Zeitgeist the Movie: Attempted Zionist Heist of the Truth Movement?
just to bring this back to the subject of 9/11
why did you omit any mention of Larry Silverstein? Do you think he was an innocent victim of someone's plan to demolish his newly leased buildings? How sinister!
____
â™
Real Truther a.k.a. Verdadero Verdadero
WTCdemolition.com - Harvard Task Force
NEW---> check out our revamped site!
good question. this isnt an
good question. this isnt an attack zeitgeist, i honestly want to know, why no mention of him?
"The Central Intelligence Agency owns everyone of any significance in the major media." ~ William Colby, Former Director, CIA
Silence is a text easy to misread.
Some other peculiarities I noticed: Talk about controlled mass media -- shows only Rupert Murdoch; Talk about world bankers' interests in WW1 -- omits the Balfour Declaration; Talk about that which shalt not be talketh about -- presents the offical story as gospel. Doesn't require an awful lot of imagination to detect a pattern there, or does it?
Maybe there is an innocent explanation for this -- if so, let's hear it, zeistgeistnyc. And please take note that I wouldn't be that suspicious were it not for the amazing production value of your movie.
______________
interns < internets
- Real Truther's blog
- Login to post comments
All I know is that Zeitgeist sucks.
The first third of that movie is the most embarrassing tripe I've ever seen (well, maybe the second most embarrassing.) I don't know who its target audience is -- Christians like David Ray Griffin and my parents would double over from the cluelessness. It seems to resonate most with self-righteous young dudes who are congratulating themselves for 'seeing through the myth' -- because both Fundamentalist and more sophisticated Christians would be unlikely to give it the time of day.
I would NEVER recommend this film -- I don't CARE how 'good' Part Two is -- the first part is just sad.
Zeitgeist sucks! I agree, Cass!
had similar gut reaction(kate's MO)...never finished watching it. then when i heard my supposedly left-wing, demo-progressive, billmayer-watching, love-mother-earth-but-hate-religion buddies touting it, i knew it had to be bad news. many of these same folks have joined the cult of Richard Dawkins. Questioning and rebelling against one's religious upbringing and established mores may be a good thing; however, I say, discard the chaffe and hold on to the seed (grain?) you know what i mean.
kateÂ
10 out of 10 Religion and Near Eastern Studies Professors agree
that Zeitgeist part 1 is pure New Age dog excrement. Check out the references – the writings of Swami Bogusananda, etc. Gimme a break. I saw a student last year turn in a Zeitgeisty type of research paper to another professor, and the student walked away with a D-minus. He didn’t get an F, only because it was typed and turned in on time.
The fact that this bogus part 1 is attached to part 2, which as I remember was pretty well done and fairly accurate, shows the technique of giving out true information right alongside bogus information. This is one of the classic tricks these folks like to use in order to discredit the actual truth presented. If you give someone a plate of truth with a big piece of dog crap right next to it, most people will reject the whole plate entirely, which is, of course, the goal of this clever little media strategy.
Also, the element of astrology did not become attached to ‘Egyptian religion’ until the Greek Ptolemaic period beginning in the 4th century BCE, long after Egypt’s pharaonic age. Astrology, as we know it today, was also not a part of original Mesopotamian religious tradition until the Assyrian period beginning in the 10th century BCE. So, no, astrology was not a part of Man’s earliest religious traditions. And when I use the word ‘astrology’, I am not talking about ancient Sumerian or Egyptian priests simply observing the movements of the heavens in order to calculate the start of a religious or a royal festival.
those first liners, Lazlo, ha hahahahah
now i'll read the rest.
and, i am endeared to the use of "near" eastern. had not seen or heard in a while. a more Brit term, no?
"cult of Richard Dawkins"
Well, he's definitely no Sam "question anything except the holocaust" Harris, but I like him.
As for the reference to Sam "question anything except the holocaust" Harris, I stopped giving consideration to anything he has to say when he equated questioning the holocaust to "Elvis sightings".
(He states this around 12:15 into this lecture)
http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=-8013281663903762676&q=Sam+Har...
The Skeptic Antidote/found in response to a Dawkins YouTube
regarding 9/11 - power point presentation about "conspiracy theoryies"...Â
I can't believe i'm posting this or that I have wactched this video twice now. I am not "born again" in the baptist/nondenomenational sense
According to these dudes, atheists have killed more nonatheists, especially christians, than have any so-called christians. Pretty heavy on the atheists of the bolshevik/commnunists/ussr/china ilk. I had always given communism the benefit of the doubt...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m8UxcGt04zg
hear hear kate
intolerance of atheism is as bad as intolerance of religion. belief and faith in any kind of spirituality, etc. is and has long been a positive force as well as being often corrupted. most religious people aren't perfect but most also aren't total jerks on purpose...
yep, and I have always been easy on the atheists
It's just that i have returned from an intense weekend visit with my hippy-writer-organic-farmer friend in NYState, and he's into this Dawkins stuff. although raised heavy irish catholic, Bill is a proclaimed atheist for years. He was preaching the religious fundamentalism is the root of all evil spiel.
so i remembered this vid! which i formerly would not have given the time of day.
i continue to be amazed at how my head and heart can be so forever turned inside out, upside down! quite the ride, man.
"isms" and the widespread misunderstanding of evil
I can totally relate to your experience, Kate, even though I'm not a religious person. Most of my friends are lefties/anarchists, progressives, hippys and yogi types. Which means that most of them would pride themselves of being above religious dogma and its cousin: the paranoid concept of evil - "there's a devil under every doorknob" type stuff.
Yet most of these people go to the opposite extreme and argue that either "there is no such thing as evil" or that evil can be oversimplified into having an explanation based upon ideology or upbringing. I used to think this way, and I used to say that everybody is good inside and we are all the same this way. Such a nice thing to believe. Who wouldn't want to believe that? That all changed after 9/11 (or the discovery of 9/11 truth, more accurately), when I realized that I didn't really understand evil and that I needed to be willing to re-examine my hidden assumptions. Not overnight, of course. But my intensified search for truth and understanding the world eventually led me to the psychological dimension of reality, which I hadn't really understood before.
Once I learned about psychopathology and the fact that some people, like 2-4% of the population are wired so differently from the rest of us: specifically that they don't have the ability to feel empathy and caring for other people. These psychopaths and sociopaths do evil things because of their nature, not because of some ism or upbringing. This reality has been studied extensively by science and the research is very interesting and relevant, and is, I believe, essential for anyone who is truly interested in understanding what is going on in the world right now (and throughout human history).
Unfortunately, most of my friends, I've found, do not want to understand evil. Some of them take the position that positive and negative are all created by our consciousness, and if we just "think positive" or suppress negative thoughts, then we can make evil go away (somehow). Or, that "evil doesn't exist", people do evil things ONLY out of fear or upbringing, etc. Or "don't look at the dark or you will give energy to evil."
I disagree with most of the above. I have realized that studying and understanding evil does not mean that you are giving it energy. I think that only by understanding evil can you know how NOT to give energy to evil. Also, fear is what feeds evil, I've found. Fear is often the result of a lack of understanding something. You fear what you don't understand.
Fighting this "evil", for the lack of a better word, that seems to be such a dominant force in the world today, requires that we become "spiritual warriors" of some sort. Not in the "religious" sense, but in the sense of a warier of the heart/mind, with the courage to look evil in the face and understand it better so that we can figure out how to fight it and develop superiors weapons of consciousness and create a better world for all of us.
I highly recommend the book, Political Ponerology (the science of evil adjusted for political purposes). The information in this book can cut through false assumptions about evil, human nature, the false battle of isms, etc., like nothing else I've ever read. It has helped me to understand the deeper levels of hideous things like 9/11, as well as helped me to really understand human nature and our political situation and to be better at avoiding being a victim of the psychopathic games of deception going on all around us.
Perhaps if your friend understood this psychological/spiritual dimension of evil, he could give up his over-simplified "x is the root of all evil" assumptions.
Â
Thanks goes out to my "petty tyrants", as Gurdjieff would say. Without the evil of Bush, Chaney, Silverstein, Mossad, Julliani, etc., I probably would never have learned about psychopathy.
These virtues are forged and tested in the encounter with the 'petty tyrant'. Overcoming the petty tyrant is not the goal of warriorship but it is a step on the way, a test. The warrior does not fight to claim the petty tyrant's position for himself but for self-perfection and freedom seen as abstract goals separate from any specific self-interest. If the warrior by defeating a petty tyrant may bring freedom to others, this is a windfall benefit, engaging every petty tyrant for the purpose of making a better world is not the warrior's goal, the warrior has greater adversaries.
The ultimate adversary of the warrior is the 'predator' which gave man the 'predator's mind'. This adversary is both internal and external...Â
study of evil
I sooooo agree, Keenan. Thank youy for this beautiful post response!!!
i, too, am studying and trying to understand over these past years the workings of psychopathology and sociopathology.
thank you for reminding of "Political Ponerology"....
but also...
"the measure of mental health is the disposition to find good everywhere"
RWEmersonÂ
Hmm.
"The Skeptic Antidote" - Sounds like just more communist fear mongering / apologetics to me. Not to mention the first to sources for their information aren't the places I'd be looking for the truth.
http://www.aquinas-multimedia.com/stjoseph/history.html
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04168a.htm
And it's not the numbers that get me, it's the inventive nature of the thousands of years of religious atrocities.
That was me.
And evidently I can't spell 2.
IN MEMORIAM EMAIL/holocaust
Check out what i received as a chain letter this morning:
Please read to the end...
IN MEMORIAM
there were pictures..not sure how to copy from email and post.
but anyway, i SNOPESED it:
http://www.snopes.com/politics/religion/holocaust.asp
i only liked part 1.. im not
i only liked part 1.. im not sure i see the big problem with it at all..
"more sophisticated Christians" whats that mean, doesnt believe in adam and eve but believes in jesus???
im just playing around, i think that they are all crazy..
Agreed...
I don't see the point in including this in an alleged 9/11 truth documentary, especially one that claims to debunk religious myth while promoting the holocaust myth. Though, the assertion that all religions are based on astrology & sun worship is a pretty solid argument.
This one is more accurate.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8251447278663885234
Jeezus, dude -- you scared me
That does sound rather snobby, doesn't it? What I mean by that is that you could take people like my parents (both Protestant clergy), demonstrate conclusively to them that Jesus as a historical figure did not exist (although they'd probably want to know about Paul and the other early Christians, too) and it would make very little difference to their faith -- their belief system about what is meaningful, and so on. For whatever reason, their religious faith is anchored in their here-and-now experience of God and Christ and the theological tradition that has come before them and not the historical narrative, which everyone knows is full of absurdity and inconsistency.
nice, Cass
which denomination of protestantism? have they read "Christiain Faith, and the Truth Behind 9/11" by DRG? sorry if i may have asked before....
Truefaction
^^
i didn't make it up :(
I think it was larry horse who done come up with that one... :) oh, sweet mockery, what would we do without you!
-RT
edit: or wait--was it you? if so, sorry for giving larry horse the credit. but then again, what's mine is yours and what's yours is mine, and what is larry horse's belongs to the ages!
Wasn't me!
I'm not laughing about my own jokes. At least not publically ;)
And as for ownership of words: "If a thing has been said, and said well, have no scruple: take it and copy it."
Let's just call it semantic evolution.
and here I thought we were all...
...rabidly anti-semantic...
HA!
No, we are all rabidly Anti-Symmetrical
ai'nt it the twooth
yep, it was me
i came up with it the same night posh israeli was hangin' in the chatroom with jpass, cass, and me. it evolved from twoofaction (for which i was told never to procreate by a mouse) which only makes sense when you say it aloud. thanks for keeping it alive, RT! in other news, the truefaction site continues its downward spiral...
chrisc takes strong objection to your characterization
of him as a 'subtle disinfo shill' over at Truthaction, btw, leading YT to rename this site 'theresashillundermybed.com/blog'.
But more importantly, there's a thread over there about the recent activities of 'The Mad Hatter' that has some important information in it -- it's the thread about someone wanting the username YT_isajew.
alright RT--this is your final warning
Please do NOT refer to disinfo agents as shills again. The word shill has been under increasing strain since the pre-publication hypefest of New York Times Bestselling Author Steve Alten's The Shill Game by Bill "the Shill" Douglas.
As you know, LIHOP is also off limits except to mean that Bush let Cheney make it happen on purpose.
Larry Silverstein and the Dancing Israelis are not to be referred to as suspects, suspicious, sketchy, or semitic.
You've had your fun, RT, now stop being so divisive or you will be banned from WTCDemolition.com/blog once and for all. I suggest that instead of division you focus on any of the other math functions like subtraction, addition, or if you feel up to it, multiplication.
not so subtle
Hi Casseia,
I am curious why you are so easy on Arabesque over at Truthaction.org.
Is it just me that thinks that shit regarding Leland was a solid case of a 911 Truther spreading disinformation? I can't imagine myself in the same situation doing the same thing. I thought Arabesque was the 'what is disinfo?' go to guy over there. And I'm to believe he got 'tricked' when:
1. the claim is extraordinary and ridiculous if true
2. the source is geocities (evidence nt extraordinary)
3. he didn't confirm by contacting lelan (whos number and email are all over the net)
All these things way heavily against Arabesque if you ask me.
Anyway, I saw that you asked him to explore his e-mail that he got and get back to us and I thought you were easy on him. I'm ready to write the guy off as positive disinfo specialist but maybe I should let it play out some more.
Maybe you are doing just that. I would be very interested WHO sent the e-mail to Arabesque. Is Arabesque an anonymous 911 Truth blogger?
Lawyer Sylvia Stolz gets 40 monts for defending Zündel
Speaking of Stasi tactics:
Holocaust Denier's Lawyer Gets Prison
January 14, 2008 - 12:56pm
BERLIN (AP) - A former lawyer for a well-known Holocaust denier was convicted of incitement in Germany on Monday for denying the genocide herself and sentenced to 3 1/2 years in prison.
Sylvia Stolz, who represented Holocaust denier Ernst Zundel at his trial, also was banned from practicing law for five years.
During Zundel's trial, Stolz repeatedly disputed the Nazis' mass murder of Jews, called for hatred of the Jewish population and ended a legal document with the words "Heil Hitler."
Zundel's first trial collapsed after Stolz was banned from the proceedings on the grounds she was trying to sabotage them.
Zundel's second trial at Mannheim state court ended in February 2007 with his conviction for incitement for denying the Holocaust _ a crime in Germany.
The 67-year-old Zundel, who was deported from Canada in 2005 and also once lived in Tennessee, was sentenced to the maximum five years in prison.
In sentencing Stolz, Judge Rolf Glenz said she used Zundel's trial in order to deny the Holocaust and to spread revisionist ideas.
"Stolz has a basic reflex to make far-right statements," he said.
Stolz, who called the Holocaust "the biggest lie in world history," also was convicted of disparaging the country and its symbols and insulting the court.
Good question...
Basically, I've tried to be super-civil over there, a uniter-not-a-divider (unlike some [kof kof]) and give him the benefit of the doubt.
I would be very interested in that as well. However, I don't believe I'll be asking Arabesque about it over there, nor reading his response, if any (so please keep me posted).
This is because I received the following email this morning making me feel less than welcome there:
So I checked out that little shithole of a site that you administrate.
I can't believe your fucking nerve asking me for a favor!
I'm going to give you a little benefit of the doubt and just assume that you have no fucking clue how hard I've worked over the past year to grow this movement and with very little to NO SUPPORT (and in some cases ongoing, orchestrated attacks) from the so-called "leaders". I have to assume that because the only other option is that you are a sick and destructive person who purposefully facilitates attacks on truthaction.
NOT ONE of you assholes has EVER shown the slightest appreciation or even a fucking acknowledgment of what I've accomplished (through CONSTANT work) in the past year. But you guys post your snarky shit in the forum and then go back over there to trash me. YOU administrate it, YOU watch it, YOU say nothing... YOU SUCK!
So anyway, I guess I'm responsible for the behavior of everyone who posts here. Of course, no one over there is responsible, in particular, for the stream of shit spewed in the direction of RT, Keenan, and others of us by Johndoraemi, siddhartha, Adam1, TmCm, et al.
(The request I had made was that he lock the Portland Thread, which was pretty ridiculous.)
Wow. That was from YT?
Wow. That was from YT?
now i have to google...
to find every nice thing i ever said about YT and the great job he does under difficult circumstances? Naw, I don't think I'll bother, he'll just forget again after five seconds. whatever floats his boat. I was one of the first people to register at truthactions, when everyone was still only into 911blogger. the last straw was when he lets TmCm go on and on about what an ass I am, waiting until I respond in a less than loving manner to admonish me for not living up to his site standards. It's the same old double standard that has to be in effect to protect shills and fake truthers. I think YT is more interested in being popular than in having integrity--that is the only explanation i can think of that gives him the benefit of the doubt (that he has ulterior motives, which I would prefer not to believe.)
Someone Does.
"he has ulterior motives" I believe it is safe to assume someone does. I know for a fact it's not me. But who is then?
not it!
I called it, see? i like to think the best of people. if i can't, then i try not to think of them at all. what i won't do is subject myself to anyone's double standard. i think the recent choice of mods for truefaction are very telling. very reminiscent of dz stepping down at 911blogger...
no doubt
I have hardly any experience with TrueFaction but I the double standard is brazenly in your face. The recent issue with Arabesque slammed it home for me. Some people are allowed to do things while other are not.
For example, according to one of the new mods, since Leland Lehrman deals with 'racist issues' then he should be stopped from participating in 911 Truth. That was the excuse given by the new moderator for why it's ok to willy nilly post shit that you haven't fact checked...like if i were to say:
"Gretavo drank drug cocktails and is actually working for the USIA (absolved into the STATE Department a few years ago) to help slow down 911 Truth and promote a pro-US message"
Imagine if I got an e-mail and I just posted this shit under a blog:
"Who is Gretavo?"
And then Cas busts my chops because the passage is not sourced....but LarryHorse is like...."It doesn't matter that Jpass is a shade ball posting shit without checking it....because Gretavo 'deals with racist issues' and should not be 'allowed' to discredit US!"
Actions speak louder then words.
"I have hardly any
"I have hardly any experience with TrueFaction but I the double standard is brazenly in your face."
Nice "divide and conquer" name for truthaction.
And everyone makes mistakes. I take full responsibility for this careless error, and it shouldn't have happened. No excuses, I demand better of myself. Guess what, DRG and Steven Jones make mistakes too, once in a while. I know, because I've pointed them out to them. There is not a double standard as far as I can tell. I corrected my mistake. That's far more than what many do. I already explained that the email appeared to have come directly from Lehrman.
"For example, according to one of the new mods, since Leland Lehrman deals with 'racist issues' then he should be stopped from participating in 911 Truth."
I think you are "protesting too much". Maybe I hit a nerve by posting a topic discussing Lerhman? Is he an out of bounds topic for you?
So the alternative is that we shouldn't talk about him. Got it. Newsflash: This is what forums are for. Discussing topics. That being said, some prefer to use them to launch into personal attacks and derail threads instead of dealing with the actual topic at hand. I usually ignore these people because they are ultimately a waste of my time.
Arab.