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

[Geolibertarian]

Really? I would think most Obama followers are against 9/11 truth,exposing religion and the federal reserve.

Never underestimate the power of wishful thinking. For instance, how many anti-war/anti-"Patriot" Act liberals voted for pro-war/pro-"Patriot" Act John Kerry in '04?

More than a few, perhaps?

[InfoTruth]

Never underestimate the power of wishful thinking. For instance, how many anti-war/anti-"Patriot" Act liberals voted for pro-war/pro-"Patriot" Act John Kerry in '04?

More than a few, perhaps?

You're right about that. It's like they know these candidates are totally pro-establishment but some how they still vote for them. Just like Mike Rivero who's voting for Obama, knowing that he's just another puppet.

[northoftheborder]

What the heck is wrong with you people.  Did you just wake up to how Alex thinks and behaves?  Did you bitch when he said 911 was an inside job over and over at MSNBC and Chris Mathews?

This guy is a total disinfo agent and you call Alex into question for being outraged?

Man...................................what happened to you guy's?  Where is Phil Donahue when I need him.

Alex screaming his lungs out is fine at times, because sometimes it is an appropriate and productive approach. However other times it is counterproductive, such as today. The content of the guest is really immaterial on this point, be they disinfo or not. Today Alex just came across like he couldn't meet the challenge and had to revert to his other qualities. I don't have a problem with Alex screaming and shouting, or Alex putting on voices, or making fun of guests, but it has to be at the appropriate time. This is something that, in my eyes, Alex hasn't grasped and it is a shame for he would be all the more effective for it if he did. Today it just seemed like he lost the debate and reverted to a childlike mode because he couldn't debate at the same level as the guest. Embarassing.  

[bushido_aria]

What Really Is Hell?

WHATEVER image the word “hell” brings to your mind, hell is generally thought of as a place of punishment for sin. Concerning sin and its effect, the Bible says: “Through one man sin entered into the world and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men because they had all sinned.” (Romans 5:12) The Scriptures also state: “The wages sin pays is death.” (Romans 6:23) Since the punishment for sin is death, the fundamental question in determining the true nature of hell is: What happens to us when we die?

What happens to the spirit when a person dies? Psalm 146:4 says: “His spirit goes out, he goes back to his ground; in that day his thoughts do perish.” When a person dies, his impersonal spirit does not go on existing in another realm as a spirit creature. It “returns to the true God who gave it.” (Ecclesiastes 12:7) This means that any hope of future life for that person now rests entirely with God.

This is an interesting look on "hell." One friend was telling me about a sort of extension of your second paragraph as the idea that basically you can lose your soul, but still have a body--while your body is still alive on Earth. What creeped me out was the idea that there are people who have already lost their soul and are walking amongst us. These people are literally in hell, but are sitting next to you. And then, when their body dies, they literally disappear from reality completely--their body gone, their spirit lost from all other dimension.

I'm no theologian, and I still don't have a definitive theology that I would ascribe to, but that, in conjunction with your comments above, is about as close to the idea of hell that I could get to and find tangible. Forgive me literary experts out there, but Dante.....Dante I think is too fanciful. lol.  

[sociostudent]

I'm a Christian and I feel that it is Peter Josephs right to believe whatever he wants.  To believe otherwise would be an assult on his freedom.  

Credentials from a school?  What are you talking about?  I just think that calling him a disinfo agent is premature.  Remember when AJ basically called David Icke disinfo agent (turd in a punch bowl)?  I wonder how AJ feels about that statement now?  

Well, that was a looonnngg time ago, and both of them learned a lot since about the NWO and how infighting doesn't get anyone ANYWHERE, it just deteriorates the movement.
The reason, I think, that Alex ripped mr. joseph a metaphorical new one was because david icke was always against the nwo, whereas mr. joseph is willing to embrace the idealism of the nwo, and still have the idea that his "higher pothead alien" stance will save him from the real evil he's worshiping right now

[Rock]

Well, that was a looonnngg time ago, and both of them learned a lot since about the NWO and how infighting doesn't get anyone ANYWHERE, it just deteriorates the movement.
The reason, I think, that Alex ripped mr. joseph a metaphorical new one was because david icke was always against the nwo, whereas mr. joseph is willing to embrace the idealism of the nwo, and still have the idea that his "higher pothead alien" stance will save him from the real evil he's worshiping right now

Someone gets it.  Thanks,

The truth will be free,



Rock

[RickT]

Just watched the movie...

Where does lust, sex, anger, psychosis, irritation, personality conflicts etc... come into this wonderful new world?  Extremely naive to believe these things are not a part of our nature.  

What about crimes of passion?  Husband kills wife because she's cheating with his best friend... crime which has nothing to do with money.  Pedophile rapes & kills a child... nothing to do with money.  Not a crime?

We aren't all the same at birth.  Some are naturally smarter than others... some are physically gifted.  Things which can still lead to jealousy & potential conflict.  Not to mention inequality and eventual feelings of superiority by some & around it goes.

Pretty airfairy stuff.  Alex was wrong too, when he said our purpose was to build... our purpose is to ensure the continuation of the species.  Sex not money is the pushing force behind almost everything we do.

Didn't mind the 1st Zeitgeist but this one kind of reminds me of that ridiculous "What The Bleep Do We Know?" which got loads of attention a couple of years ago.

JMHO

[derek17]

Well, that was a looonnngg time ago, and both of them learned a lot since about the NWO and how infighting doesn't get anyone ANYWHERE, it just deteriorates the movement.
The reason, I think, that Alex ripped mr. joseph a metaphorical new one was because david icke was always against the nwo, whereas mr. joseph is willing to embrace the idealism of the nwo, and still have the idea that his "higher pothead alien" stance will save him from the real evil he's worshiping right now

Look, I agree with everything you say.  I was just using the "turd in a punch bowl" comment to show how all of us can come to conclusions before all the precincts are reporting.  Peter Joseph is relatively new to the movement, which means that he still has some time to come around before we start tagging him as disinfo agent. 

[northoftheborder]

Just watched the movie...
Where does lust, sex, anger, psychosis, irritation, personality conflicts etc... come into this wonderful new world?  Extremely naive to believe these things are not a part of our nature.  

I gotta agree with you, and many others here. His view was extremely and very grossly simplified. What he was saying sounded like a Sociology 101 class on the ideas of Durkheim, Spencer and Marx (and Engels).

Didn't mind the 1st Zeitgeist but this one kind of reminds me of that ridiculous "What The Bleep Do We Know?" which got loads of attention a couple of years ago.

Again I gotta agree with you, though some of 'What the Bleep' was ok, just presented in a poor fashion. Didn't necessarily agree with all in the first Zeitgeist, but this new one I find I'm more at odds with some significant aspects of it, including the reduction and simplification of the human nature. Throughout history whenever our inherent complexity is denied then it tends to lead to very bad things, to understate the point.

[Jackson Holly]

I know these Utopian types pretty well, I think.
UTOPIANISM is their religion, but some don't realize that's what it is.
And it is a very evangelistic religion ... they want to force the entire planet to conform to it.
No different from any other self-centered religio~philosophy - my way or the highway.

I heard Joseph say today ... "there is no such thing as evil".

That's evil.

He is a lost soul. He is deluded. He is brainwashed.

His god is Nogod.

And this comes from a non-believer who's best friends and family are all believers ...
and I have no problem with that - I like it.
But I know evil exists ... and I know it when I see it.

[sociostudent]

LOL I remember that interview! I actually thought Alex was going have a good discussion with Peter but it turned into a battle.

Well, I kind of enjoyed it, actually. It was informative, and hilarious when alex hit him with the "pissin your pants" remark, that was freakin awesome 

[trailhound]

Well, I kind of enjoyed it, actually. It was informative, and hilarious when alex hit him with the "pissin your pants" remark, that was freakin awesome  Wink

Yeah that was great, you got to love Alex's willingness to say just what he's thinking. lol. Also agree with you're last post.

[sociostudent]

Look, I agree with everything you say.  I was just using the "turd in a punch bowl" comment to show how all of us can come to conclusions before all the precincts are reporting.  Peter Joseph is relatively new to the movement, which means that he still has some time to come around before we start tagging him as disinfo agent. 

Well, spitting out disinfo in not one, but two movies, while using manipulative speech and musical undertones...yeeaah, that's usually kind of a giveaway

[derek17]

Well, spitting out disinfo in not one, but two movies, while using manipulative speech and musical undertones...yeeaah, that's usually kind of a giveaway

Well you are entitled to your opinion, and I am entitled to mine.   I think he actually believes what he says.  Even Alex doesn't think Peter is a disinfo agent.  Although I have been known to be wrong once in a while.

One thing that I do know for sure is that "Rourke from Texas" probably loves Zeitgeist Addendum.  You can just go to the store and get whatever you want for free.  LOL!

[sociostudent]

Well you are entitled to your opinion, and I am entitled to mine.   I think he actually believes what he says.  Even Alex doesn't think Peter is a disinfo agent.

One thing that I do know for sure is that "Rourke from Texas" probably loves Zeitgeist Addendum.  You can just go to the store and get whatever you want for free.  LOL!

God, that guy's annoying. He's like a poster boy for "Lord of the flies"...it's just infantile to think that distribution of wealth is going to help ANYONE

[Mber]

I heard Joseph say today ... "there is no such thing as evil".

If he did in fact say that, that tells me all I need to know.

[derek17]

God, that guy's annoying. He's like a poster boy for "Lord of the flies"...it's just infantile to think that distribution of wealth is going to help ANYONE

He is annoying.  Although I do find him funny once in a while.  Alex is right, the guy sounds like he is blazed out of his mind every time he calls in. 

[Yurebis]

On PJ's defense, and I want to say that I don't agree with this, he means there is no evil on the basis that every deviant behavior can be explained by external factors.

He means that to correct crime and corruption, we'd need to examine the causes and not throw people in prison. In his utopic world, people would be indoctrinated somehow to not do these type of things since birth.

Now, we all know what that means coming from the perspective of an anti-NWO crowd, but for someone who considers the globalists to be only a "small problem"  in the world, this idea of a heavily brainwashed population with the use of technology may sound like a good idea after all! Because, for Peter, the ends justify the means.

[Firewerk66]

i agree with Peter Joseph 100%. there is higher lever thought processes going on here. Alex doesnt get it (or doesnt WANT to get it), most people here dont get it. you guys can have the old system.

Today, Alex sounded like one of the hillbillys he makes fun of when somebody speaks intelligently- resulting in infantile banter, name calling, etc just like a Sean Hannity or Bill OReily would do.

Dammit Alex you were a jerk today, but I'll still listen. 

by the way people, Peter Joseph IS NOT A NWO DISINFO AGENT? dont be so simple minded.

[sociostudent]

The one question I most wanted Alex to ask Peter was: "Which Presidential candidate do you support?"

Why?

Because the answer to that question, IMHO, would have been the most revealing as to what Peter's true intentions are.

I have my guess:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ECQOFxxTBsU

[shakazooluu]

I honestly think after hearing that guy talk and just argue with Alex illogically, that damn Zeitgeist is a New World Order training system. They want control and ideals, in his society fat people dont exist, i just dont like him.

[vladimir]

When I started reading the Forum posts, I couldn't understand all the negative comments about Zeitgeist Addendum because I hadn't realized that Forum members were talking about the separate Venus Project section. I think Alex agrees that the Zeitgeist film itself is generally a good thing, except for its ham-handed bashing of religion.

The Venus Project, on the other hand, which is mostly the work of Roxanne Meadows and Jacques Bresco (whom I heard interviewed on The Zone on its Genesis stream), but which has influenced Peter Joseph's thinking; is a utopian socialist concept. Utopian socialism is the early 19th century doctrine that says that people can solve the major social and economic problems if they are only better informed; and, additionally, that the existing system can be reformed to the point where it solves the major social and economic contraditions. It was first espoused in the revolutionary period of capitalism, when a certain amount of free enterprise was possible. One of the major proposals was for a national bank (Pierre-Joseph Proudhon, 1809–1865) that could be used to fund progressive and egalitarian reforms. Another utopian-socialist scheme was the New Lamarck Community of progressive industrialis Robert Owen in Scotland, which was the model for a commune movement in America
(see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Lanark).

For a critical history of utopian socialism, read Frederich Engels's Socialism: Utopian and Scientific, Chapter I "The Development of Utopian Socialism" http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1880/soc-utop/ch01.htm. The rejection of utopian socialism by Marxists was on the basis of the degeneration of capitalism and the need for thoroughgoing social revolutions (not just political overthrows) led by the working class (which is degenerate capitalism's nemesis).

The blood that flowed in the early period of the Great French Revolution (the "Terrror") was an act of defense against the monarchies of Europe, who were besieging France. Spreading the Revolution was a more effective method. The world can thank John Adams and George Washington for much of the blood: had they declared their solidarity with the French revolutionists, it would have been far less necessary.

I disagree with Peter Joseph that righteous anger (as Alex showed in the interview) is irrational. I generally distrust the unemotional, disinterested intellect.

Utopian socialism is grounded in idealism - a dull intellectual tool. Peter Joseph tellingly uses the term "materialism" as if it meant "avarice" or "acquisitiveness". This reflects the slander against the Philosophy of Materialism perpetrated by the Stoics and adopted by the official Constantinian Church.

Peter Joseph is right on one major point. Systems in their decadence are wasteful, inefficient, and reactionary. Free enterprise is impossible under decadent capitalism because decadent capitalism thwarts innovation and personal freedom to revolutionize the means by which civilization advances itself, and promotes monopoly. The ideals of many of the utopian socialists are positive, but their almost total ignorance of the mechanics of history renders their ideas useless - or, in a word, utopian.
 

[CriticalMind]

Hey folks,

i created a thread about this then it was moved into this one and i was banned without warning. I don't know why, i can't find board rules, i was never admonished before. So i would like to know why i was banned.

This was my post:

Where to post critics on Alex?? LOL

Peter Joseph is on and after his gentle start he gets worse then at his one-man-stampede when Rothschild was on. He acts like a gorilla throwing bananas. I dont like either the Venus Project because it leaves a lot of things open and doesnt seem to make much sense. But after 5 minutes of explaining how open Alex is for ideas he just bashed and bashes against Joseph. Totally ridicolous and not even a prober debate much less a real discussion.


----------


If you want to talk: schachtelhalm@web.de

[Wintermute]

I partially agree with the point Joseph was trying to make when he said that goods are sold at $xx.95 because it sounds cheaper than rounding it up to the nearest dollar.  That's a basic tactic of marketing psychology that you can learn about in any book on marketing.  It's a manipulation so ingrained that it became systemic in society... so it doesn't necessarily follow that AJ is bad, unless you argue that AJ should micromanage his operation to remove systemic influences from his staff.

Joseph's denial of genetic instinct is simply absurd.   For example, anyone who's owned pets can tell you that they exhibit common behaviors that could not have been learned through environmental influences.   eg.  You can compare two groups of cats... one  that grew up around siblings and parents versus another that had no animal role model and was raised by humans... both groups will still engage in hunting, stalking, ambush and fighting - practically from the moment they can walk.  
  
      
 

[JTCoyoté]

Ok people this is VERY important!! Look at the intro to "Zeitgeist Addendum", it's more than just plain aesthetics. First it makes you focus on a single point like a hypnotist, then it incorporates these intense periods of fast flickering strobe like imagery, followed by periods of instant calm. That throws people's brains for a loop without them even really knowing about it, and then induces a far more mesmerized and suggestible state. It's as if it was produced by a PsyOps technician or something, or at least someone who knows brainwashing type techniques.

It's also like what integrators do, they shout and scream at people, then offer them tea and biscuits, then shout and scream at them again, it's a way of breaking down people's mental barriers. The first film's intro also had this type of sequence, presented in a slightly different way with tanks and bombs bombarding people’s senses, with intersecting “serene” moments.

After doing a lot of editing work myself I look at this and think: "what is this guy trying to achieve with a sequence like this?". My conclusion is that he’s trying to produce something that's not designed to please people, but to actually try and reach into their brains a bit, so that information can be sort of more implanted than absorbed and accepted consciously. I don't know, but I certainly don't feel right about Zeitgeist from a technical stand point, it seems rather disturbing and manipulative.

It’s like something from Clock Work Orange where the main character in that is being “reconditioned” with strobing imagery. It's sick and a lot of people haven’t even got a clue what their looking at. This guy Peter Joseph can claim it's "art" all day, the bottom-line is that if his film were to be broadcast it would most likely break a ton of broadcasting laws because of the intro alone. It would probably induce epileptic fits in a minority of people, on the majority it would have varying degrees of a manipulative effect on their critical thinking, making them more cognitively malleable and primed to absorb the "information" (ideology more to the point) presented in the film with less critical filtering.

These are just observations which could be wrong, but it's a critique that needs to be made that not too many people are making.

Yes this is the point that I made in the beginning of my long post on page 13 here... I analyzed the first four minutes, even broke down the strobe images, which are in black and white as an eyeball slowly materializes around them and then closes... this takes about 45 seconds from the beginning when you are mesmerized with the pulsating oscillating white spot in the middle of the dark screen...

When the eye opens again it is in color with music engineered to put you into a soothed state... low in the back ground a voice begins speaking as a film fades up and the eye fades out... it is the image and sound of J. Krishnamurti, weaving the story of how we are all one, and need to alter everything we do to become one world... This all takes approximately 4 minutes from beginning of the movie.  The message of this first 4 minutes is the entire movie's theme in compressed time...

There are approximately 20 images in the strobe image segment... all shocking or sad. This along with the light at the beginning, the black and white eye, and shocking music, represents the the first hour of the movie. The last hour is summarized by the soothing music, the color eye, and J. Krishnamurthi's speech...

This puppy is slick... and designed, to divide the movement. This is NWO from beginning to end they bait you with the absolute truth for the first 55 minutes then sell you there utopist solution in the last 68 minutes... Slick!!

--Oldyoti

"The high office of President has been used to foment
a plot to destroy the American's freedom, and before
I leave office I must inform the citizen of his plight."
~John F. Kennedy, at Columbia University,
10 days before his assassination

[LOOGS]

sorry folks, just watched the film, not sure what to make of Alex's remarks, but can someone clear up for me why it is that when ever anyone does not believe the earth is 6000 years old, the word shill starts popping up, this "I can prove 911 was an inside job, just look at the scientific evidence, yet my early brothers must of rode dinosaurs" vibe is just killing the movement!!

[Firewerk66]

Joseph's denial of genetic instinct is simply absurd.   For example, anyone who's owned pets can tell you that they exhibit common behaviors that could not have been learned through environmental influences.   eg.  You can compare two groups of cats... one  that grew up around siblings and parents versus another that had no animal role model and was raised by humans... both groups will still engage in hunting, stalking, ambush and fighting - practically from the moment they can walk.  

He didnt deny the genetic traits, he said environmental factors were a stronger influence in HUMANS due to our evolved intellects.

[Freeski]

I just watched this and all I can say is that Alex Jones is solid.

[Another_Ron_Paul_Supporte]

How does his proposed world view explain human history before there was money?

[jgalt]

I added a comment which was deleted under this original post which had the name and owner changed. I don't know why the moderators are censoring and moving stuff around.

Anyway my original point was that I was disappointed in the interview today, because Alex was obviously just trying to make Peter look bad, even though I think he actually agrees with everything.

Who cares if competition is innate or not. Or if evil is a religious term or not. There was only about 2 minutes of positive stuff when Alex finally stopped yelling and asked how this could be set up.

I think both of them missed a great opportunity though. What they should have been talking about is not what could happen way in th future but what can we all do now to make things better. Alex as always say just tell people, get the word out, but ONLY exposing 911, the Fed, NWO will never change anything.

What we need to do is get the word out about something POSITIVE. Believe it or not the NWO has done us a huge favor by getting all the lefties to believe in global warming and getting the religious right to think there is a terrorist threat mainly due to muslims having our oil.

We don't need to waste time convincing people those are hoaxes, we should focus on what is the REAL solution to those fake problems, and that is Clean, abundant, renewal ENERGY. And if we just spent a tiny fraction of the military budget on it we would have it in no time.

ENERGY FREEDOM will severely hinder the NWO and everyone in the world will support it.

[vladimir]

Peter Joseph and his Venus Project collaborators are utopian socialists. Utopian socialism was discredited 150 years ago.

See my comments at http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=65042.160

For a critical history of utopian socialism, read Frederich Engels's Socialism: Utopian and Scientific, Chapter I "The Development of Utopian Socialism" http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1880/soc-utop/ch01.htm. The rejection of utopian socialism by Marxists was on the basis of the degeneration of capitalism and the need for thoroughgoing social revolutions (not just political overthrows) led by the working class (which is degenerate capitalism's nemesis).
 
Utopian socialism is grounded in idealism - a dull intellectual tool. Peter Joseph tellingly uses the term "materialism" as if it meant "avarice" or "acquisitiveness". This reflects the slander against the Philosophy of Materialism perpetrated by the Stoics and adopted by the official Constantinian Church.

 
The concept of evil in the Abrahamic tradition is based on the Covenant and the Laws revealed by J-h-v-h. Evil (or "sin"), in the Abrahamic religions, is seen as the crucial problem of human existence. For ancient Greeks and Romans who hadn't heard of the Covenant and the Laws of Moses but who commited murder and adultery, the term "evil" could not rightly be applied. Ancient Greeks and Romans didn't go around willy-nilly murdering their neighbors; but, on the other hand, the Ten Commandments don't seem to deter most Chistians from coveting their neighbors' wives. For Buddhists, the crucial problem of human existence is not evil (or sin), but suffering. For Jesus, who recognized the importance of adhering to the Covenant, the crucial problem is the lack of love for one's fellow man and woman. What was new in the teachings of Jesus which went contrary to accepted teachings of Moses and the Prophets was the forgiveness of sins - a radical expression of the love of man and woman. This is something that William Blake pointed out.

The teachings of Buddha and Jesus figure as the basis for the New Age religions which are favored by modern utopians. For deists such as Thomas Jefferson and George Washington, the revelations of J-h-v-h were not a part of their religious beliefs; but the teachings of Jesus were. The Jefferson Bible has everything but the words of Jesus stricken out.
 
The monopolists are not inherently "evil", for the reasons I gave above. Where they profess the Abrahamic tradition and the revealed Word of J-h-v-h and violate the Laws of their religion, they are in those cases guilty of evil. However, much of what they do would be approved by religious authority, and usually is. Their major fault is that they act contrary to what Jesus, and many wise persons before and after his time on the Earth, taught us was ultimately important: the love of one's fellow man and woman. The monopolists, who put wealth and power above human good, are guilty of thwarting the basic instincts of human beings to preserve their own species by caring for the interests of their fellow humans. They are rightly to be viewed as enemies of humanity.
 
People such as Peter Joseph are guilty of not doing their homework. And their flawed solutions can be exploited by the monopolists to further their plans for world domination. This is also the case with a lot of the psychology profession. The global elitists are uncannily good at taking other peoples' ideas and perverting them to their own inhuman ends.
 

[LOOGS]

gigaddy!!!   best site on the web, none delusional, with a spash of humor   http://www.fknnewz.com/view/175/morons-overrun-the-earth/

[liko]

I think people can now see easily the kind of crap Peter Joseph is pushing.  I apologize if some people's bubble may burst, but that is why Alex has a good following.

He exposed Noam Chomsky and Ann Coulter as well as other controlled opposition by the NWO.

Why should Peter Joseph not fall under the same scrutiny as Noam Chomsky?

Why should he not be exposed?  Who would want a softball interview with a false prophet prophesing idol worship (technology worship)?

Spot on Sane!

[andrewgreve]

zeitgeist adendum plus this alex interview = EPIC FAIL for Peter Jay

[sociostudent]

He means that to correct crime and corruption, we'd need to examine the causes and not throw people in prison.

Instead, we should "re-educate them" 

[JTCoyoté]

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 as the sounds 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.

When the eye opens again it is in color with music engineered to put you into a soothed state... low in the back ground a voice begins speaking as a film fades up and the eye fades out... it is the image and sound of J. Krishnamurti, weaving the story of how we are all one, and need to alter everything we do, forget what we have learned so as to become one world... This all takes approximately 4 minutes from the beginning of the movie.  The message of this first 4 minutes is the entire movie's theme in compressed time... Wild.

There are approximately 20 images in the strobe image segment... all shocking, horrifying, or sad. This, along with the light at the beginning, the black and white eye, and shocking music, represents the the first hour of the movie. The last hour is summarized by the soothing music, the color eye, and J. Krishnamurthi's speech...

This puppy is slick... and designed, to divide the movement. This is NWO from beginning to end... they bait you with the absolute truth for the first 55 minutes then sell you on their utopist solution for the last 68 minutes... Slick!!

This is a shot across the bow, aimed directly at the movement and signals "the shot heard around the world" in the "Info-War for Independence"!

--Oldyoti

"The high office of President has been used to foment
a plot to destroy the American's freedom, and before
I leave office I must inform the citizen of his plight."
~John F. Kennedy, at Columbia University,
10 days before his assassination

[ironPlasma]

I think Alex is a tough nail when he gets going. I agree that todays interview could have been so much more productive, but instead they poked eachother's buttons and got on an emotional argument. I do think Alex's arguments are extremely important and I do think that Peter Joseph was being a bit too idealistic, to the point that it is unfeasible to make his ideas a reality without exterminating everyone in the planet and starting over from scratch.

I do agree that human nature is almost totally programed, but there is about 10% genetic make up in there, and I wished they would just get past that point... How can P.J. argue that humans are the complete result of programming? He's not as much as intellectual he thinks he is... but I guess everyone makes mistakes.

Alex needs to be less emotional and explosive. He needs to realize he has a drill sargent's voice and it's not meant to be turned up without making people upset... I understand though, he is only human aswell. I do that sometimes too, but I have learned that doing that creates a major psychological barrier no matter how right you might be for many people.

[minionzero]

Just got done listening to the interview for the 2nd time (because I couldn't believe what I heard the 1st time - WOW!).  Let me preface my comments by saying that first, AJ was my intro into the alleged NWO plot to take over the planet, and I truly believe there is substantial evidence to support this thesis (quite some time afterward [March '08] I started listening to his radio show, and have listened every day since); and second, I won't deal with the content itself, simply observations that have, quite honestly, lowered my image of AJ.

Observations:

1) VERY interesting/entertaining radio.  2) It's obvious that, regardless of AJ's prefacing comments, he was itching to pick a fight - he simply doesn't like when others disagree with him; and in an instant morphs into a semi-intellectual bully.  3)  Regardless of the content of Peter's comments, AJ has again proven that he is utterly incapable of holding the "intellectual debate" he repeatedly purported to be engaging in.  3)  AJ continues to have difficulty incorporating new ideas into his own unshakable philosophy, much less give them the remotest of courtesies for consideration.  4)  AJ needs to learn how to *LISTEN* to what his guests are not only saying, but the context in which it's being presented; rather than resorting to shouting over, and even turning off his guest's mic (yes, he did it precisely when PJ was trying to explain a point) to spew the same old pablum we've grown to know and love (yes, he's got encyclopedic knowledge on a lot of stuff, but it's so based in self-absorption and maintenance of his own beliefs at all costs that he often leaves himself open to (dis)missing valid, relevant & substantiated viewpoints).  5)  When AJ get "out-thunk," he simply twists his guest's words/theses and resorts to puerile mockery, unfounded ad hominem attacks, and mistaking coherent debate for "lawyer tactics."  This stuff happened several times.  Quite sad, actually.  I fully expect this of Rush & Hannity, but shouldn't we expected more of AJ?  I guess not.  It's obvious AJ was the one "pissing his pants" on this one.  6) Why the hell would PJ come back on to address audience questions at a later date, as AJ suggested, after this train wreck?  7)  Go ahead and defend him if you wish, but AJ got schooled.  Plain and simple.

I think Peter's big *SIGH* prior to AJ playing the HG Wells clip crystallized my thoughts quite nicely on this sorry excuse for an "interview."

I'm still an AJ fan, and will continue to *LISTEN* to what he has to say.  But, I think we need to take his own advice and not look to him as any sort of savior.  He's got a lot of INFO, but when push comes to shove, he doesn't really have many workable SOLUTIONS/ANSWERS.  At least PJ's giving it a shot.  Misguided or not, I leave it to you guys to assimilate, debate, dismiss, or ignore his premises however you wish.

Can't wait to see if the follow-up "interview" actually materializes!  I can guarantee I'll listen!

[vladimir]

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.

"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. 
 

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.

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.
 

When the eye opens again it is in color with music engineered to put you into a soothed state... low in the back ground a voice begins speaking as a film fades up and the eye fades out... it is the image and sound of J. Krishnamurti, weaving the story of how we are all one, and need to alter everything we do, forget what we have learned so as to become one world... This all takes approximately 4 minutes from the beginning of the movie.  The message of this first 4 minutes is the entire movie's theme in compressed time... Wild.
 
There are approximately 20 images in the strobe image segment... all shocking, horrifying, or sad. This, along with the light at the beginning, the black and white eye, and shocking music, represents the the first hour of the movie. The last hour is summarized by the soothing music, the color eye, and J. Krishnamurthi's speech...

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.
 

This puppy is slick... and designed, to divide the movement. This is NWO from beginning to end... they bait you with the absolute truth for the first 55 minutes then sell you on their utopist solution for the last 68 minutes... Slick!!

If they weren't slick, there wouldn't be a need for Alex Jones; or for me and you, for that matter.
 

This is a shot across the bow, aimed directly at the movement and signals "the shot heard around the world" in the "Info-War for Independence"!

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]

Social models have been forced upon us for thousands of yrs...by those families which want to secure their model of predictbility, power and control over people(the lower classes).  'Models' are innately dubious but should NOT be dismissed as 'seen that, done that' mentality.  We have to be open to ideas, experiment with them and have a 'choice'.

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.

Read the history of the Paris Commune of 1871 online at http://www.marxists.org/history/france/paris-commune/index.htm

Then read online http://www.marxists.org/archive/kautsky/1930s/demvscom/ch02.htm

Excerpts
"... Marx characterized the Paris Commune of 1871 as an attempt “no longer, as heretofore, to transfer the bureaucratic-military machine from one hand to another, but to destroy it, and this was the prerequisite for every true revolution of the people on the comment.” (Letter to Kugelman. )

"The destruction of this type of state machine was, in truth, the only thing the Paris Commune undertook to achieve. It did not live long enough to embark upon any Socialist measures.

"The maintenance of a strong bureaucratic-military state machine constitutes, however, the prerequisite of any dictatorship as a political order. Its destruction signifies complete anarchy or complete democracy, but never dictatorship. For Marx and Engels the all important aim in the destruction of the centralized state apparatus was solely the establishment of democracy.
...

"These in brief, were the various tendencies dominant among Socialists when Marx began to think as a Socialist. He had never been in doubt as to the hopelessness of bourgeois-philanthropic utopianism. The only Socialism he took seriously was the Socialism emanating from the labor movement. Very soon, however, he saw also the inadequacy of the three tendencies outlined above. He perceived this inadequacy in the fact that the adherents of each of these tendencies sought to bring about Socialism with the proletariat as they found it a task that was obviously unrealizable." (emphasis added -vladimir)

The Venus Project digs up again and tries to present as a new doctrine the program of utopian socialism, which was discredited 150 years ago and represents in our time a dangerous illusion that serves to weaken the working class intellectually in its struggle for emancipation. The emancipation from global despotism must be lead by the working people themselves under their own banner. Anything less opens the way to a futuristic despotism posing as a secular savior.

[from your post]
 ALEX...ask him who funds the Venus Project...and who are they asking to fund it in the future.

This is a good point. I think such people should be more than happy to "open their books" if they stand behind what they're saying. I haven't checked, so maybe they have. In a lot of such cases, you'll see that David Rockefeller or one of his foundations is a key contributor; but I'm not saying the Venus Project people or Peter Joseph are so funded, because I don't know one way or the other.