Zeitgeist Deception - Producer no longer feels 9/11 was an inside job

[TheGoodFight1984]

I was thoroughly disgusted by Alex today...

Alex acted like a child.

Like Bill O'REilley

My thoughts too.. I know this won't be welcomed by most and I don't care either way but that 'interview' was an abomination.. really really really bad. I'll still be listening to the show and posting here but the attitude AJ took on here was, well, it surprised me that's for sure.. I can't get past that to be able to take in and mull over the content of the discussion itself. bah, f-it. I think AJ really should have a good think about how he treats other people, his show or not.  

[Aaron]

My thoughts too.. I know this won't be welcomed by most and I don't care either way but that 'interview' was an abomination.. really really really bad. I'll still be listening to the show and posting here but the attitude AJ took on here was, well, it surprised me that's for sure.. I can't get past that to be able to take in and mull over the content of the discussion itself. bah, f-it. I think AJ really should have a good think about how he treats other people, his show or not.  

+1

[Dok]

You guys wouldn't be complaining if it was Bush he was interviewing. But since its the High Prophet, well...

[Initiated]

You guys wouldn't be complaining if it was Bush he was interviewing. But since its the High Prophet, well...

The "High Prophet"? Are you really that blind?

[RickT]

A person doesn't have to be religious or against Socialism, Communism or whatever -ism to find his opinions regarding nurture vs. nature completely off the wall.  He and the movie make wild generalizations about all human beings and that everyone can just eventually learn to do things for the common good.  As I said in my previous post, this leaves out sex (1 example) which is really our biggest motivational instinct.

Oh!  Will wives and girlfriends stop getting bitching during that time of the month?  I suppose the Venus crowd would suggest drugs will be used to counter the negative affects of our hormones, both male & female.  Machines will give us some super duper sexual gratification, therefore men will not want a partner.  Women won't need a provider or partner as everything will be provided and children will eventually be hatched and raised by nanny robots/cyborgs.

Maybe since the movie showed so much love for the Central and South American strongmen, Chavez may let Venezuela be the place to try a test city.  They can give me a call when they solve the PMS situation.  Or when all labour is done by self creating and self sustaining fembots that look like Shania Twain.  

Really though, this all sounds like the potential "possibly well meaning" start of the very dystopic societies we rail against.

[TheGoodFight1984]

You guys wouldn't be complaining if it was Bush he was interviewing. But since its the High Prophet, well...

I probably would be tbh, I take offense whenever someone is treated unfairly or without respect, just like that lady who called in a while back to challenge something AJ said and he instantly shunned her and started calling her a pschizophrenic etc, it's just a disgusting way to talk to someone. I wouldn't like to be spoken to like that, nor would I have the gaul to speak to someone like that. it's just disrespectful. anyway I have work to do. laters.

[Dig]

I just listened to Alex's interview with Peter Joseph. I agree that Alex could have handled himself better. It did seem that he was on the defensive from the beginning and did act a bit childish in quite a few instances (like the "feeble-minded" comment and many others) as well as being his naturally overbearing self. However, it is his radio show and he did allow him to speak uninterrupted at one point during the broadcast. I have a ton of respect for Alex and what he does and I have a lot of respect for Peter as well and what he is trying to accomplish, but it did seem more of a bridge-burning interview than anything productive for the listeners or the movement in general.

Sadly though, I kind of expected this. I just hope it doesn't fragment the kind and caring people that stand for truth (hopefully together) and want a real change. It could have been a good conversation about exposing the real criminals and directing that frustration, which we all have, towards that purpose.

I was amazed that AJ gave PJ a good 50% of the time to talk.  Unfortunately PJ spent a good 20% of his time complaining that he did not have time to talk.  That was pretty funny actually.  Also, I definitely enjoyed the breakdown of the overly obvious hypocricy of PJ working as a hollywood whore (his words) and uses scary music to cajole masses into a pigeonhole idealistic technocracy.

I think that PJ should be on more interviews with a wide array of radio shows.  I think that this was a first step in understanding technocracies and futurism so that they can be brought to the forefront.

The idea of using the words evil, bad, sick, etc. and taking some higher level of understanding of human behaviour in order to shift the mindset is a very old concept.  Here is more information about controlling human thought, engineering of consent (for the greater good), and re-education:

HOW TO CREATE A SOCIETY OF SHEEPLE
WHO WILL NOT OBJECT TO SOCIAL CONTROL
WHO WILL EVEN SUPPORT IT

The Engineering of Consent (part 1 of 6)


The Engineering of Consent (part 2 of 6)


The Engineering of Consent (part 3 of 6)


The Engineering of Consent (part 4 of 6)


The Engineering of Consent (part 5 of 6)


The Engineering of Consent (part 6 of 6)

The programme explores how those in power in post-war America used Freud's ideas about the unconscious mind to try and control the masses.

Politicians and planners came to believe Freud's underlying premise - that deep within all human beings were dangerous and irrational desires and fears. They were convinced that it was the unleashing of these instincts that had led to the barbarism of Nazi Germany. To stop it ever happening again they set out to find ways to control this hidden enemy within the human mind.

Sigmund Freud's daughter, Anna, and his nephew, Edward Bernays, provided the centrepiece philosophy. The US government, big business, and the CIA used their ideas to develop techniques to manage and control the minds of the American people. But this was not a cynical exercise in manipulation. Those in power believed that the only way to make democracy work and create a stable society was to repress the savage barbarism that lurked just under the surface of normal American life.

[Firewerk66]

Iv kept my opinion out of this so far but i have to agree AJ went a bit OTT but he has done so much for the truth movement who am i to judge?

well, you have every right to an opinion, listen to both sides and make up your mind. AJ has done GREAT work in waking people up, but he is not infallible and is subject to criticism. Just like when AJ went on Coast to Coast and George criticized Alex on his handling of the Malkin situation. Alex agreed he should have kept his cool BECAUSE he is in the spotlight and is in the power position he is in. Same deal here with the PJ interview. ALex did WAY more harm than go in advancing the cause. I hope he addresses this today, as i'm sure he's taking some heat.

[Dig]

I probably would be tbh, I take offense whenever someone is treated unfairly or without respect, just like that lady who called in a while back to challenge something AJ said and he instantly shunned her and started calling her a pschizophrenic etc, it's just a disgusting way to talk to someone. I wouldn't like to be spoken to like that, nor would I have the gaul to speak to someone like that. it's just disrespectful. anyway I have work to do. laters.

I am very confused at how this was not a respectful interview.  In the two hours AJ gave him the floor often.  Would anyone in the MSM give AJ 2 hours even with some of their personal opinions sprinkled in?  WTF?  AJ did more for PJ then anyone else I have seen.  He also gave PJ rights to sections of his films so that AJ could allow other creative people to make their own messages.  Can anyone explain to me how AJ is doing anything that is contrary to what we would expect and even demand after listening to him for years?

Also, I find it overwhelmingly revealing that almost all critical comments concerning the interview attack AJ's demeanor rather than the actual words he uses.  I have not seen any criticism whatsoever of AJ rebutting PJ's fanciful comments with reality. Can anyone actually point out a sentence/sentences that AJ said that does not make sense?  Or is this just an obvious set of talking points:

"AJ displayed WWF behaviour"

Can someone offer an actual critique of his words or is this just another talking point discussion?

[Dok]

The "High Prophet"? Are you really that blind?

Ya, High Prophet, he proclaims a vision and look at how people just flock to him, and defend him with religious vigore. He had his for runner in the failed Matyraya and his coming millenium in the Venus project. For some one who is so Anti-Religion he seems to be starting one.

L. Ron Hubbard is widely rumored to have said "The way to make a million
dollars is to start a religion."

[TheGoodFight1984]

I am very confused at how this was not a respectful interview.  In the two hours AJ gave him the floor often.  Would anyone in the MSM give AJ 2 hours even with some of their personal opinions sprinkled in?  WTF?  AJ did more for PJ then anyone else I have seen.  He also gave PJ rights to sections of his films so that AJ could allow other creative people to make their own messages.  Can anyone explain to me how AJ is doing anything that is contrary to what we would expect and even demand after listening to him for years?

I think you misunderstand what I'm trying to get across sane, the bottom line is I thought that some (not all) of the interview was badly executed in the way AJ put himself across.. I found the mimicking of PJ to be out of order. I'll keep out of this thread now I've said all I wanted to, probably too much looking back.

[Pupil]

For those upset at PJ's ass-whupping by AJ: If you want intellectual radio, listen to Alan Watt. You don't listen to AJ to gain a deeper understanding or achieve intellectual enlightenment - you listen to AJ for raw information and to have charlatans like PJ be thouroughly taken down. Yes, AJ is like WWF sometimes, but that's AJ.  If you want to hear someone give a chance for PJ to make his intellectually vacuous claims and then get taken down on an intellectual level, get a debate going between PJ and Alan Watt, who understands the way this world works better than anyone alive, and is as cool as a zen master.  AJ used a club yesterday, AW will use a rapier.

I've been wondering about this bizarre premise of resource scarcity.  Do any of you realize just how huge this planet is? This idea that animals compete due to scarcity is utterly ridiculous! Trust me, there is more than enough food to go around.  Just because we humans have allowed ourselves to be caught in an economic paradigm that ensures resource scarcity for us doesn't mean that resource scarcity exists. And by resource scarcity, by the way, I'm referring to food, because that is the resource all animals require.

Animals compete because competition ensures the survival of your descendants.  It's not raw resources that are scarce - it are the odds that you will mate with the best genetic match for you IE the individual that turns on your INSTICTS (which PJ all but denies). Even then, there's no shortage of members of the opposite sex - just the ones that have the qualities you seek. It is the future that is uncertain, and so animals fight tooth and nail to ensure that their progeny will carry on, and will have the best qualities possible to ensure their survival. It follows, then, that being stronger than other members of your species gives you better odds in the reproductive battles. Hence the year-long competition leading up to the big fight during mating season.

This is the basic instinct without which life would not have continued to this day.

[Dig]

I think you misunderstand what I'm trying to get across sane, the bottom line is I thought that some (not all) of the interview was badly executed in the way AJ put himself across.. I found the mimicking of PJ to be out of order. I'll keep out of this thread now I've said all I wanted to, probably too much looking back.

AJ mimics everyone, I hardly think it was "out of order" especially given how much we love the unabashed rawness of his lifelong fight against the NWO.  PJ has been exposed a bit by the interview and I am sure he will be exposed further by future interviews.  He is obviously controlled by the same inherent human instincts that he attempts to deny are insticts and that is why he spend a good portion of the interview complaining.  He was able to get his message out to a huge audience, but when AJ pointed out cracks in his matrix, he seemed a bit dumbfounded and agressive.  I really cannot see how any of this was unexpected.

Again, I think a transcript would clear up a lot of the misinfo by others (not you-I understand what you were saying).

[JTCoyoté]

"Just happenstance." Hardly. You missed my point about understanding the mechanics of history:
"The ideals of many of the utopian socialists are positive, but their almost total ignorance of the mechanics of history [I meant mechanics that have as their human element the globalists we talk about] renders their ideas useless - or, in a word, utopian."
 
If you're referring specifically to Peter Joseph & Co., you have to realize that there are a lot of people such as these who are enthusiastic enough about a line of thought to spend their fortunes and their talents supporting it, independent of the global manipulators. If their talents support a line of thought that is easily turned to use by despots, we suffer for it. But the best way to derail them is by polemicizing against them. 
  
Unfortunately, I didn't take the time to read all the posts. I merely scanned them. I'll certainly go back and read what you said. You know, I made the same point a month ago about the "September Clues Exposed" video elsewhere on this Forum.
  
I too am suspicious about such technical ploys, but I think a lot of these have to do with making re-editing convenient and making the video exciting. No argument that Peter Joseph wants to hit his audience hard with the material. Good teaching uses advanced propaganda techniques: if the material is finally counterproductive, it's disinformation. I have to agree that any such techniques that are used to advance utopian socialism are, in the final analysis, misinformation, but not necessarily disinformation.
  
If they weren't slick, there wouldn't be a need for Alex Jones; or for me and you, for that matter.
  
It is a shot across the bow. But it's not new. I think you're giving the Venus Project people too much credit. I heard a scientist from NASA say some of these utopian futuristic things a few months ago, and this guy was, in effect, talking about doing away with human beings. Peter Joseph & Co. are a whole different animal: they're just ignorant, ingenuous, and wrong.

Vladimir,

I have been known to miss my share of points over time... I suppose you have as well... Suffice it to say in the final analysis we agree upon the latent negative propaganda value of this final installment of Zeitgeist... Whether the authors are utilizing extremely subtle/subliminal suggestive techniques intentionally or not, and setting aside the reasons for the moment, they are being used just the same.

This all goes against Peter Joseph's accusations against Alex in the interview, for propagating Madison Avenue techniques by using a price tag of a $19.95 for his videos rather than $20... Small peanuts compared to the slick Madison Avenue, Edvard Bernays style, subliminal sales job crammed into the first four minutes of the ZA film... This is beyond the pale, and I cannot abide it as accidental, or happenstance.

A coincidental interplay of opposing themes painting one as dark and bleak, with visual and auditory assaults... then transitioning into a slower segment, colored in soothing sound bathed in utopist glow, as the solution to the first... A sound and video assault of extremes that slams the senses from the git-go... cramming the entire theme of the movie into the first four minutes, aimed at the short attention span unwitting... This is not coincidence... yet may be defended with plausible deniability... but not to the aware.

JTCoyoté

"A wise and frugal government which shall restrain men from
injuring one another, which shall leave them otherwise free
to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement,
and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has
earned. This is the sum of good government."
~Thomas Jefferson

[Dig]

For those upset at PJ's ass-whupping by AJ: If you want intellectual radio, listen to Alan Watt. You don't listen to AJ to gain a deeper understanding or achieve intellectual enlightenment - you listen to AJ for raw information and to have charlatans like PJ be thouroughly taken down. Yes, AJ is like WWF sometimes, but that's AJ.  If you want to hear someone give a chance for PJ to make his intellectually vacuous claims and then get taken down on an intellectual level, get a debate going between PJ and Alan Watt.

A PJ/AW debate...that would be awesome!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[agentbluescreen]

I just listened to Alex's interview with Peter Joseph. I agree that Alex could have handled himself better. It did seem that he was on the defensive from the beginning and did act a bit childish in quite a few instances (like the "feeble-minded" comment and many others) as well as being his naturally overbearing self.

I have to defend Alex 100% here, in spite of his overbearing reaction to the notion that there is no morality that defines 'good and 'evil'! Strangely, Peter Joseph completely denies the final conclusion of his first movie in his statement that all religion is restrictive and tyrannical, blinding people from the 'secret hidden truth' of his magic pragmatic plastic notion of amorality based upon 'environmental prejudice' and the 'secret sauce of plenty' that would supposedly create a 'better' global society. The notion that scarcity is the root of all evil is nonsense!

Please allow me to repeat the conclusion of Zeitgeist:

"When the Power of Love overcomes the Love of Power the world will know peace" -Sri Chinmoy

Now let me correct and paraphrase this fine thought that was sadly misstated by Mr Chinmoy:

"When the Power of Love overcomes the Lust for Power the world will know peace" -Phil

The most important and proper distinction here, is that lust for power is not Love! Love is a gift given, never a present received! That is what's called a Charity!

While I shudder to bring 'religious faith' into this defense, it is obvious, no matter what ones moral upbringing is that the most perfect, correct and undeniably true definition of morality is contained in the perfect teachings of Our Savior Jesus in two commandments that once and for all permanently and perfectly defined the difference between Good and Evil in all respects and in all regards for all living beings for all time and without any exception!

In fact the Law of Love is the proof of all goodness and is not merely a secular Christian truth but is also shared by most every other faith and even is given lip service to by greedy, self serving organized gnostic Corporate Fascist 'religions' to some much more limited extent!

Religious 'institutions" are virtually all evil, so to that extent Peter is half right, just read St John the Divine and understand why he condemned ALL CHURCHES (Paul) trying to pervert Christ's teachings into Templar tyrannies as 'abominations of desolation'!  But faith in and through ones love of All Love Itself and the expression of that unconditional Love to all one's fellows through the individual Sacramental Offerings of their own Charity is real, it does represent truth and does exist and it does define morality and all which is good and that which is evil!

There can be no morality outside of an acceptance of such basic faith in Love as the Perfect and Invincible  Conqueror.

[justgetthere]

In case you missed the full interview

Alex Jones' Heated Interview with Peter Joseph of Zeitgeist

http://justgetthere.us/blog/archives/Alex-Jones-Heated-Interview-with-Peter-Joseph-of-Zeitgeist.html

[JTCoyoté]

I have to defend Alex 100% here, in spite of his overbearing reaction to the notion that there is no morality that defines 'good and 'evil'! Strangely, Peter Joseph completely denies the final conclusion of his first movie in his statement that all religion is restrictive and tyrannical, blinding people from the 'secret hidden truth' of his magic pragmatic plastic notion of amorality based upon 'environmental prejudice' and the 'secret sauce of plenty' that would supposedly create a 'better' global society. The notion that scarcity is the root of all evil is nonsense!

Please allow me to repeat the conclusion of Zeitgeist:

"When the Power of Love overcomes the Love of Power the world will know peace" -Sri Chinmoy

Now let me correct and paraphrase this fine thought that was sadly misstated by Mr Chinmoy:

"When the Power of Love overcomes the Lust for Power the world will know peace" -Phil

The most important and proper distinction here, is that lust for power is not Love! Love is a gift given, never a present received! That is what's called a Charity!

While I shudder to bring 'religious faith' into this defense, it is obvious, no matter what ones moral upbringing is that the most perfect, correct and undeniably true definition of morality is contained in the perfect teachings of Our Savior Jesus in two commandments that once and for all permanently and perfectly defined the difference between Good and Evil in all respects and in all regards for all living beings for all time and without any exception!

In fact the Law of Love is the proof of all goodness and is not merely a secular Christian truth but is also shared by most every other faith and even is given lip service to by greedy, self serving organized gnostic Corporate Fascist 'religions' to some much more limited extent!

Religious 'institutions" are virtually all evil, so to that extent Peter is half right, just read St John the Divine and understand why he condemned ALL CHURCHES (Paul) trying to pervert Christ's teachings into Templar tyrannies as 'abominations of desolation'!  But faith in and through ones love of All Love Itself and the expression of that unconditional Love to all one's fellows through the individual Sacramental Offerings of their own Charity is real, it does represent truth and does exist and it does define morality and all which is good and that which is evil!

There can be no morality outside of an acceptance of such basic faith in Love as the Perfect and Invincible  Conqueror.

It was a more than a fair interview... it was touted from the beginning as containing the possibility of controversy. They both gave, and took their punches... In the final analysis, Peter showed his film making talent, and genuine or feigned naive idealism,  Alex demonstrated his seasoned and experienced skepticism... let's hope that Peter Joseph walked away a little wiser for the experience.

JTCoyoté

"A wise and frugal government which shall restrain men from
injuring one another, which shall leave them otherwise free
to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement,
and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has
earned. This is the sum of good government."
~Thomas Jefferson

[noxium]

A PJ/AW debate...that would be awesome!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I'd like to see AJ ask Alan Watt about Christianity. Hmmm I wonder why he never talks with him about things he knows Alan Watt will disagree with.

As to Jt saying is was more than a fair interview, I would only ask you to look at the David Icke, Alan Watt, and Micheal Tsarion interviews and judge off of them. Alex does not debate their "different" information, he just leaves it alone. But with Peter Joseph he set out to try and destroy him from the start. That is biased from the get go which means it could never have been a fair debate, discussion, interview, whatever you would like to call it.

[TessaC]

I have to disagree with you on this, Tessa. First, I don't think that modeling is a bad technique: it's used all the time in science and technology. Secondly, there are some models that should be dismissed if they're adequately discredited. In the case of utopian socialism, it has been seen, has been done; and it doesn't work. We shouldn't waste our time on bad models unless we can revive them with a lot of new evidence. 

Hmmm...you didnt get it.  I think we're talking about 'social modeling', in its many guises.

[Firewerk66]

I'd like to see AJ ask Alan Watt about Christianity. Hmmm I wonder why he never talks with him about things he knows Alan Watt will disagree with.

As to Jt saying is was more than a fair interview, I would only ask you to look at the David Icke, Alan Watt, and Micheal Tsarion interviews and judge off of them. Alex does not debate their "different" information, he just leaves it alone. But with Peter Joseph he set out to try and destroy him from the start. That is biased from the get go which means it could never have been a fair debate, discussion, interview, whatever you would like to call it.

+1

QFT

[Dok]

Alex said he was too nice, round two's about to start.

[37]

Anyway, when you put an occultist up front, it would seem to be a message.  Especially when you know most of your audience won't go find out whose sermon they are listening to. 

I just find it odd that the first small piece of research I did into this film brought an association to Occultists.  Especially the notorious, global version known as Theosophy.

I'm surprised Alex didn't bring up Theosophy...did I miss it?

I wonder if Peter works for a news channel?  Like CNN.

[KingNeil]

I think we need to stop getting distracted and ask a simple question to Joseph: how, step by step, do we get to the new society?

[Geolibertarian]

I'd like to see AJ ask Alan Watt about Christianity.

Alex won't for the same reason he won't ask David Icke about it -- because he considers his show a "secular" show, not a religious one, and because he's wise enough to realize that one does not have to be a Christian to be opposed to false flag terrorism and to the NWO's "end game" agenda.

[noxium]

Alex won't for the same reason he won't ask David Icke about it -- because he considers his show a "secular" show, not a religious one, and because he's wise enough to realize that one does not have to be a Christian to be opposed to false flag terrorism and to the NWO's "end game" agenda.

Are you listening today? Just curious.

He will not ask Alan Watt this because Alan Watt's beliefs fall more in line with the first Zeitgeist's view on religion. Not completely but Alan has a somewhat similar view. That is why he will not ask him.

[Dok]

Alex is laying into it about the Matraya, Krishnamurti. LOL

[johnnyoi]

It seems about 1/4 religious to me, any more than that and it would sound like preaching.  He just made good points though, put some good FR and 9/11 stuff in the movie and everything else in there may also have an effect.

[Geolibertarian]

Are you listening today? Just curious.

I listen to his show daily, and I assure you it was Alex who called his show "secular," not me. That doesn't mean he never mentions his Christian faith, just that that isn't the main focus of his show; news and information is.

He will not ask Alan Watt this because Alan Watt's beliefs fall more in line with the first Zeitgeist's view on religion. Not completely but Alan has a somewhat similar view. That is why he will not ask him.

I'm sure Alex would agree with me when I say that, if people don't agree to disagree on religion and join forces in opposition to the NWO's political agenda, the day will soon come when it simply won't matter what our respective views are on religion, because we'll be too busy struggling just to survive.

[TessaC]

It's all just happenstance then, right Vlad.... Nope not at all. People with this kind of propaganda talent and attitude, are owned and operated and willingly complicit.

The point that I made in the beginning of my long post on page 1 here about the first 4 minutes... I analyzed this portion a frame at a time, I broke down the strobe images, which are in faded black and white, as an eyeball slowly materializes around them and then snaps closed as abruptly the sounds... not music stop... This all takes about 45 seconds from the beginning when you are first ushered in and mesmerized with the pulsating oscillating white spot in the middle of the dark screen then it geometrically explodes into a strobe of sights and sound that are calculated to disturb.

<snip>

Just a little more on the 'subliminal flashing'. [/color]  This technique is used to 'alert the retilian brain'.  In general, when this 'flash' takes place, the brain hones in on frequencies in the environment.  So when you described the oscillating effects after the flash..the reptilian brain hyper focuses on the screen.  Another technique is to pulse electromagnetic waves directly after the flash.  The reptilian brain hones in on any frequencies nearby and rides them...up, down.  Once the brain makes contact with a frequency, it follows it.  And youre right, it could be hypnotic or jarring or shocking without the subject being conscious of it.

Commercials use it to grab and hold attention.  Military can use it to conjure up a mass frenzy.  Horror flicks use to stimulate primal fear, etc..

Some people are editing with this flash and they think its a 'cool' style, used between cuts.  They may not know it's more scientific uses in manipulating the public's brain waves.

[Dig]

I am amazed that PJ claims complete and utter ignorance of the NWO scientific futuristic technocracy.  How is this even possible?

I really am grad that AJ played "Things to Come."   Just reading CFR documents will show in plain language the plan to dissolve the left/right, good/bad paradigms in favor of a social assimilation grid that will allow no free thought whatsoever.

Can anyone explain how PJ is so knowledgeable about so much concerning corruption and deception, yet he seems to be crippled intellectually when it comes to the NWO plans for a very similar scientific technocracy displayed as a "good" future in his film.

[InfoTruth]

The fundamentalist Christians have gotten to Alex!

[noxium]

I listen to his show daily, and I assure you it was Alex who called his show "secular," not me. That doesn't mean he never mentions his Christian faith, just that that isn't the main focus of his show; news and information is.

I know his show is based on information and news, but he uses Christianity as a crutch to fall back on, because most of his audience are Christians. This is why zeitgeist in his eyes must be discredited, for his listeners.

If he "knows" it is NWO then he needs to prove such an accusation, not just spend his time throwing up similarities between Zeitgeist and NWO philosophy. The same can be said about the book of revalation and the utopia it talks of after destruction. Kinda similar if you ask me hmmmm.

I'm sure Alex would agree with me when I say that, if people don't agree to disagree on religion and join forces in opposition to the NWO's political agenda, the day will soon come when it simply won't matter what our respective views are on religion, because we'll be too busy struggling just to survive.

I agree with this.

[InfoTruth]

Now Alex is bashing Atheists!

[illuminuts]

I didn't necessarily agree with Peter, but for god's sake, Alex Jones is the most arrogant, immature, rude, and uncouth personality in the truth movement.
This is not an attack from some newbie on the information that Alex brings. I've listened to Alex every day since 2003. His conduct in yesterday's interview is the precise reason that most people don't take him seriously. He's like that friend you had when you were 12 that refused to admit he was wrong and shit on anybody who insinuated that he was.
And I'm not saying that Alex is wrong! It's just his bullshit personality that has turned me off.

So long Alex. It's been interesting. If it's ok, I'll just read the information on prisonplanet.com rather than listen to you spray it all over the side of my head.

[Dig]

Are you listening today? Just curious.

He will not ask Alan Watt this because Alan Watt's beliefs fall more in line with the first Zeitgeist's view on religion. Not completely but Alan has a somewhat similar view. That is why he will not ask him.

I have read and heard AW's stand for freedom of faith and believe that the view of PJ differs greatly.  PJ seems to propose that the absense of freedom of religion will provide abundance in the world/universe. 

AW is very clear about central power and control which PJ seems to ignore.  PJ's stand seems to be that NWO will magically conform to PJ's view of the future.  This is either sophmoric ignorance or something more complex that still does not help fight against the NWO.

[2Revolutions]

I think we need to stop getting distracted and ask a simple question to Joseph: how, step by step, do we get to the new society?

I was hoping that he would provide some examples on to implement the Venus plan in the interview with AJ.  But I fear that the plan will be implemented with the lastest technology (biological weapons, nukes, and the barrel of a gun)

[akston]

Hopefully the Christians don't all pile on and accuse us of being NWO now...

I'm an equal-opportunity basher of religious ideologies. Not the individuals, mind you - just the systems of thought. Buddhists, Jains, Christians, Satanists, Muslims, Jews, Hindus - I believe they're all metaphysically and epistemologically 'wayward', let us say. Doesn't mean I hate them. Didn't the Christ say something like hate the sin, love the sinner?

[Geolibertarian]

I know his show is based on information and news, but he uses Christianity as a crutch to fall back on, because most of his audience are Christians. This is why zeitgeist in his eyes must be discredited, for his listeners.

It's not as simple as that, otherwise he'd be trying to "discredit" David Icke and others for their non-Christian views.

If he "knows" it is NWO then he needs to prove such an accusation, not just spend his time throwing up similarities between Zeitgeist and NWO philosophy. The same can be said about the book of revalation and the utopia is talks of after destruction. Kinda similar if you ask me hmmmm.

Frankly I think ZA is getting more attention than it deserves, what with our economy on the verge of total implosion. If you're on a sinking ship, that's not the time to get into religious debates.

[DCUBED]

Can anyone explain how PJ is so knowledgeable about so much concerning corruption and deception, yet he seems to be crippled intellectually when it comes to the NWO plans for a very similar scientific technocracy displayed as a "good" future in his film.

I'm not covering for PJ because I don't know what his true intentions are. But, everyone I know who knows about the NWO have no idea about NWO technocracy. Many people who are awake to the NWO only know about 9/11 and the Federal Reserve. They don't see the "big picture".  

As for PJ, I find it hard that he doesn't see that his ideas and NWO futuristic plans are very similar. Maybe he's a shill, maybe not. Time will tell.