting, was this: The sin of Sodom was not homosexuality, lust, or anything of that nature. It was breaching the law of hospitality. When the people of Sodom ask Lot to send his guests out of his home they breached hospitality law. It didn't matter what they people wanted to do to them, they didn't have the right to demand that Lot turn his guests over once he had taken them in. They could have said "Hey, Lot, send your guys out 'cause we need another couple guys for doubles parcheesi." or "Lot, buddy, those two guys, we think they stole Frank's mule and raped Zeke's daughter, we want to arrest them." The reason WHY didn't matter in that part of the world at the time. Hospitality Law was just about absolute. There are plenty of other biblical stories that emphasize that same point; don't breach hospitality.
9/17/2016 08:53:05 am
It is a good question - a student in my class posed it also. I've written down a few of my own thoughts on the matter in a new blog post here, FYI: http://www.andywhiteanthropology.com/blog/hybrid-theory-and-the-broadening-of-the-nephilim-dragnet-lightning-post
9/16/2016 12:23:34 pm
"conspiracy theories that originate on the left"
9/18/2016 04:18:46 am
Excellent point, and one that keeps on getting forgotten.
9/16/2016 12:55:11 pm
I think it is fairly obvious by now that the core problem of 9/11 involved a failure of information sharing, by our own government. The head of NSA (Hayden) was ostensibly confused over just what to share with other US intelligence agencies.
9/17/2016 01:13:56 pm
To be fair, Hayden's confusion was justified, given the sheer amount of information overload all the security agencies get. Unfortunately, the problem is nowhere near to being solved, since the original intention of the creation of Homeland Security got fucked up nine ways to Sunday. So no, we shouldn't "forget what caused 9/11,' anymore than we should forget what caused two world wars.
9/17/2016 08:18:57 pm
When Lee Harvey Oswald claimed he was a patsy, he was telling the truth as he knew it. He thought he was helping the US government. There is documented proof that he contacted a representative of the government (FBI) requesting a double-check of his mission...which was not to kill JFK.
9/18/2016 04:23:07 am
Gunn, I find it interesting you're taking the word of a murderer over, I don't know, the thousands of police officers and other investigators.
9/18/2016 12:22:03 pm
Why would someone ask me a question, posing as me? Anyway, I guess I'm not as trusting of "authority" as you are. You're presupposing that Oswald was a murderer, but in my narrow opinion, you've swallowed the carefully crafted cover-up bait hook, line and sinker. Ultimately, we have different opinions, based on knowledge or a lack of knowledge...but that's okay. Peace to you.
9/16/2016 02:26:09 pm
Hillary was being generous saying only half of Trump's minions are deplorable.
9/16/2016 03:13:09 pm
Amazing, that from a few words in a ancient text the Nephilim have evolved into a dramatic 21st century conspiracy narrative.
9/16/2016 03:49:22 pm
I have a general question about Marzulli. He opens his videos with the statement that he is broadcasting from "an undisclosed location deep in the heart of the Santa Monica mountains". His interview with the Kandahar Giant source was also secret. Is this just showmanship or is he really concerned about being found? Does he want to sound important, avoid creditors or does he have a bit of paranoia that "they" will find him? Just seems like an odd thing to emphasize.
9/16/2016 04:47:30 pm
How does Marzulli think Trump will save us from a "Revelation" type antichrist, or the gay agenda, etc... when the end times are Gods prophecy. According to his bible, it IS going to happen, no man can put a stop to God's plan. Why is he trying to slow down the process and defy his god. I know I'm oversimplifying this, but it seems to me that die hard Christians who claim the bible as 100% accurate, and God's true word, somehow think they can stop the events in Revelation.
9/16/2016 04:53:11 pm
Another example of Homo Sapiens rubbish
9/16/2016 05:35:38 pm
The point of James 2 seemed to me to basically be "this is a stupid argument, stop having it".
9/16/2016 07:21:06 pm
Yep, Marzulli strikes again. While reading this post dissecting his arguments, I had the scene of Mel Brooks sneaking into the Roman Senate in mind. "Bullshit, bullshit, bullshit."
9/17/2016 01:15:17 pm
The more they protest about the evil sinful people they claim they're not, the more one should be inclined to think they protest too much.
trolling are we?
9/18/2016 12:22:43 am
Why comment at all when you're not deconstructing Marzulli but Nietzsche and at the moment I'm wondering if you're even aware of it? It's all thru today's article in this instance via "idealism" and historiographical "style." Marzulli has taken a fringe bit of what may not have been tacitly accepted by even Mormon historiographers as CULTURALLY affiliated with Gnosticism run amuck and hence beyond the scope of their PRESUMED AND UNSPOKEN apologetics structure, and rather than discuss the historigraphical premise that undergirds WHY the "right wing" is "anti-modern" you show your own tail of sorts. Yes and no may be the answer attributed to Wittgenstein but discretion existed long before he coined a "scientific EXCUSE."
9/18/2016 12:53:48 am
On the subject of conspiracy theories and cover-ups, I can only shake my head and chuckle. The biggest problem with the idea of the government concealing such conspiracies lies in the very idea that the government is actually capable of keeping a secret. I know that some people will try to point to things like the Manhattan Project to claim that "see, the government kept that a secret." Except for the fact that 150,000 people worked on the Manhattan Project. anything that 150,000 people are aware of cannot be called a secret.
Your comment will be posted after it is approved.
Leave a Reply.
I am an author and researcher focusing on pop culture, science, and history. Bylines: New Republic, Esquire, Slate, etc. There's more about me in the About Jason tab.
Enter your email below to subscribe to my newsletter for updates on my latest projects, blog posts, and activities, and subscribe to Culture & Curiosities, my Substack newsletter.
Terms & Conditions
Please read all applicable terms and conditions before posting a comment on this blog. Posting a comment constitutes your agreement to abide by the terms and conditions linked herein.