• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

ZEITGEIST, The Movie

regan69 said:
... and make significant progress in securing the oil reserves and gas pipelines that are going to be paramount to any empire in the future, it makes perfect sense that a administration with an appaling moral compass would sacrafice 3,000 of it's own people to do this. It has been done before, just never on this scale. I don't know the whole story - I'm sure there are only a handful of people who do -but I believe that at the very least the US government was complicit with the events on 9/11
Click to expand...
Oh goody, are you the one who has all the evidence 9/11 truth has been alluding to?
 
Last edited:
cisco said:
Paranoid/delusional. I've been hearing the chip/tattoo/rfid thing is "a couple years away" for 20 years now. Older people have probably been hearing it longer. It ain't gonna happen.

I think it's mostly based on the book of Revelation. At least where I grew up (bible belt), that seemed to be the source of most of it.

It's bunk.
Click to expand...

JonathanClement said:
Why do you think it's bunk? Like, give some reasons. I like to have that security, you know?
Click to expand...

Hi JC,

There isn't actually the technology available to do it. RFID only works to a few metres and GPS doesn't work unless you're outside. Most CTists conflate the two technologies in their minds and come up with some wonder-device that sounds pretty scary but isn't actually possible.

Interestingly, in the UK, some journalists and government ministers have been doing this also, apparently believing it is possible to have tracking chip implants. There was an interesting, though scientifically suspect, report in the Independent on Sunday (generally a decent paper) quoting UK defence ministers as saying they were going to buy the chips to fit in prisoners!

Several companies, such as Digital Angel, who sell both technologies, appear to do little to deflate the myth also. It seems they even rely on it for publicity.

It's not however impossible that the tech could be developed. I read recently that the Chinese have committed to investing $6bn in RFID to improve their systems management. There could be some scary spin-offs with that level of money being pumped in.

I think it's good to keep tabs on these things. You can go for dismissing ideas out of hand, but I'm personally happy to keep an open mind. I like Zeitgeist too. Maybe you would struggle to substantiate it to a strictly empiric and academic level, but that's not to say it isn't without considerable merit.

Nick
 
Last edited:
regan69 said:
GreNME said:
But what does this have to do with the price of tea in China?
Click to expand...
It has nothing to do with the price of tea, try the price of oil - sitting at $100 a barrell now as we reach "peak oil" and set sky rocket in the coming years as the general public start to realise that the end of cheap oil is upon us and we have nothing better to move on to. Bearing this in mind, and bearing in mind that since 9/11 the US has successfully been able to invade Iraq and Afganistan, topple their leaders (who were admittedly not the nicest people in the world, though it didn't stop USA dealing with them, and, in the case of the Taliban, creating them), and make significant progress in securing the oil reserves and gas pipelines that are going to be paramount to any empire in the future, it makes perfect sense that a administration with an appaling moral compass would sacrafice 3,000 of it's own people to do this. It has been done before, just never on this scale. I don't know the whole story - I'm sure there are only a handful of people who do -but I believe that at the very least the US government was complicit with the events on 9/11
Click to expand...

  1. I don't think you really understand the concept of peak oil, hence your misuse of scare quotes when referencing it.
  2. I don't know if you have realised it-- in fact I'm of the opinion that you haven't-- but the US isn't the one that stands to profit big with the Afghan pipeline. Since you haven't yet figured out who it is, I'm going to let you stew over it and suggest you try out this little thing I call Critical Thinking.
  3. I'm not sure if you are aware of this, but the price of oil or any commodity tends to go up, not down. There are brief dips in prices that are mostly due to seasonal factors, but the price curve is always upward. Using the price of oil as "proof" is, at best, not indicative of anything (and, at worst, indicative of a poor understanding of economics).
  4. The US government didn't create the Taliban, and the Taliban is not al Qaeda. The fact that you seem to keep mixing important distinctions like this up gives me the impression that you are more emotionally invested in the line of reasoning you are using than intellectually invested. While I can sympathize with your outrage to a degree, appealing to my emotion is not going to convince me intellectually.
  5. Most importantly, none of what you are talking about has evidentiary bearing on the case of the operation conducted by a group of individuals, who were funded by and trained by al Qaeda, to use airliners as missiles to attack targets in the United States on September 11th of 2001. This isn't to say that some of what you are talking about might have differing degrees of relationship to groups connected with the event, but that "connected to" includes "affected by" or "opposed to" just as much as it means "complicit with."


So, unless you can distinguish what kinds of connections you are attempting to trace I will continue to hold the opinion that you are not aware of the facts and are instead promoting your judgment on the grounds of an emotional appeal. Once again, while I can sympathize with your outrage neither my sympathy nor your emotional appeal is in any way convincing me, nor is it actually drawing any kind of factual complicit connection between the United States government and the al Qaeda attack on 9/11.

Ya dig?
 
regan69 said:
Obviously not. Otherwise George would be impeached and I would be assassinated :)
Click to expand...

Since George is still in officer and no troother has been assassinated, can we conclude that no one has any evidence of a 9/11 inside job?
 
GreNME said:
  1. I don't think you really understand the concept of peak oil, hence your misuse of scare quotes when referencing it.
  2. I don't know if you have realised it-- in fact I'm of the opinion that you haven't-- but the US isn't the one that stands to profit big with the Afghan pipeline. Since you haven't yet figured out who it is, I'm going to let you stew over it and suggest you try out this little thing I call Critical Thinking.
  3. I'm not sure if you are aware of this, but the price of oil or any commodity tends to go up, not down. There are brief dips in prices that are mostly due to seasonal factors, but the price curve is always upward. Using the price of oil as "proof" is, at best, not indicative of anything (and, at worst, indicative of a poor understanding of economics).
  4. The US government didn't create the Taliban, and the Taliban is not al Qaeda. The fact that you seem to keep mixing important distinctions like this up gives me the impression that you are more emotionally invested in the line of reasoning you are using than intellectually invested. While I can sympathize with your outrage to a degree, appealing to my emotion is not going to convince me intellectually.
  5. Most importantly, none of what you are talking about has evidentiary bearing on the case of the operation conducted by a group of individuals, who were funded by and trained by al Qaeda, to use airliners as missiles to attack targets in the United States on September 11th of 2001. This isn't to say that some of what you are talking about might have differing degrees of relationship to groups connected with the event, but that "connected to" includes "affected by" or "opposed to" just as much as it means "complicit with."


So, unless you can distinguish what kinds of connections you are attempting to trace I will continue to hold the opinion that you are not aware of the facts and are instead promoting your judgment on the grounds of an emotional appeal. Once again, while I can sympathize with your outrage neither my sympathy nor your emotional appeal is in any way convincing me, nor is it actually drawing any kind of factual complicit connection between the United States government and the al Qaeda attack on 9/11.

Ya dig?
Click to expand...
1) I am fully aware of the implications of "peak oil", which makes the US govts actions all the more easy to understand. I'll spell it out for you; there is a limited number of gas and oil left in this world, our demand is ever increasing and our supply is dwindling to the point where we are peaking. The future of all countries, especially economic empires, will depend on their access to oil and gas. As #1 consumer of oil and gas is the USA, which is why the government is doing everything they can to secure these resources. Peak oil will hit everyone hard and eventually change our world works but in the coming frenzy a desperate grab for resources will occur. It has clearly begun.
2) What are you talking about? If the pipelines go though the Caspian then the west win. If the west wins then the biggest winner in the west is the USA. If they bypass the caspian and go the Russian friendly way then Russia wins (either way Afganistan loses). I can't see how you think the US won't profit big from this and who you think will????
3) Look at the price of oil since it was discovered. In paying particular attention to that last 10 or so years you will see that it was sitting at about $20 (US) a barrell. It is now $100 a barrell. That is an increase of 500%. Please can you name me another commodity that is used as much as oil on the world market that has risen like this? I'd be very interested to know...
4) The US didn't create "the Taliban" or "Al Qaeda", but for many years (before the Soviets invaded) they funded the extrimist Mujaheedin in an effort to knock over the democratically elected secular government of Afganistan in order to replace them with people who they could do business with. They funded billions into the Mujaheedin and from that came the Taliban and Al Qaeda.
5) It all relates, and it's all to do with our dwindling energy supplies and the need to stay dominant.

I know it is easier to think of the Bush administration as a bunch stupid and bumbling warmongers, but in light of all everything that has happended, and is happening, it is naive and foolish to do so.
 
cisco said:
Since George is still in officer and no troother has been assassinated, can we conclude that no one has any evidence of a 9/11 inside job?
Click to expand...
Yes you can conclude that no one has SUFFICIENT EVIDENCE. You can also conclude that the world mainstream media is gagged to the point of disbelief and that people like you are frightened to entertain the point and connect the dots for even a minute.
 
regan69 said:
3) Look at the price of oil since it was discovered. In paying particular attention to that last 10 or so years you will see that it was sitting at about $20 (US) a barrell. It is now $100 a barrell. That is an increase of 500%. Please can you name me another commodity that is used as much as oil on the world market that has risen like this? I'd be very interested to know...
Click to expand...
GE stock from 1989 to late 1990 and later rose 6 times. Vote for Clinton, it will happen again? Buy stock. lol

In 1969 I made 80 cents an hours, gas was as high as 25 to 35 cents a gallon, my car got 15 to 20 mpg. Now if I was 16, I could start making 6 dollars an hour doing the same darn job, but the owner now will not let me eat anything we make at break!!! I now can buy gas at 335 cents a gallon and my car gets 30 to 40 mpg. My cost per mile is now lower! OOPS, what is going on!!!

CT time,,, lol
 
regan69 said:
Yes you can conclude that no one has SUFFICIENT EVIDENCE. You can also conclude that the world mainstream media is gagged to the point of disbelief and that people like you are frightened to entertain the point and connect the dots for even a minute.
Click to expand...
Sorry, reformed CT'er. I connected the dots for years, then finally realized I was connecting dots that are unconnectable except when I'm buried in paranoia (and taking speed like a dumbass) and making myself look really stupid in the process.

Fear is being afraid to face reality, and manufacturing this fantasy world where shadowy figures have kept you down so you haven't become a multi-zillionaire by the age of 20 like you grew up believing you would. And rather than accept you're not anywhere as special as you always told yourself you are, you blame phantoms... and convince yourself that everyone else are sheep who are under the thumb of these phantoms so they don't fight back.

Being that I was into all that rot before the Internet I have somewhat of an excuse, but looking back I wish every single day someone would have slapped me with a dose of reality and said "stop being so stupid and take a minute to realize how impossible this garbage you're wrapped up in really is."

Please don't rob yourself of the years that I did. Grow up.
 
ElMondoHummus said:
Is there any other way to take speed?

I'm just sayin'...

;)
Click to expand...
No there isn't. But it's hard to convince yourself it doesn't make you smarter and a better all around person when you're chopping up your second set of lines of the morning. :o
 
regan69 said:
1) I am fully aware of the implications of "peak oil", which makes the US govts actions all the more easy to understand. I'll spell it out for you; there is a limited number of gas and oil left in this world, our demand is ever increasing and our supply is dwindling to the point where we are peaking. The future of all countries, especially economic empires, will depend on their access to oil and gas. As #1 consumer of oil and gas is the USA, which is why the government is doing everything they can to secure these resources. Peak oil will hit everyone hard and eventually change our world works but in the coming frenzy a desperate grab for resources will occur. It has clearly begun.
Click to expand...

If that is your explanation of what you think Peak Oil is, then you're a bit off. That could explain the cascading off-ness of your other theories, though.

regan69 said:
2) What are you talking about? If the pipelines go though the Caspian then the west win. If the west wins then the biggest winner in the west is the USA. If they bypass the caspian and go the Russian friendly way then Russia wins (either way Afganistan loses). I can't see how you think the US won't profit big from this and who you think will????
Click to expand...

If you're not willing to do the homework yourself and you are so convinced you've done all the learning necessary to understand, then there's not really much that's going to help you. I never said the US wouldn't get a big payout, but the US is not "the west" and you still don't seem to understand the implications behind who stands to make out the best with the Afghani pipeline.

regan69 said:
3) Look at the price of oil since it was discovered. In paying particular attention to that last 10 or so years you will see that it was sitting at about $20 (US) a barrell. It is now $100 a barrell. That is an increase of 500%. Please can you name me another commodity that is used as much as oil on the world market that has risen like this? I'd be very interested to know...
Click to expand...

Haha. You apprently haven't been keeping up with aluminum in the US. It's been shooting up and down like crazy in the past ten years.

You're heavy on the hyperbole and light on fact. Here, have a look at a historical chart of prices for crude, adjusted for inflation going up to 2007. You don't even get the prices right, relying instead on your emotional appeals, which kind of hampers the effectiveness of your argument. The fact that you apparently don't realize how many commodities over the past few decades have seen sharp increases and decreases severely hampers the effectiveness of your argument.

regan69 said:
4) The US didn't create "the Taliban" or "Al Qaeda", but for many years (before the Soviets invaded) they funded the extrimist Mujaheedin in an effort to knock over the democratically elected secular government of Afganistan in order to replace them with people who they could do business with. They funded billions into the Mujaheedin and from that came the Taliban and Al Qaeda.
Click to expand...

Billions, huh? Can you quantify that? Sorry, but you're going to need to give some quantification for a number like that. I am aware, however, that tens of millions were given to some mujahadi groups-- I realize you may not be aware of this, but there wasn't a single monolithic "Mujahadeen" that existed in Afghanistan, and the name "mujahadeen" is more of a title ("freedom fighter" or "fighter for what is right") than it was the name of an organization. Care to share your numbers with us? I know where I got my numbers, but if you have other sources I'd be happy to see them.

regan69 said:
5) It all relates, and it's all to do with our dwindling energy supplies and the need to stay dominant.
Click to expand...

That's a poor reasoning to come to such a far-fetched conclusion. Once again, I believe this has to do with a very superficial and un-nuanced understanding of what Peak Oil actually is and how long it has actually been an issue. Furthermore, if you really believe that oil and oil prices are at the core of everything then you should by all rights be saying that the OPEC countries are the ones culpable, because it's OPEC that sets the price by controlling the supply in contrast to the amount of demand. Oddly, I see very little damning rhetoric coming from you toward the OPEC cartel.

regan69 said:
I know it is easier to think of the Bush administration as a bunch stupid and bumbling warmongers, but in light of all everything that has happended, and is happening, it is naive and foolish to do so.
Click to expand...

Why do you keep doing this false dichotomy stuff and shooting yourself in the foot? No one is arguing that the Keystone Cops are running the government. Instead, what is being pointed out is that individuals with piss-poor leadership skills and no real ability to plan past a few years are most likely in office, and that their behavior before, during, and after 9/11 is indicative of such poor leadership skills.

What's confounding is that many of us here don't want the current group in office to have power any more than you might, but you're perfectly willing to lump each and every one of us who don't buy the web of paranoia that you've weaved in with that group anyway. You're not even making a reasonable accusation against anyone, not providing actual cogent and clear descriptions of what you're raging against, but you treat corrections to your factual deficiencies with vitriol and accusations of complicity. All you are accomplishing by doing this is creating a feedback loop where you never have to re-evaluate yourself because you're not under any obligation to examine opposing arguments in the first place.
 
regan69 said:
Yes you can conclude that no one has SUFFICIENT EVIDENCE. You can also conclude that the world mainstream media is gagged to the point of disbelief and that people like you are frightened to entertain the point and connect the dots for even a minute.
Click to expand...
Isn't that a pretty dire accusation to make without sufficient evidence?

ETA: By the way, I'm far from intellectually frightened by anything. My hate for the Bush administration was so fierce and unbridled at the time I heard the conspiracy theories that I desperately wanted to believe them. They failed to hold up under critical analysis, however - just like my belief in Jesus, out-of-body experiences, and Santa Claus - so I dropped them.
 
Last edited:
Wait, which democratically elected government were the Mujahideen trying to overthrow? And how long before the Soviet Invasion was the U.S. funding the Mujahideen? And which lucrative business interests precipitated U.S. involvement, as opposed to, say, Cold War maneuvering?

Yeah, you sound real informed. :rolleyes:
 
Slayhamlet said:
Wait, which democratically elected government were the Mujahideen trying to overthrow? And how long before the Soviet Invasion was the U.S. funding the Mujahideen? And which lucrative business interests precipitated U.S. involvement, as opposed to, say, Cold War maneuvering?

Yeah, you sound real informed. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Speaking of mujahadeen...you ever see rambo pt 2?
 
1984

I watched the movie. From the very beginning I thought it I had seen/read something just like it before. The movie 1984 and the propaganda film people were forced to watch (I think it was called Two Minutes of Hate or something like that) seemed strikingly similar to this whole film. The quotes, the music, the narration, extremely similar to the the Big Brother and the "Ministry of Truth" in the 1984. I haven't watched or even thought about the book or movie in years but this seemed to bring up that memory. In other words, I thought the film was more interested in promoting itself than proving the ideas contained within. The ideas in the film, whether truthful or not, seem more like propaganda than proof of the ideas presented.
 
NVfrenchy said:
I watched the movie. From the very beginning I thought it I had seen/read something just like it before. The movie 1984 and the propaganda film people were forced to watch (I think it was called Two Minutes of Hate or something like that) seemed strikingly similar to this whole film. The quotes, the music, the narration, extremely similar to the the Big Brother and the "Ministry of Truth" in the 1984. I haven't watched or even thought about the book or movie in years but this seemed to bring up that memory. In other words, I thought the film was more interested in promoting itself than proving the ideas contained within. The ideas in the film, whether truthful or not, seem more like propaganda than proof of the ideas presented.
Click to expand...

That's an interesting (and ironic) observation, and I concur with it. The formatting definitely comes across strong with the propaganda, flashing sequences by with over-dubbed exposition so quickly (as if to keep the viewer from giving any extended scrutiny to the parts).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom