Hey Everyone.
I have been answering a lot of questions through email recently for various publications and I just realized they might be good to post. Sorry for any overlap - some are not proofed either. Q in red and A in Blue:
What was the main reason to make these documentaries which are very
sensational in everywhere like Turkey? Can you tell something about the
story of Zeitgeist.
In early 2007, I began work on "Zeitgeist", which was actually more of
an art installation than a movie in its original form.
It was shown for free to a small group of people over a 6 night run and
then I tossed it up on the internet after it was all "over"...so i
thought. It then went viral somehow and thus it become "Zeitgeist, The
Movie". I then had to go back and retroactively get rights permissions, which was
a nightmare given the nature of the content.
The 2nd movie, "Zeitgeist: Addendum" was created in 2008 in an effort
to follow up and clarify some of the issues in the first film, along with
presenting a possible solution in the form of an organization called
The Venus Project. Since then, I have been working to promote the idea of a new
social system in an effort to move humanity out of the egotistical and
self-serving mentality which have become the norm in our corrupt
culture today.
How can we really end up with the monetary system? We need a huge
conciseness revolution do make it and a real force to abolish
banks,corruption and debt. Are normal people I the whole world
willing/prepared to do it? Why did you choose the term "Zeitgeist" by Hegel for your
documentaries? Could you tell us about the movement "Zeitgeist"? what is
its main purpose?
I had nothing to do with"Hegel"- the term Zeitgeist is a household word
these days. Since it means "the spirit/awareness of a period/culture", I
thought it was a good conceptual name for a film that deals with social
establishments and event interpretations that are widely accepted and,
sadly, unquestioned as to their validity or relevance.
Do you think the current crisis confirms your thoughts about the
system?
Yes. It isn't as much "thinking" as it is simply doing the math. Between
technological unemployment (humans beings replaced in the labor force by
machines ) and the monetary irresponsibility and self-interest driven
manipulation coming from the banks, corporations and Wall St, we are
going to see further problems. Even if the general economy recovers from
the current recession/depression, it will not be able to overcome
technological unemployment, which is the true cause of unemployment in
the world. This is the "contradiction" of the market system which will
eventually lead to the displacement of many workers and hence, the
displacement of the "consumer" itself, so industry will not be able to
continue its "cyclical consumption" and rotation of money...people
simply wont have enough work to allow it.
Why do you think the global crisis has started? Has it been started on
purpose by some people like the other examples on your documentaries?
Well, the central trigger was the housing market's sect of the
derivatives market, which was bloated through margin, to the effect of
that their is now about 1.5 Quadrillion in outstanding derivatives
value... which is about 15 times the GDP of the entire planet. I don't
feel this crash was intended per se, though it was expected.. And, like
any large scale event, it is going to be guided to serve the purposes of
those in power. So now we have the banks trying to unify world wide and
remove transparency though a larger monopoly. This is not good and will
only lead to more control and power.
Has the crisis had an effect on people's interest in your thoughts?
Yes, I think so. People need a direction for change, not just complain
about the current system. We have tons of people who complain all day
long on radio stations, tv shows and the like... but they offer nothing
in regard to change. Most live in a fantasy world and think that we need
to "return" to something... as though there was some ideal of America or
any country which was once "good". This is a Falasha. We need to move
forward, not backwards.
Can the crisis end the "money system" that you criticize?
It depend on which crisis you speak of. Generally speak, the banks and
economy can recover from the credit issue and then start another
expansion period. This will create prosperity for a decade or so, and
then we will fall back into recession as the money supply is drained.
This is called the "business cycle" and despite the massive problems, it
can still continue. However, it will take some time and a tremendous
amount of suffering before economic expansion can occur again in any
meaningful way.
The true crisis is that of "Technological Unemployment" this is the
replacing of human labor with machines, which is really what is
responsible for the great amount of production growth we have on this
planet. The fact is, the pattern of machine replacing humans isn't going
to stop and the unemployment figures are only going to continue their
growth in the long term.
Some people think the Venus Project and the ideas you stand up for in
addendum are just Utopian and unreal. What would be your answer for this
critiques?
People think it is unreal based on limited frames of reference and
projected biases. We are doing nothing but using reason and historical
pattern recognition and inference. If you want a world which has the
highest probability of society being healthy, having more free time,
material abundance, the best health care and standard of living, you
will see that Jacque Fresco's ideas are the way to go. For those who are
skeptical, all you have to do is point out the constant corruption in
our current system and make them understand that our whole planet is
currently based on competition. Competition is nothing but dangerous and
the world you see is the result. It is "cooperativeness" which is going
to move us into a better world. Money is not needed in a society capable
of producing an abundance, if we just worked together.
What will be the main difference between the current system and the
system you defend and what will be the benefit to us?
Well, the main difference is that 80% of all current jobs are either
phased out by machines, or eliminated entirely for they serve no real
role. This will free humanity. Then we install a autonomous cybernated
system for resource regulation and as a decision making tool. Through
the use of a "systems" approach to social organization, we can
understand our planet and adjust our production methods for the benefit
of all. There is no stratification. No such thing exists for it has no
basis. The most important aspect however is that we will create a new
culture of people who do not have the problems we face today. People
will be turned around to understand the foundation of life's' process
and their role in society, They will not care for competition and social
status, for these are false ideas based on generations of scarcity.
People in this new system will see themselves as social organisms, and a
new era will down that is based on the value system of "cooperation",
not "competition" or narrow self interest, which is dominant today.
The mostly heard critique about you is that the documentaries are all
about conspiracy theories just like the things you mention about 09.11..
In society today, all acts of gain are of a conspiratorial nature. That
is just the nature of the system. 9/11 is just another example, albeit a
massive one.
Another critique about you is that you’re acting as a cultural and
social engineer. Do you think a number of people can design a society
perfectly? What is your review in the point of view of social
scientists?
Social scientists are only as good as their ideas. It has nothing to do
with "cultural engineers" per se. These are just labels. The merit of
any idea is the idea itself, not where it comes from. Also, there is no
such thing as a perfect society. This is impossible. We are always
changing, along with our technological methods.
What are your next plans to announce this movement to more people? Do
you plan running this movement in politics?
As of now, we are just spreading awareness. Zeitgeist III will be
released next year to further this goal. We also have a powerful
movement forming at www.thezeitgeistmovement.com
You have been quoted as saying, "It is my hope that people will not take what is said in the film as the truth." What concerns, if any, do you have regarding the huge following Zeitgeist appears to have developed since its release?
On the website sometime ago I made a poetic statement referring the
nature of understanding and I stated something like what you denoted
above. This was, of course, taken out of context as though I was telling
people not to believe the research in the film. The rest of the
statement was something like "... find out for yourselves for knowledge
is not told, it is realized." This was to denote that you cant just tell
people things... they have to figure it out for themselves. I hope that
is clear. Debunkers of Zeitgeist have used that statement to berate the
presentation as though it was a "disclaimer".
I have no concerns about the supporters. The movement is not going to
stop and the change we are advocating isnt a matter of opinion. The
evolution is going to happen one way or another.., whether it takes 10
years or 500.
The only concern I have is the chaos that is likely to ensue in between,
as we are on a path toward a kind of imbalance and disequilibrium that
has never before been seen in history.
Given the amount of views Zeitgeist has received on Google Video and YouTube, are you at all surprised by the lack of coverage in the mainstream media?
No. Though we did get a New York Times Review for ZDAY 2009 in New York
City, I really don't care about the mainstream media. In fact, it is
good we are in the shadows still as it is easier to function. However,
this movement is going to explode in the near future to an extent that
will shock everyone. This has little to do with our actions, but rather
the degradation of the current system as a whole. As things get worse,
more people will wake up and look not only for answers, but a new
direction. our direction is the next logical progression, I feel and I
suspect millions of other humans are going to see this soon as well.
There has been a considerable amount of debate online over the central message of Zeitgeist. The first part of the film states that religion is nothing more than an astrological allegory used for controlling the masses. The second claims that 9/11 was an inside job; a fabricated event designed to manipulate the American public into supporting the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan. The third part deals with money and how it is created and controlled by the Federal Reserve, a private institution. Can you explain why you chose to focus on these three areas and what, if any, is the relationship between them?
General summations are always dangerous. First of all, Part one of
Zeitgeist, does not simply conclude that "religion is nothing more than
an astrological allegory used for controlling the masses". Religion
comes largely from an ignorance towards natural phenomena. Early
civilizations did not understand how the world and science worked, so
they invented explanations based around personifications that seemed to
make sense at that point in time. it is a natural progression of
knowledge. however, Once a certain number of people engage in a certain
value/belief system, the establishment power (governments) will always
seek to hijack those issues in order to maintain control. In effect, you
really cant have a society without a general collective awareness. So,
the establishment religions where always in transformation and always
secretly guided to support the agenda for the elite classes who run
things. it is that simply. Religion is very relevant historically as to
the nature of human thought and development, but 90% of the religiously
minded people today have been indoctrinated in a system of belief that
is really there to preserve the status quo. for instance, in the old
Capitalist news reels they would say that the Free market was a
"christian ideal" while Communism was a cold "spiritless atheistic"
ideal. They did this to convince the largely Christian population of the
west to accept their system of social control vs a new one that might
alter the power balance.
As far as : "The second claims that 9/11 was an inside job; a fabricated
event designed to manipulate the American public into supporting the
invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan." Yes, that is essentially correct.
Every major war for profit needs an excuse to get the public on board.
9/11 was just a CIA black op... it was also an infiltration to counter
the growing anti-establishment sentiment growing around the world which
threaten those in control. Terrorism is a blanket term to stop those
interested in social change. it is a preservation mechanism for the
establishment, using contrived legal grounds to stop activism and
rebellion.
As far as the rest of your question:"The third part deals with money and
how it is created and controlled by the Federal Reserve, a private
institution. Can you explain why you chose to focus on these three
areas and what, if any, is the relationship between them?" - I would
summarize the 3 parts as all being related to Social Myth. Religion is,
of course, is naturally mythological, but other historical notions, such
Money and catalystic events such a 9/11 often do not get the attention
they require on this level. 9/11, as per the government's story, is
essentially a myth and serves the same function- to influence people's
perspectives and worldviews. 9/11 was presented as a sacred event that
"we will never forget" which essentially reinforce the idea of "good and
evil" and the notion of "freedom" in "America" and the like. This myth
led to two wars for profit and caused more division for society.
Division = control.
Part 3 about the monetary system presents the most profound myth of them
all- Money. Money is a nothing thing that has been invented and people
today can't envision any other kind of life without it, as they have
never been shown any positive alternative. The only reason the monetary
system works is because people have faith in it. We sit around and
pretend that little pieces of paper have value and meanings. They don't-
they never did. In turn, society is grossly manipulated by those in
charge of money, for people have no idea that the whole thing is
base-less, outside the very primitive, outdated concept of "monetary
exchange for goods and services".
Looking back at history, with all the violence and war and the rise and fall of empire after empire, are we not heading inexorably towards a one-world-government? Is it an avoidable step in our struggle to birth ourselves as an intelligent species?
World One Government, when I use the term, is a system of centralized
control based on money and what I would call "pocket capitalism". The
free-market never existed as a larger system... it was actually a scam
put upon the lower class, while the upper classes maintained control.
this is why banks are being "bailed out". The system is a mathematical
fraud so they have to bailout those that fall victim. Unfortunately,
these never help the people..only the larger order corporate
constituents. A corporate fascist on world state is avoidable if the
public understands what the real direction is. Sadly, most people have
no understanding of what is actually important or relevant to social
functionality and peaceful coexistence. They don't know the state of
technology... they are constantly adsorbing nonsensical biases from the
culture which continue to reinforce abberancies that do not help
progress. We have a tremendous hurdle of "consciousness" that we need to
overcome. Patriotism, Religion, Capitalistic self-interest are just a
few of the despotic world views that continue to paralyze human
potential and keep the blinders on the public. However, a world
organization, in and of itself, is actually a positive thing, as long as
the corporate/financial elements are removed. The highest optimization
of the planet's resources is a system worldwide for
mining/production/distribution. It is this eventuality that will lead to
an abundance for all the world's people. We need a "systems" approach to
society as a whole using science, technology and intelligent resource
management. That's it. We don't need "politics" or "government" or 99% of
the legislation out there. Our system today is a failed one. It is like
a house that was poorly built on the side of a cliff...since it is weak,
it needs stilts and supporting structures to put pressure on each side
to keep the house standing. That house is the "monetary/corporate
system" and the supports are "laws". A true system needs no laws. Laws
are patches to try and keep a failing system in place. that is why every
year, across the world, 1000s of new laws are introduced to control the
behavior of the people. It doesn't work and it wont work. The daily
destruction of the environment, the wars, the poverty, the labor
exploitation and death every second from starvation is the result. It is
time to change. www.thezeitgeistmovement.com
How long did you spend researching and producing Zeitgeist and Zeitgeist
Addendum?
total 8-14 months per movie
What is the beautiful music at the beginning of Zeitgeist Addendum?
i composed the music. music is my first area of study
Any plans for a third film?
yes: Well, I would prefer not to give too many details at this time, as
it is
still in development, but I will likely focus on "Human Behavior",
"Technology" and "Rationality", generally speaking.
When did you decided to do these movies?
In early 2007, I began work on "Zeitgeist", which was actually more of
an installation than a movie in its original form.
It was shown for free to a small group of people over a 6 night run and
then I tossed it up on the internet after it was all "over"...so i
thought.
It then went viral somehow and thus it become "Zeitgeist, The Movie". I
then had to go back and retroactively get rights permissions, which was
a nightmare given the nature of the content.
The 2nd movie, "Zeitgeist: Addendum" was created in 2008 in an effort to
followup and clarify some of the issues in the first film, along with
presenting
a possible solution in the form of an organization called The Venus
Project. Since then, I have been working to promote the idea of a new
social system in an effort to move humanity out of the egotistical and
self-serving mentalities which have become the norm in our corrupt
culture today.
What do you do besides working on this project?
I'm a freelance film editor and music composer.
How was it for you winning the award of the best activist film of
2008?
I was surprised and flattered - the Artivist Film festival was kind
enough to give me the award two years in a row.
I certainly never expected any recognition of any of the works... mostly
due to the controversy of the material.
I presume that you don't believe in the change that Obama promised.
Is the new president of the USA just another one that guaranties
thatthings will not change?
Actions speak for themselves. The "change" which Obama promised has yet
to materialize. His comments about future actions are nothing but
rhetoric. He is front man for the Wall Street System. The election was a
psychological con-job to create a positive approval rating for the US
president. Yes, he is there to placate the public. Yet, he has escalated
the Afghanistan war, which is about geopolitical positioning, along with
drug running and oil protection. Of course, he is claiming to reduce
troops in iraq in the future... which is just that- a claim. He is there
to make sure Wall St. comes out ahead with this new crisis, preferable
with a new global financial order which is less susceptible to the
mathematical flaws that the market/monetary system inherently has.
Your films are very uncomfortable to lots of people/groups. Did you
got problems after releasing them on the internet?
Of course. death threats - hate campaigns/websites and the like. Those
who believe in religion have a natural propensity to reject logic and
reasoning,
and since my films using logic to draw conclusions regarding the lack of
historical basis of religion, many get very offended, for i am taking
their identity away. Same goes for the "nationalist" or "patriot" or
"capitalist". If you talk about the USA not being the "greatest country
in the world", or how the free-market is a dysfunctional and fraud
producing construct, it is interpreted as another form of blasphemy. The
bottom line is that people at this stage want to believe that their
understands are finite. This is unprovable. There are no finite
understandings. Everything is emergent. 1000s of years from now, humans
will look back at our culture today in horror in regard to the
superstition and deficient concepts we put forward as true.
Here in Portugal lots of people are talking about the Zeitgeist
movement. How was the reaction in the USA?
Large, but certain European places seem to have a more focused
interpretation. Overall, the media still ignores it in the states, even
though on the internet
it is still very popular. I expect America to be last in this evolution.
There are people that know how society works and want to run away from
it.But they have decided to go "back to the roots", to the country, and
beself-sufficient. Is this attitude in the wrong direction? Or is it
aselfish way to look for a better life?
Well, most have yet to understand where the motivations and values of a
human being comes from. Historically, people have turned to
god/satan...possession..evil forces/good forces, etc, to explain
behavior. Even today there are "behavioral geneticists" which still look
for some 'gene' that can explain a
complex behavior. While genes are relevant, they don't teach a human how
to think about the world or respond to society.
Given this understanding of how it is really the 'environment' that
shapes who we are, we then see that true change must come from the
environment to a large degree. Going "back to the roots" of the USA or
the like isn't productive on this level, for society itself is shaped by
technological innovation. For example, one way or another we are going
to see more people become unemployed. This is due to "technological
unemployment" and it is unstoppable. In time, the majority of people on
this planet will not have a job, for computers and robots, will take
over the majority of the work.
It is the "contradiction of capitalism"- Companies save money with
machines...yet they inturn displace the "consumer", in turn hurting
themselves. This is the TRUE cause of unemployment on this planet.
We can now produce more and more with less and less people, in less
time. Given this reality, the only path is away from the free-market
system, to a collective system which enables the now abundant goods to
be distributed without a price tag. This is a large subject and I cannot
cover all aspect here, but i do recommend people read the "83 page
Orientation guide" found at www.thezeitgeistmovement.com for
clarification
Is it really possible, from your point of view, to change the human
behavior in our generation? If feel that very normal people feel
strangely "safe" is this system and don't want to participate in the
change. Do you think that this illusion of "safety" doesn't allow people
to see the real truth? Is it a kind of mechanization of life?
Yes. People find comfort with what they know at this point in time.
There are many reasons for this. The true basis of change is not a
gradual evolution... but rather a dramatic shift due to bio-social
pressures which force a different perspective. The current economic
collapse, loss of faith in government, along with technological
unemployment is what will bring us to a new level. I feel the human
value system can change dramatically over the course of a generation,
but i do agree that the higher states of awareness will not be obtained
for some time. We have to undo what our scarcity driven, greed based
society has already done.
How can we really end up with the monetary system? We need a huge
conciseness revolution do make it and a real force to abolish
banks,corruption and debt. Are normal people I the whole world
willing/prepared to do it?
Not yet... but as denoted before, the system is going to fail. This will
shift consciousness to a degree. the question is really about focusing
the people's attention on what is relevant and possible in regard to
society. If people knew the possibilities, they would be much more
inclined to change. Sadly, 99% of the world has no idea what is possible
as they have been brainwashed into modes of thought which reject new
information for the sake of their own personal comfort and the comfort
of the dominant establishment organizations. We need a worldwide
revolution.. something that has never been done before in the history of
mankind. We have to unite in a common direction. If 500 million people
join us across all religions and nations, then the march begins. The
government and corporations will not stand a chance, even with their
bloated militarys'.
At the end of the movie Addendum, you give six suggestions on how
to change the actual order. Do you have more?
We have to reject the system in every way we can. At the same time, we
need to inform the world as to what could be
if we decided to work together and share resources/ideas, as opposed to
fighting for them. These are the two broad moves.
You suggest that with technology we can free people from work and,
at the same time, create abundance. How would humans react with only
goodthings to do and almost no obligations? Is it compatible with the
human nature?
Firstly, the traditional definition of "human nature" is a superstitious
disposition. There is no provable science to it. People look back at our
history and see violence and then think that since it is occurring
histrionically, it must be "how we are". No- that is missing a critical
issue, which is the environmental influence.
The reason we have "greed" and "self interest" is because we have been
taught that in order to survive, these are the value that work best. In
a monetary system, such values are rewarded and reinforced.
There is no reason why a new value system cannot be created which will
reward the idea of "working together and sharing resources" as the norm.
Human beings are clever, emotional robots. We are programmed. While it
is true that neurochemicals and physiological traits set propensities
for human reactions, they do not give a person "greed" or tell them who
to hate and why. Society is to blame. We are all victims of culture.
So, to answer your questions, once humans understand that there is no
basis for the "us and against them" and that it serves no reward, then a
new civilization will dawn based on values which seek to support all of
humanity... not just one person. We have to equalize society. Until this
is done, we are on a path for destruction. This is a natural progression
and with the dawning of technological abundance, we can now do it. We
are on the edge of a massive paradigm shift.
Your idea of debt as the form of slavery of the 21stcentury is a
very naked truth. But some people, who have worked all life, might feel
very offended with that. Did you received criticism?
Interestingly, that is something few bring up to me. Yes...again- it is
a value thing. Sort of like in the Bible where it says " you shall earn
your living by the sweat of your brow". People have these ideas of work
and purpose and tend to think "that is the way it is". As far as debt,
it's sad most still don't get it. Our whole system is based not only
upon the selling of labor for income (which is being phased out) but
also upon putting people into a state of obligation (debt) in order to
force them into selling their labor for income. Very sick.
Will the change come from people or will people be forced to change,
when the US monetary system, and all of the others behind him collapses
?
Well, loosely speaking- Both, but "forced" is the wrong word. People
will be informed/educated and their internal logic will harness the new
idea in time.
First, there will be a group of rationalists who have figured this out
and they will lead the path. Then, as society undergoes change, those
who maintain values which are outdated will slowly adapt, for their old
values are no longer supported by the system. This is a natural
progression.
As far as direct action, the movement will need to put pressures on the
governments and corporations, as they are not going to just give
everything up. Their conditioning is far too corrupt. In time, however,
they will become embarrassed by their perspective and they too will join
us, realizing that their lives will be that much more meaningful and
rewarding when they work for the common good.
Is there a small bibliography or filmography you could recommend for
activists?
Yes, we have a reading list through The Venus Project, which isn't as
much about activism, per se, as it is about awareness. www.thevenusproject.com/media/downloads/Booklist.pdf
In order for activism to be success it isnt enough to just fight the
negative outcomes of our current system.
We have to have an educated goal of transition in order to move away
from the root causes of the pervasive corruption we see today. The
realization is that it is the system which is causing this... not the
people. People are products of their environment.
What do you expect to change in the long run? Or, what is a plausible
future for humanity? Are you an optimistic?
Technological Unemployment is going to be the nail in coffin for the
global capitalist system. There is no stopping this, unless we choose to
deliberately stop social progress itself. Unannounced to most people,
government/economics have virtually nothing to do with human progress...
it is technological innovation that free us improves our physical lives.
The true change will be when the people finally realize what is
important in the world and that is human creativity and human
extensionality (caring). Once this awareness spreads, a new direction
will emerge that sees the world as one organism and realizes that the
best possible means for human flourishing is the world learning to work
together by sharing ideas and productions tasks. Otherwise, the next
generation is going to likely be faced with serious form of global
oppression/hardship.
If the monetary system is the problem, how can we change anything if,
presently, we need money to survive?
We only presently need money to survive because that is what the system
teaches and perpetuates. The reality is that WE DON'T need money at all.
What we need is the intelligent management of the world resources,
coupled with the deliberate use of technology for the betterment of
humanity as a whole. There is no reason to sell your labor as a slave
anymore. 80% of the jobs in existence serve no large function that to
perpetuate the circulation of income among people so they can buy things
and keep others employed. The other 20% can be automated very easily. In
time, even complex tasks like surgery will be done by machines with a
higher degree of accuracy than human surgeons get today.
Is it unwise to try to describe the "movement" you are speaking of or
is it something that, by its very nature, resists description? What,
if anything, differentiates the "movement" from a "cult" or "religion"?
"Cult" and "Religion" are words which have no finite definition.
The general consensus however would define them both as fixed ideologies
that generate a following, or membership base, which support the ideas.
Of course, a cult is often fringe, while a religion is often established
in society.
The difference between the two is simply the subjective size. Religion
is really a cult mindset and vice-versa.
Given this, any group that shares ideas could theoretically be called a
cult. You could have the cult of mathematicians... the cult of physicians, the
religion of atheists...whatever.
The Zeitgeist Movement is a social movement which supports emergence in
thought and social structures.
We are not concerned with fixed views, but rather with open views. That
being said, it doesn't mean certain perspectives are not advocated such
as 'the scientific method'. Why? because the environment keeps
supporting this practice with the incredible feats of technology and
other discoveries which have improved our lives. science seems to work.
praying/worship/prophesy and blindly referencing 1000 year texts does
not seem to work, or do anything for that matter, except stop our
creative, emergent and learning processes.
Therefore, because we advocate change, I see no grounds to consider it a
religion or a cult. It is too open for such a distinction. it is also
not based on some "great man" as with most religions/cults. Our
dedication is to methods of thought and a basis of perspective, not
people.
Do you suspect that the global recession or "credit crisis" was
deliberately engineered to start to pave the way for a single global
currency?
No- but it is being used as such, among other things. The trick now is
for the central
banks to figure out how to avoid this issue from happening again, so
they want to devise a new system which removes transparency. As long as
the public can understand the inherent fraud of the monetary system,
they have a problem. if they can blanket the whole thing with a single
currency and a world wide organization, then the public will have no
basis to compare and relate. At least that is my view.
But what do you think is the kernel of
this change? Are you talking about a fundamental change in the
individual; in the very nature of how we think and in our awareness of
ourselves and our thoughts? I.e. consciousness. And, in addition to
this, what are the practical elements of this change you speak of?
we need psychological/sociological and environmental change. These
have to occur more or less in tandem.
The human value system needs to be rescued from the sea of the selfish,
narrow sighted, materialism which it is drowning in, and thus cultured
to see the world as a singular entity. The basis realization is that we
can accomplish a zillion times more productive things if we learn to
"cooperate", rather than "compete". Likewise, the environment needs to
support our flourishing, not our restriction. We live in an abundant
world...yet most have been considered by the system to think everything
is scarce. Even our farce president Obama talks about cutting funding
from the government programs... this is just moronic... for there is no
such thing as money! there are only resources and the fact that we live
in a world governed by a game that artificially CREATES scarcity and
deprivation... is just pathetic and sad.
It doesn't have to work like this.
Food and water and surely two of the most fundamental resources for
any society. How would resources like these be managed in a society
without money? Or are you saying that the "system" would not require
management? How will scarcity / hoarding be avoided in a growing
population?
Food and water are unbelievably easy to crate and maintain. There is
no sound reason for any human tp have to pay for these things, for
automation is already doing 90% of the labor. We simply need to finish
the other 10%.
there is no reason to hoard anything that is free to all. As far as
scarcity, it can be overcome through environmental monitoring and
autonomous cybernated systems. The management would be very simple. one
person behind a computer could monitor the production for an entire city
once the system is set up, For more on this, see the 83 page Orientation
guide at www.thezeitgeistmovement.com. The sad things is, 99% of the
population has no idea as the to the true state of technology, so they
find it very hard to think that machines can replicate themselves...
they can "heal", self correct and maintain an "awareness" of its
environment. In time, the machines will be constructed through
nano-techonolgy from the atom up. This also goes for most production
items, including food. We face a new world of incredible abundance and
we need to realize this and adapt of social system to fit the new level.
For this to occur, the monetary system must be overcome. The longer we
have it, the more paralyzed we become.
I think the majority of the people out there are not only incapable
of understanding monetary policy, due to our pathetic educational
system, but are too timid and afraid of change. My question is, what do
you think would be the strongest motivation for people to do away with
the monetary system?
Well, as with anything, failure and thus forced change by cause and effect. However, I do my best not to think that way, as I don't like seeing people get hurt. In the end, technological unemployment, which is the phenomenon of people being replaced by machine, is going to be a strong catalyst. The fundamental basis of our world monetary system is the selling of labor as a commodity for income. This foundational element is now being challenged, and economists at this time are essentially ignoring the pattern. The fact is, Technological Unemployment is really the cause of long term unemployment in the world. Technology is making the human work force obsolete. In fact, we are MORE productive, with less people due to the nature of the advanced automation machines. In time, you are going to see unemployment continue to rise and the question thus becomes: "At what point do we decide that the system doesn't qualify as functional anymore?" 20% Unemployment? 30%...60%?
That point aside, the other issue is simply making people understand how
much better their lives would be if we shifted our focus to use
technology to overcome our current state of scarcity. If people knew how
abundant and pleasurable their lives 'could' be if we stopped competing
and starting cooperating to produce an abundance of everything with
modern methods, most would quickly turn around. The horrors and hardship
we face today, from war to governmental corruption and poverty does not
have to exist at all and there is no reason to tolerate it anymore.
Many severe crimes, especially crimes relating to sexual violence,
are neither driven by the prospect of financial gain nor a matter of
survival. I agree that steps should be taken to deter negative/harmful
behavior, but I do feel that many cold-blooded crimes must have a
consequence. Will there be any form of punishment in this new society or
will the survivors of crime be forced to live in fear?
All progress is a matter of degree. We are not seeking utopia for no such thing exists. I believe 90-95% of most "crime", as know it is a side effect of the profit system and hence scarcity. Once we have a system in place that stops the basic survival fear we have of each other, while allowing no reward for corruption, pollution and waste, the aberrant behaviors that remain can be focused on in a constructive way. Sexual Violence has a cause, just like crimes of passion and jealousy. While I admit it is complex, in time the mental distortion can be reduced if not overcome. For instance, jealousy is very common is our culture for many reasons, such as the grading system in school. We breed competitive behavior all over the place. This will stop due to a shift in awareness (realizing that cooperation is provably more productive to all than competition) and thus people will change the way they look at each other. However, to answer your question, our current system of punishment is not much of a deterrent when it comes to violence sex crimes. The real issue, apart from finding the cause, is removing the person so they cannot do more harm, and putting them into an environment where they can get well. If it happens that at that point in time that person shows no signs of getting well, they will be kept there. It is logical to remove threats, but the system of "punishment" will not be anything like it is today, for such a thing doesn't work in the case of such complex crimes, for the most part. Most murderers do so in a rage, and they are not thinking "if i kill this person, i could go to jail". A petty thief, however, might be deterred by the thought of prison. However, thieves will have no basis in the new system, for there is no property.
I hope this is clear. In the future we deal with "crime" by both
removing violent offenders and figuring out what made them to want to
commit such an act in the first place. Then this information is incorporated into the design
of the system(education) to try and prevent such developments in the future.
Granted, for such crimes, it could take a few generations to see
substantial drop offs. Overtime however, such acts would become so rare
that the idea of a police force would be a waste of time.
This system isn't perfect. It is just a whole lot better and more productive. There is no productivity today regard to crime/behavior.
That is why the prison population in America is growing every year.
The day, when awareness is no longer an issue, and the Zeitgeist
Movement is recognized as an opposing force to the numerous corporations
around the world, how are we supposed to compete against them, which are
much better funded than The Movement, and will unquestionably attempt to
discredit us and attempt to convince the population that The Movement is
not in their best interest? How is the Zeitgeist Movement going compete
against the elite class of citizens who are going to try to undermine
the movement?
Mass Movement on a scale never before seen. Think about it this way - if
51% of the US population refused to pay income taxes one year, the
government would not be able to prosecute them all and they would look
insane and foolish to try and do so. This is why governments preserve and perpetuate
division. "Divide and Conquer"works. In order to overcome our problems, it is
going to take a global effort on a mass scale. We have to unify with a
common goal. Political movements will not work. The monetary system is a
paralyzing, self preserving mechanism. It does not allow for it to be
overridden inherently. It is static. Only though the mass rejection of the system,
supported by the logic of what The Venus Project proposes, will such a
transition occur. The future is going to be very ugly if people do not
know what to look for. This way we all need to educate our fellow human
beings as best we can. Remember, all the governments and corporations
have are the projected value systems they create, laws and the military.
That's it. It is a house of cards and I am not afraid.
What is your stance on 9/11 now. I know you said you've been
misquoted in the New York Times after Z-Day, so can you tell us what is
your feeling about it? And what do you think of the fact that active
explosive residues of nanothermite were found in the WTC dust and
confirmed by scientists recently?
My stance is the same, except for the fact that I'm frustrated with talking about it. Another problem is the stigma. This is tough. I am trying to bring in people who support certain scientific/ideological perspectives in certain ways in regard to the Movement, but many are scared to have such a controversial association. Granted, I have created this with a good reason, but it is frustrating to be called a "conspiracy theorist" over and over again for it cuts people off. So, in an effort to try and widen the Movement into social segments that can only seem to associate the 9/11 with "tin foil hat" people, I have decided to shift my communicative focus, generally speaking. Obviously, I am in full support, or I would not have made Part 2 of the Z1. But when it comes to the Movement itself, I want the focus to be on the most relevant issues...and that is really the monetary system, as far as problems are concerned. 9/11 was essentially a trigger for war and war is largely for profit these days. They are related.
The Movement is much larger than 9/11 truth at this point. Exposing such
a thing has value for it will continue to erode confidence in the
system. However, the debate is very annoying in the mainstream and every
time we see a clear discovery, we quickly see well organized
propaganda based rubukes that confuse the issue. (such as the hilarious
NIST study of WTC7 )This is the way the game is played. Also,
the goals of those who still have the blind brainwashing to think that
9/11 is what the government said it was, will do anything they can to
protect that identification. It is a "faith" of sorts, which is why I
treat it as such in the first film.
The active nanothermite was a powerful find. It is essentially like
finding a stick of dynamite, un-detonated, in the rubble.
There is no faking that kind of science unless it is simply made up. I
see too much at stake for these independent scientists for them to just
make such finds up. They don't get money for their interests; they risk
their careers; they are not selling anything; they are simply performing
their science in an objective way to seek answers. I can do nothing but
sigh when I hear people try to make up excuses about how WT7 fell "from
fire". The NIST report was a circus of bullshit made through reverse
black box modeling to fit a predefined conclusion.
In the end, sadly, logical reasoning does nothing to inform most of the public at this
day and age. People are driven by their emotional identifications. For
decades we have had video of JFK being shot from the front, with his
head going back and to the left. What good has it done us? The
government still claims he was shot from the back and people still
generally believe it in America. It is just sad. I think 9/11 will fall
into the same trap.
The goal of the propagandists that run the websites that attack 911
truth do so not to convince the public of the official story... they now
do so to create a "draw". This is where you counter an argument in such
a way by using semantic manipulation or irrelevant angles, so that the reader is left not
knowing what to think. If you can confuse a truth by imposing contrived
variables that are out of the frame of contextual reference but are
presented as viable by the presenter, then mission accomplished as a
debunker. Sadly, the "draw" technique works. For instance, I get emails
all day long from people who have been feed wacky nonsense about The Movement.
99% just become confused due to what they have read and are apprehensive in turn. We even have a
small group of twisted people who think we are "Illuminati satanists"
trying to "manipulate society" into bringing in the "New World Order". I
actually get serious emails from people who are literally concerned
about this. Its unreal. Of course, we have Alex Jones to thank for that.
You talk about creating devices that last 10 years+ but as the
technology advances these things will dramatically change faster as
things become more streamlined. So in essence the technology would
advance so quickly that it could make devices obsolete faster than they
could be recycled.With technology advancing so quickly in a
resource-based economy do you think it would be necessary to slow down
technological advancements and distribution?
Not at all. It comes down to recognizing the growth rate and adjusting the product enclosures (if applicable) to support updates. For instance, you can have a "universal" enclosure for a computer which would allow you to have a titanium box with the best wiring, enabling all the components to slide in and out when new advancements are made. Most computers sort of work like this already, where you can change out cards and the like, but the intent isn't for longevity. Also, there would be foresight and no withholding of efficiency. In other words, when apple computer puts out a new product, they do so many generations behind their current state of technology so they can make more money. This waste will not occur in the future. The current state is known, the growth rate is calculated, and the product is created to strategically reflect both attributes. No slowing - maximizing.
Obviously, obsolescence is going to continue, but if we understand what
aspects are most likely to be quickly improved (like hard drives) vs
those which are most likely to have longer integrity (like enclosures),
we an devise a system to take advantage of both. I would generally say that once
we get away from the profit system technology will increase cataclysmically.
Today, when a person has an idea, they often patent it, making it off
limits for others to use/research. This will be history in the future
for there is no basis for it. Instead, ideas are presented to everyone and
improved upon collectively. This way, progress will be tremendous and
fast. Think about it: Modern invention today works like this: A person
creates an idea, pattens it and sells it.
Once the product is being sold, an establishment is set up which
immediately slows progress, for the product is now serving a monetary
function and is hence supporting people financially. This is paralyzing.
Coupled with the legal patents, the product, in fact, becomes a barrier
for further development.
People often argue with me that "profit" is an "incentive" for change.
Sure, if you want to maintain a very narrow perspective, but Profit is more parlaying than anything else, among many other problems. In the future, a product will be a running development with no restrictions to
change. Once computerized systems are set up which can allow for
inferential logic, they will assist design development even more so and
people will bounce their ideas against this system to make sure they are
in accord with modern science as we know it. Again, I think progress will be
staggering compared to what we see today and obsolescence will be a natural
byproduct which is fully taken into account on many levels, both
strategically and also in regard to recycling.
Re:Full Q & As ( from Peter ) 6 Months, 2 Weeks ago
Feedback:
Thanks for this.
I think I speak for everyone in saying that your dedication and genuineness are self evident in your actions and how much you interact with everyone on the forum, over the radio show, etc.
I noticed you speaking about the subject matter of the third film you plan on making...
I have been watching a few documentaries on primates lately and thought you may be interested.
also the documentaries "Marvelous Monkeys," National Geographic's "The New Chimpanzees," "Chimps are People Too" by the BBC, "Ape Genius," "The Human Ape" and PBS's "Cleaver Monkeys" also "Capuchins: The Monkey Puzzle." Really Amazing Stuff. I always thought Richard Dawkin's "Nice Guys Finish First" had some really interesting parts to it.
I disagree with Dawkins that the main determinant of how animals help one another is based on the percentage of common genetic code (ie brother helps brother more than cousin helps cousin, more than friend helps friend, more than member of one species helps member of separate species) but there is no doubt that symbiosis and cooperation is the fundamental element of social systems in nature. I think there are indeed cases where there is simple host/parasite scenarios, but rarely do these systems ever have the ability to evolve into more orderly structured models which help both organisms achieve a higher quality of life.
People often ask if acts of "true" altruism are possible. I used to be agnostic about this, but when we look in nature and you see things like a dog risking its life to cross a busy freeway to drag an animal of another species to safety, and then leave the scene without any other apparent reason than to help that animal out it really makes for quite a strong argument in favor of as "pure" a form of altruism as we can probably test for or observe.
Anyway, thanks again for taking the time to answer all these questions. One quote for you on vaccines as well:
"This biggest question is: “Did vaccines eradicate diseases?” Diseases were on their way out and epidemics have their own lifespan. According to the World Health Statistics Annual 1973 – 1976, Volume 2, there has been a steady decline of infectious diseases in most developing countries regardless of the percentage of vaccines administered. Researchers pointed out that infectious diseases disappeared as the result of sanitation, improved public water supplies and personal hygiene, and better distribution and increased consumption of fresh fruits and vegetables. From 1850 to 1940, diseases had declined 90% and were at an all-time low, just when vaccines started to be introduced. In addition, diseases for which there was never a vaccine also declined dramatically. In countries without widespread use of vaccines and in diseases for which there is no vaccine, there was also a general decline." rightstofreedom.com/health/educate-before-you-vaccinate/
Re:Full Q & As ( from Peter ) 6 Months, 2 Weeks ago
Feedback:
Some people are going to hate me for doing this but....
peterjoseph wrote:
The Movement is much larger than 9/11 truth at this point. Exposing such
a thing has value for it will continue to erode confidence in the
system. However, the debate is very annoying in the mainstream and every
time we see a clear discovery, we quickly see well organized
propaganda based rubukes that confuse the issue. (such as the hilarious
NIST study of WTC7 )
Please tell me what was hilarious in the NIST study of WTC7?
Whats hilarious Peter is the 911 Truth movements claims about WTC7. All they do is lie and distort, and I can prove that and I believe to your satisfaction if you would only sit down and look at what is presented.
I've been discussing this in several places on this forum, such as here and here.
Also, the goals of those who still have the blind brainwashing to think that 9/11 is what the government said it was, will do anything they can to
protect that identification. It is a "faith" of sorts, which is why I treat it as such in the first film.
Rather ironic to read this, especially to me as I was a truther for about a year and half because of your film.
I can also prove I was if somehow you didnt believe that. Then eventaully I really looked up the claims in order to see if I could defend the critcisms of them and found it wrong about damn near everything. (Ironically the religion section was probably the most correct of all 3 parts!)
The active nanothermite was a powerful find.It is essentially like finding a stick of dynamite, un-detonated, in the rubble.
Peter, they found paint chips. Nothing was found out of the ordinary. Gage and Jones comes out with some of the worst science I've ever seen, but to some people if it reads like science its good enough for them even if they understand none of it. You really need to look into this properly.
There is no faking that kind of science unless it is simply made up. I see too much at stake for these independent scientists for them to just
make such finds up.
Oh right! So why is it that Intelligent Designers and Creationists write their own papers on how evolution isnt real? Why is it we still have historians that believe they Halocaust didnt happen? What motivation do they have?
They don't get money for their interests; they risk their careers; they are not selling anything; they are simply performing
their science in an objective way to seek answers.
Yes they certainly do.
Look at how much they ask you to give them:
Citizen / Student $10 monthly 20 WTC Evidence and 20 Twin Towers Cards
Advocate $25 monthly DVD: 9/11 Blueprint for Truth + 20 of each card
Activist $50 monthly 2 DVD's + 50 of each card
Patriot $100 monthly 3 DVD's + 100 of each card
Statesman $250 monthly 5 DVD's + 250 of each card
Ambassador $500 monthly 10 DVD's + 500 of each card
AE911Truth Hero $911 monthly 20 DVD's + 1000 of each card
Doesnt that sound excessive?
I can do nothing but
sigh when I hear people try to make up excuses about how WT7 fell "from
fire".
I dare you to debate me on it Peter, and I dont mean that in a antgonistic way. You constantly talk about how wonderfully it is to be proven wrong and how if you're wrong you want to know about it. I dare you to put your philosophy here to the test, put you money where your mouth is. WTC7 as far as I can tell one of the greatest lies the truth movement has ever promoted.
In the end, sadly, logical reasoning does nothing to inform most of the public at this day and age.
Then it should be a simple matter to prove me wrong, whatdaya say?
The goal of the propagandists that run the websites that attack 911
truth do so not to convince the public of the official story...they now
do so to create a "draw".
I discovered eventually that there is no "draw", 911Truth is akin to Creationism in various ways and despite people telling me that for a long time I didnt want to accept it. Now I know enough about this that I agree with them. I didnt just suddenly come to this conclusion its been a long process.
This is where you counter an argument in such
a way by using semantic manipulation or irrelevant angles, so that the reader is left not
I would LOVE for you to point out where I have ever done that and if anyone else wants to chime in I'd be happy to hear them.
I've been debating Creationists and Intelligent Designers for over 8 years and have a very high standard of honesty and evidence. I will not allow any dishonesty like that and if I am wong I damn well want to know about it, I want to know if theres flaws in my reasoning, because you see I hate being wrong, but that doesnt mean I stick to my beliefs it means I really want to get to know whats true which means discarding and changing my beliefs if they turn out to be wrong. I will not ignore any point and if you think I have call me on it. Debating forces you to really look into a topic far more than you would casually, it forces you to understand what it is you are reading. I do not believe you have done that whatsoever, if you had you couldnt possibily have thought the claim of no hijackers names on the flight manifests was something you'd want to have in your film.
For instance, I get emails all day long from people who have been feed wacky nonsense about The Movement. 99% just become confused due to what they have read and are apprehensive in turn. We even have a small group of twisted people who think we are "Illuminati satanists" trying to "manipulate society" into bringing in the "New World Order". I actually get serious emails from people who are literally concerned about this. Its unreal. Of course, we have Alex Jones to thank for that.
Thankfully this small group of loonies isnt the problem the movement will have, it will be this connection to 911Truth and conspiracies. Its already happening right now, people writing off the movement because of these connections no matter how much you think you've tried to distance yourself from it it simply isnt good enough.
Consider this, Peter....
If I could prove to your satisfaction a claim made in your 911 section of your film, would you accept it was wrong? How many claims would I need to show was wrong before you acceped it was overall too incorrect (and embarrasingly wrong) to promote any longer?
Even if 911 really was an inside job 911Truth claims are still wrong about damn near eveything.
So whatdaya say? You say you dont want to talk about it anymore, but dont you owe it to yourself and the future of this movement to find out?
Re:Full Q & As ( from Peter ) 6 Months, 1 Week ago
Feedback:
Some people are going to hate me for doing this but....
I just hope not, as it is interventions like yours that help us make progress in the search for the truth. You are very welcome as long as no one is unjustly offended.
because you see I hate being wrong
You should try being happy when corrected instead.
What Peter said might not be accurate. So what? Do you think it is easy to separate scam from fact in the 911 case?
It is very difficult to be certain without a doubt as there are so many selfish interests fuelling biases involved (among both sides probably).
Look at how much they ask you to give them:
Citizen / Student $10 monthly 20 WTC Evidence and 20 Twin Towers Cards
Advocate $25 monthly DVD: 9/11 Blueprint for Truth + 20 of each card
Activist $50 monthly 2 DVD's + 50 of each card
Patriot $100 monthly 3 DVD's + 100 of each card
Statesman $250 monthly 5 DVD's + 250 of each card
Ambassador $500 monthly 10 DVD's + 500 of each card
AE911Truth Hero $911 monthly 20 DVD's + 1000 of each card
I think you do a very good job in exposing the money flow for it is one of the most relevant issues to understand the biases in this matter. I want to see more!
Its already happening right now, people writing off the movement because of these connections
If they see the connections as offensive for them they have all the right to only take from this movement what they wish I guess. This movement is still growing, and will grow for a very long time as it is very viral.
It is amazing how you said so much but referenced so little. I bet what you said is not all your ideas, so please provide reference to something serious to base those claims. You didn't even expose your point about tower 7, you just said that what Peter said in the film was wrong.
I think the point of the films is not whether they are accurate about the facts. That they were damn good in making us question what seemed unquestionable and to especially question the most relevant issues in our lives and society. There should be nothing atop a "pedestal of the unquestionable", especially what is so important for our lives.
The truth... we will never hit it at all. But we can do our very best effort to get a better aim at the "Infinitesimal bullseye of Truth"
Re:Full Q & As ( from Peter ) 6 Months, 1 Week ago
Feedback:
rogeriopfm wrote: Some people are going to hate me for doing this but....
I just hope not, as it is interventions like yours that help us make progress in the search for the truth. You are very welcome as long as no one is unjustly offended.
Hi Roger, glad you think so! I have a funny feeling Peter wont be quite so receptive to this information however, which is a shame.
because you see I hate being wrong
You should try being happy when corrected instead.
What Peter said might not be accurate. So what? Do you think it is easy to separate scam from fact in the 911 case?
It is very difficult to be certain without a doubt as there are so many selfish interests fuelling biases involved (among both sides probably).
Oh yes I am happy when corrected as being corrected means I stop being wrong, you see? Its embarrasing if you have believed and or defended something strongly to admit but the faster you can get over that the better.
I think you do a very good job in exposing the money flow for it is one of the most relevant issues to understand the biases in this matter. I want to see more!
If they see the connections as offensive for them they have all the right to only take from this movement what they wish I guess. This movement is still growing, and will grow for a very long time as it is very viral.
People are not going to take seriously someone who believes such conspiracy theories, there will be some of course but not the amount we'd need.
Also the problem with Zeitgeist is it is associated by the name, associated by Peter, associated by the fact that its called Zeitgeist Addendum, associated by calling the next film Zeitgeist III, associated by the fact that Addendum says that WTC7 was demolished. Its all associated to Zeitgeist 1, and after people watch that they may well ridicule and reject the movement writing it off as crackpot. As in, if you can believe in "THIS RUBBISH", then the Venus Project is probably rubbish as well. Its wrong but will happen.
It is amazing how you said so much but referenced so little. I bet what you said is not all your ideas, so please provide reference to something serious to base those claims. You didn't even expose your point about tower 7, you just said that what Peter said in the film was wrong.
That is all true. The problem is if I make the post too long he certainly will not read it (he might not anyway!). I did however link to a couple of threads where I am having very indepth discussions regarding these issues.
I've covered a wide range of topics but building 7 comes up a lot. If you are interested I would first read through THIS thread, then move onto THIS one. It may take a while but you can see I have provided a lot of information there.
I think the point of the films is not whether they are accurate about the facts. That they were damn good in making us question what seemed unquestionable and to especially question the most relevant issues in our lives and society.
Certainly worked on me initially but he is presenting lies and causing people to believe lies. This is indefensible no matter how right you are over all. Evolution is real but I would never lie not need to lie to get people to understand that.
Just to be clear I dont believe that Peter purposefully went out to decieve people, he just believes without question a lot of fringe, usually conspiracy theorist, sources. Its the lies and dishonesty of those sources eg. Loose Change, Alex Jones, David Ray Griffin etc that are presented in the film, literally, as they are cut and pasted from their own videos with nice editing.
There should be nothing atop a "pedestal of the unquestionable", especially what is so important for our lives.
True. But its not that 911 shouldnt be questioned, its that these people are lying and distorting the truth.
The truth... we will never hit it at all. But we can do our very best effort to get a better aim at the "Infinitesimal bullseye of Truth"
Thats correct! When I argue with Creationists they are always talking about "the "truth". "Truth" is so much a religious concept that its not surprising to me that "911Truth" calls itself that, because so much of it is a dogmantic religious adherance to their beliefs. If you're new to the information Im presenting you may not understand that yet, but if you arent dogmatic in your beliefs Im sure you will begin to understand what Im talking about.
I am a little frustrated that there are certain users around here claiming to speak for science and reason and logic yet pushing all kinds of irrational ideas (wont name names) which makes people who dont know any better think that maybe I am like that too or that I am no better. I ask them just to look at the material and judge for themselves.
When you read my posts I will ask you to consider, why doesnt any 911Truth source tell me this? Why wasnt it relevant to tell me? Because this is what I came accross when I was looking at this stuff.
Re:Full Q & As ( from Peter ) 6 Months, 1 Week ago
Feedback:
ed wrote:
Rather ironic to read this, especially to me as I was a truther for about a year and half because of your film.
same here!, then i read from the JREF forums and found all the misinterpretted and made up information from the conspiracies.
People are not going to take seriously someone who believes such conspiracy theories, there will be some of course but not the amount we'd need.
Also the problem with Zeitgeist is it is associated by the name, associated by Peter, associated by the fact that its called Zeitgeist Addendum, associated by calling the next film Zeitgeist III, associated by the fact that Addendum says that WTC7 was demolished. Its all associated to Zeitgeist 1, and after people watch that they may well ridicule and reject the movement writing it off as crackpot. As in, if you can believe in "THIS RUBBISH", then the Venus Project is probably rubbish as well. Its wrong but will happen.
this is exactly my biggest problem, i don't even mention it. I just can't see how you could conspire such an event with out a rediculous leak of information.
Re:Full Q & As ( from Peter ) 6 Months, 1 Week ago
Feedback:
ed, Glad to see your visiting ae911truth website, yes they do need funding to support the information they are getting out to the masses. Traveling worldwide and to many cities in the U.S. is not free. Since the MSM(mainstream media)is handcuffed, informative scientific presentations by Gage,S.Jones and others is of vital importance. I agree with Peter,he reenforced what I had known to be true about 911 once I did the research. Putting up What they charge for thier products, if thats your knock on them ,thats sad. You probably would rather pay $500. to eat lunch with Karl Rove.
Re:Full Q & As ( from Peter ) 6 Months, 1 Week ago
Feedback:
Ed, I admire the strength of your misguided views. I'm not going to debate with you what really happened on that tragic day where many lives were lost (if you know anything about world history it's quite obvious what happened, anyway). The fact of the matter is the government used it as an excuse to enter into an "illegal" war, not in one country, but two countries. They also abused the power of the situation using it to perpetuate the enemy image of "terrorists" to incite mass fear and inturn pass the homeland security bill. Now arms manufacturers, oil companies, denfense contractors and even banks are reaping huge profits from the war while innocent human beings die without just cause
The administrator has disabled public write access.
All ideologies are idiotic, whether religious or political, for it is conceptual thinking, the conceptual word, which has so unfortunately divided man. - Jiddu Krishnamurti
Last Edit: 2009/05/17 03:09 By BranManFloMore.Reason: Taking Off Duplicate Post
The administrator has disabled public write access.
All ideologies are idiotic, whether religious or political, for it is conceptual thinking, the conceptual word, which has so unfortunately divided man. - Jiddu Krishnamurti
