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

[sociostudent]

Listening to lastnight's show now, PJ on in about 5 minutes.. looking forward to hearing what all this fuss is about.

God, I'm glad you're here, man...This one thread has been on FIRE tonight. This is a really controversial topic, this whole z.a. thing

[xundk]

That's just the thing, man...we're NOT divine. There IS such a thing as evil in this world, whether or not you can see or recognize it, and just because you pull the covers over your eyes (by embracing transhumanism) doesn't mean it goes away. you close your mind to the realization that you're being manipulated even MORE than you were before you agreed to this new "utopia"

We are all created equal, we all come from the same source... Even those that are "evil"... I'm not saying that bad things isn't happening (why the hell do you think i'm on this forum?). I'm saying that in order for us to truly come together and start a better world, we need to recognize that we are all equal and that we need to stop hating eachother because we think we are different... We need to stop dividing ourselves into petty little groups and fight eachother over mindless ideas about how we got here...
If we can't stop fighting, we can't fight the tyrrany...

[Rock]

Institution = church, state, moske, jihad group etc.
This way of thinking has no basis for any form of institution, you are the instituion of your own belief. Because when you have a beliefsystem that allows you to belive what ever you want, as long as you don't harm anyone or push the beliefsystem, an instituion cannot exists, cause noone could agree on what you belive, but everyone would accept it, because you are you, and not a part of something else... Don't you see that in the future you will not be judged by what you belive, what you own or what you do. You will be judged by WHO YOU ARE... As a human being...

Emmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm....who does the judging?

[xundk]

Emmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm....who does the judging?

You, me everyone... Every time you see a new person, your mind autiomaticly judge that person on his looks, his behaviour, his way of speech etc.
It's not a judge like the one in a courtroom, or your god... It's your way of judging people that is going to change.
If you see someone today that owns a ferrari and has on a black suit and tie, you automaticly judge him on the basis of that. What I am talking about is goign from that, to judging people on WHO they are, and not how they look or what they have...

[Dig]

God, I'm glad you're here, man...This one thread has been on FIRE tonight. This is a really controversial topic, this whole z.a. thing

To get more information on the heated exchange, go to the thread in the AJ Show room.  Two threads were started concerning this interview.  Here is the other thread...

http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=63680.0

[Atomic]

When confronted with reality, the only recourse seems to be the Eric Cartman defense:

There is no point in talking to you. You think PJ is targetting your personal belief system for eradication and he is NOT. Nothing in the universe can be said to change your mind because you have convinced yourself that he wants to destroy your personal belief system.

You demostrate throughout this thread that:

1. You know what PJ is advocating when clearly you don't.
2. That you consider him a misguided idiot or worse an NWO dupe with a utopia plan. He is neither.
3. That you don't allow for even the possibility that PJ might be saying something new you have not heard before. You also don't allow for the possibility that you may have missunderstood him.
4. You don't care to have a civil respectful conversation about it all you want to do is ridicule him.

Screw that noise man I don't need more devisive crap in my life. Go right on ahead making snide remarks for 10 years about him for all I care, it gets you nothing. Devide away.

[Dig]

Time for Carousel again.

For those of you not familiar with the awesome magnetic rail system and perfect technocracy planned by NWO for decades, please download logan's run and try to ignore the slow pace of the futuristic soap opera.  You may start to see that the similarities with the futurism in ZA are shocking.

[toto]

In the perfect PJ system where no money is needed, I'll take one of these yellow wagons for my daughter, three in red for my boys, and a black one for me while I'm changing the words sin and evil around to mean I'm "bad" to da bone.


Back soon, I'm getting my other shopping list together - Yeppiee free goods..woowoo thanks PJ, great idea.

[Dig]

There is no point in talking to you. You think PJ is targetting your personal belief system for eradication and he is NOT. Nothing in the universe can be said to change your mind because you have convinced yourself that he wants to destroy your personal belief system.

You demostrate throughout this thread that:

1. You know what PJ is advocating when clearly you don't.
2. That you consider him a misguided idiot or worse an NWO dupe with a utopia plan. He is neither.
3. That you don't allow for even the possibility that PJ might be saying something new you have not heard before. You also don't allow for the possibility that you may have missunderstood him.
4. You don't care to have a civil respectful conversation about it all you want to do is ridicule him.

Screw that noise man I don't need more devisive crap in my life. Go right on ahead making snide remarks for 10 years about him for all I care, it gets you nothing. Devide away.

I respect your opinions and individual thoughts on the matter.

[squarepusher]

Here are some basic questions for the Zeitgeist 'truthers', since Peter Joseph failed to address them:

1 - How do you defend yourself when the New World Order is attacking you? Dont you need to develop warfare?
2 - Without money, what would be the impetus for going the extra mile?
3 - Who's going to perform the 're-education' process that Peter Joseph alludes to in the last segment of the interview? And isn't that brainwashing in itself?

[Atomic]

I respect your opinions and individual thoughts on the matter.

What does that mean? That you do allow for the possibility that you have missunderstood him? Or you don't?

[sociostudent]

3 - Who's going to perform the 're-education' process that Peter Joseph alludes to in the last segment of the interview? And isn't that brainwashing in itself?

Well, it's called "enhanced re-education techniques" but it really means "brainwashing and torture"

[Dig]

What does that mean? That you do allow for the possibility that you have missunderstood him? Or you don't?

It means what it says, I respect your opinion that you feel he is not attacking individual creativity, individual thought.

I just do not share in your opinion on the matter.

I do not wish to change your thoughts, your individual beliefs, you have every right to them.  I just respectfully do not assimilate with that view on the films.

I have varying thoughts and beliefs on this subject.

I do not believe that you need to be subjected to re-education to conform to my beliefs, I feel that you should have the freedom to express your beliefs about the films.

[xundk]

Here are some basic questions for the Zeitgeist 'truthers', since Peter Joseph failed to address them:

1 - How do you defend yourself when the New World Order is attacking you? Dont you need to develop warfare?
2 - Without money, what would be the impetus for going the extra mile?
3 - Who's going to perform the 're-education' process that Peter Joseph alludes to in the last segment of the interview? And isn't that brainwashing in itself?

1 : You won't need to defend yourself, because there is no basis for corruption or control.
2 : Personal growth, experience, collective growth. Love.
3 : Re-education is not a new institution, it's a change of the current one. Where critical thinking is being introduced to everyone in "school". It's a makeover of what we have. When we teach a child that hitler did this and that, we teach the child to research and think outside the box at the same time. We need to teach everyone to question reality and what they are being told. It's not re-education, it's new education. And we cannot have no education, because then we would have to start all over again, making a new math system etc. We need to free our educational system from restraints and boundries...

[Atomic]

Well, it's called "enhanced re-education techniques" but it really means "brainwashing and torture"

What a load of crap, he is not advocating re-education of anyone he is advocating the elimination of the "scarcity" based system that creates most of our social problems to begin with.

You remind me of a pit bull that had some meat thrown to him and was so quick to eat it up that he never realized it was loaded with poison. So quick to make assumptions and to attack and so damn slow to understand and to change.

[squarepusher]

1 : You won't need to defend yourself, because there is no basis for corruption or control.

What about neighbouring countries? Let's say they start building this Venus project somewhere on the Atlantic and, say, a thousand people initially decide to immigrate there. Let's say we have a New World Order-type government installed at that time that declares the newly-formed country (Project Venus) as a state sponsor of terrorism. Let's say they start an invasion of that country with a United Nations army. How are you going to defend yourselves against an outside threat?

Or do we just subscribe to the theory that whenever this Project Venus comes to fruition, there will be no more 'elites' and 'enemies' and 'NWOs'?

[Dolphin]

What?... If I love freedom i'm against this movie? how do you figure that?
If you are religious then you might wanna look at this movie and think "Hmm, yeah, my religious institution did cause X numbers of wars with X numbers of deaths, because others didn't belive the same", Maybe my institution has got to go...

He's not saying that religion itself is bad, only the institutions...

Actually I don't think that at all, we all have freedom of will everyone of us do we choose to either give it up or keep it sacred it's all a personal choice, religion did not course wars or deaths people started the wars because they made the choice too, furthermore they are in violation of there own commandment(s) "You shall NOT kill" so they can't have been following what they where reading properly.

Turns out the utopia you want, religious people want too except with one alteration a perfect incorruptible pure leader, which no matter how hard you try you will never get on this earth by human works, you may get peace at some point but then sudden destruction will come, because you cannot base a civilization on imperfection and you can't get to enlightened perfection either because your just deluding yourself into thinking your some how better than the people below you.

The only way you will never get this utopia of yours even for a short while is to murder every single person that believes in any kind of higher power, in which case can you kill me first please?

[Dok]

Time for Re-Education...

[Dolphin]

Time for Re-Education...

Kill me please, I'd rather die than be "re-educated".

[Atomic]

What about neighbouring countries? Let's say they start building this Venus project somewhere on the Atlantic and, say, a thousand people initially decide to immigrate there. Let's say we have a New World Order-type government installed at that time that declares the newly-formed country (Project Venus) as a state sponsor of terrorism. Let's say they start an invasion of that country with a United Nations army. How are you going to defend yourselves against an outside threat?

Or do we just subscribe to the theory that whenever this Project Venus comes to fruition, there will be no more 'elites' and 'enemies' and 'NWOs'?

How did Gandhi defend himself? See you think guns are the power and they are not. If I refuse to comply with what you want you can shoot me but you still do not have my cooperation.

You are also jumping way ahead and not considering the steps that would take us from here to there. You are so damn anxious to crap all over PJs ideas that you are falling all over yourselves trying to attack something you don't fully grasp.

[xundk]

What about neighbouring countries? Let's say they start building this Venus project somewhere on the Atlantic and, say, a thousand people initially decide to immigrate there. Let's say we have a New World Order-type government installed at that time that declares the newly-formed country (Project Venus) as a state sponsor of terrorism. Let's say they start an invasion of that country with a United Nations army. How are you going to defend yourselves against an outside threat?

Or do we just subscribe to the theory that whenever this Project Venus comes to fruition, there will be no more 'elites' and 'enemies' and 'NWOs'?

The example set by the venus project is an EXAMPLE, and is just a way of seeing things. If we get that far, there will be no neighbouring countries. We will all have one country, the world. Because governments won't exist. It would be everyone working together.

An outside threat... You gotta be kidding me... Bet you were outside on the 14th with a big banner to welcome the intergalactic federation of light?

[Atomic]

It means what it says, I respect your opinion that you feel he is not attacking individual creativity, individual thought.

I just do not share in your opinion on the matter.

I do not wish to change your thoughts, your individual beliefs, you have every right to them.  I just respectfully do not assimilate with that view on the films.

I have varying thoughts and beliefs on this subject.

I do not believe that you need to be subjected to re-education to conform to my beliefs, I feel that you should have the freedom to express your beliefs about the films.

No answer.

That is why I said there is no point in talking to you because the truth is you do not allow for the possibility that you missunderstand what PJ is saying. When you allow for that possibility there is a chance for understanding when you don't there is no possibility.

[xundk]

Actually I don't think that at all, we all have freedom of will everyone of us do we choose to either give it up or keep it sacred it's all a personal choice, religion did not course wars or deaths people started the wars because they made the choice too, furthermore they are in violation of there own commandment(s) "You shall NOT kill" so they can't have been following what they where reading properly.

Turns out the utopia you want, religious people want too except with one alteration a perfect incorruptible pure leader, which no matter how hard you try you will never get on this earth by human works, you may get peace at some point but then sudden destruction will come, because you cannot base a civilization on imperfection and you can't get to enlightened perfection either because your just deluding yourself into thinking your some how better than the people below you.

The only way you will never get this utopia of yours even for a short while is to murder every single person that believes in any kind of higher power, in which case can you kill me first please?

There will be no leader... We will be the leaders of our own individual lives. There will be no need for killing anyone, because everyone is as valuable as you and I. When we start to understand that it is irational to try to corrupt anything and that it will only hurt ourselves on the long term, we will abandon this conduct. But they way we are thinking today, we simply cannot think outside the box and see that it could ever be a possibilit, and that is what makes it so hard to achieve.

[CosmicChimp]

Just listening to the "debate" now, on podcast. Alex totally dominates Peter. I've effectively heard nothing of what Peter has to say. I'm not getting anything from Peter from the interview/debate/discussion. Alex is being rude and interrupts the whole time. Very annoying! Alex has no social skills. Because of Alex's interruptions I don't expect Peter to be able to get an idea out at all and therefore I've tuned him out knowing I'll never get a complete thought from him. I've wanted to hear what Peter had to say for two days now! What a pity. Now I'll have to go and watch the Zeitgeist series and see what Peter has to say, but without Alex's commentary. It's self defeating, as I'm not really getting what Alex is saying either but especially not in relation to what Peter has on his film. What a pity. Alex does this to some extent with all of his guests. It's barely tolerable. Jeff Rense's guests are allowed to speak and actually get a complete thought out, I've been turning more and more to Rense's style lately.

[squarepusher]

How did Gandhi defend himself? See you think guns are the power and they are not. If I refuse to comply with what you want you can shoot me but you still do not have my cooperation.

You are also jumping way ahead and not considering the steps that would take us from here to there. You are so damn anxious to crap all over PJs ideas that you are falling all over yourselves trying to attack something you don't fully grasp.

No, I'm pondering what would happen to this utopian society if warfare is not considered to be an option.  And I'm not even coming to a pre-defined conclusion, I'm asking you the question. And all I get is a vague 'How did Gandhi defend himself' response, which tells me you are not even sure about it yourself.

Basically, what I'm asking for is a fleshing out of ideas as opposed to some 'pie in the sky' dream that fails to address real threats and real problems. And one of the problems I see with an utopia where warfare is not considered is that you have no tool to defend yourself. You're basically a lamb waiting for the slaughter. (metaphorically speaking)

[xundk]

No, I'm pondering what would happen to this utopian society if warfare is not considered to be an option.  And I'm not even coming to a pre-defined conclusion, I'm asking you the question. And all I get is a vague 'How did Gandhi defend himself' response, which tells me you are not even sure about it yourself.

Basically, what I'm asking for is a fleshing out of ideas as opposed to some 'pie in the sky' dream that fails to address real threats and real problems. And one of the problems I see with an utopia where warfare is not considered is that you have no tool to defend yourself. You're basically a lamb waiting for the slaughter. (metaphorically speaking)

If warfare is not an option, could love be?

[Dolphin]

There will be no leader... We will be the leaders of our own individual lives. There will be no need for killing anyone, because everyone is as valuable as you and I. When we start to understand that it is irational to try to corrupt anything and that it will only hurt ourselves on the long term, we will abandon this conduct. But they way we are thinking today, we simply cannot think outside the box and see that it could ever be a possibilit, and that is what makes it so hard to achieve.

Really? for the past 2000 + years that is all the Christian has ever thought about, your trying to emulate heaven on earth.

[squarepusher]

An outside threat... You gotta be kidding me... Bet you were outside on the 14th with a big banner to welcome the intergalactic federation of light?

I wasn't talking about that at all... did I use that term once? No? Alrightie then.

And actually, I don't subscribe to the whole 'good aliens/bad aliens' and Intergalactic Federation of Light malarky.

But instead of attacking me, let's go back to your answer.

If we get that far, there will be no neighbouring countries. We will all have one country, the world. Because governments won't exist. It would be everyone working together.

No, because at one point you have to start with this project at a time when the situation is less than ideal. The elite that is currently in control would do one of two things:

1 - They would reject this society and try to destroy it.
2 - They would co-opt it, join the bandwagon, throw some kind of global warming theory behind it and go from there.

Where is the solution? Do you honestly believe the Rockefellers, Rothschilds and Kissingers at one point in time just start thinking 'hey, all that killing and stuff, you know, that was not so nice at all... let's subscribe to the Venus Project's idea of thinking and make the world a better place'?

[toto]

PJ, I'll have three of these smooth bath tubs as well please - This new world without money is great.
(I only work four hours a week peeling potatos)
woowwoowie, shucks I'm happy.

[Dig]

1 : You won't need to defend yourself, because there is no basis for corruption or control.
2 : Personal growth, experience, collective growth. Love.
3 : Re-education is not a new institution, it's a change of the current one. Where critical thinking is being introduced to everyone in "school". It's a makeover of what we have. When we teach a child that hitler did this and that, we teach the child to research and think outside the box at the same time. We need to teach everyone to question reality and what they are being told. It's not re-education, it's new education. And we cannot have no education, because then we would have to start all over again, making a new math system etc. We need to free our educational system from restraints and boundries...

1. this has been an NWO staged philosophy for a long time. It is a way to disarm the public.  It is part of the UN gun control agenda, people cannot be trusted with weapons, only the central control world government is allowed to have weapons:

Here are a few threads on this subject:

http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=15199.0
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=16552.0
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=14803.0
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=37024.0


Here is a room dedicated to the second amendment and the importance of it: http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?board=333.0

The idea of destroying all weapons/military is similar to the war on drugs and the war on terror, they wish to control all weapons so that individuals are no longer a threat to the "World Order"

2. Those are beautiful ideals, but how would they be qualified?  There are historical accounts of such systems that are controlled by the whims of the central control forces.  Without an unbiased medium like non-fiat money, the value would be the same as fiat-money, totally subjective.  The idea of no money actually results in the same if not greater problems as fiat money.  The narrator seems to be suggesting that a worse solution with the same inherent flaws should be used to get rid of the problem.  This follows the NWO's problem/.reaction/solution model of control.

3. I do not think you answered the question concerning who will dictate the new rules and enforce the new doctrines. Again, there does not seem to be any disolvement of central power, only a change of the methods the central power utilizes.

[xundk]

I wasn't talking about that at all... did I use that term once? No? Alrightie then.

And actually, I don't subscribe to the whole 'good aliens/bad aliens' and Intergalactic Federation of Light malarky.

But instead of attacking me, let's go back to your answer.

No, because at one point you have to start with this project at a time when the situation is less than ideal. The elite that is currently in control would do one of two things:

1 - They would reject this society and try to destroy it.
2 - They would co-opt it, join the bandwagon, throw some kind of global warming theory behind it and go from there.

Where is the solution? Do you honestly believe the Rockefellers, Rothschilds and Kissingers at one point in time just start thinking 'hey, all that killing and stuff, you know, that was not so nice at all... let's subscribe to the Venus Project's idea of thinking and make the world a better place'?

The road leading to a better world is not going to be easy, but I belive that if everyone starts thinking good things, not money, competetion, division, we would see things naturaly come into place. You keep saying that the elite would take over, use excuses etc. But this idea is based on what could happen AFTER we remove the things that could manipulate us and control us...

I'm off to work now (Just to say why I won't be posting for the next 9 hours)...

[Dig]

No answer.

That is why I said there is no point in talking to you because the truth is you do not allow for the possibility that you missunderstand what PJ is saying. When you allow for that possibility there is a chance for understanding when you don't there is no possibility.

Now I am confused.  I just stated in great detail that I respected your opinions of the film, I then said that I do not share those opinions.  Are you saying that I as an individual do not have the right of free thought as I have specifically stated you do have the right to?  Are you saying that free thoughts must be assimilated into a re-education of the mind such that they can be uniform, perfect, and collective?

Is it not possible to have individuals with varying opinions?  Creative self expression, freedom of the mind?

Or is your point that if I am not acceptable to the "understanding of PJ" like you understand him then I am not worthy of self expression?

[munkey]

I have a question.
What checks and balabces would be put in place so as science must use ethics when striving for this eutopia?

what will happen when its science that tells us that the population is too large and we must reduce the population by selective breeding.

Who will say who can breed and who cant depending upon what hereditary conditions may be in your genes?

I for one do not want to be ruled by anyone, I want to use my own common sense and hope that those around me can do the same.
In theory the idea has merit, but once one rules another, there is a divide.

[TheGoodFight1984]

oh god... I wish AJ hadn't gone off on an immature shouty / mocking rant here.. so far PJ has the upper hand with this 'discussion' 100%.. no matter what shouting doesn't make you right or your point any more valid. Sorry AJ I will support your efforts all the way but you gotta stop talking down to or shouting at guests or callers. not cool, not helping the cause or credibility issues at all. Just... don't. please. that's my 10c.

[trailhound]

Im lazy as hell and just want to lay around and mostly just do drugs and have sex. I cant wait for PJ's world so i can truly do what i want and have everything i want supplied to me.

[Atomic]

No, I'm pondering what would happen to this utopian society if warfare is not considered to be an option.  And I'm not even coming to a pre-defined conclusion, I'm asking you the question. And all I get is a vague 'How did Gandhi defend himself' response, which tells me you are not even sure about it yourself.

Basically, what I'm asking for is a fleshing out of ideas as opposed to some 'pie in the sky' dream that fails to address real threats and real problems. And one of the problems I see with an utopia where warfare is not considered is that you have no tool to defend yourself. You're basically a lamb waiting for the slaughter. (metaphorically speaking)

Oh I am quite sure how I would defend myself and it isn't with guns. Those who come to dominate me will get nothing, no cooperation, I will NOT comply. Attacking me will just cost them resources and they will gain nothing, I will not work for them or help them in any way. Defending yourself like that takes personal growth and commitment and also an understanding of the concepts I am talking about. Now attacking like wild animals on a message board is not going to lead to any understanding. It is just the equivalent of the WWF on a blog. If you want to stand in the ring and say "I AM THE ULTIMATE BLOGGER GOD, LOOK AT ALL THE BLOGGERS I CRUSH WITH MY POWERFUL AUTHORITATIVE STATEMENTS" go ahead it will lead nowhere. If you want to show a little humility and allow for the possibility that others can teach you something if you listen and are open to learning then there is a possibility that you can gain something. Are you here to learn or to compete with other bloggers and rule them all with your superiority? Most are not here to learn which is why bloggs so often turn into futile wars that never end.

[Atomic]

Now I am confused.  I just stated in great detail that I respected your opinions of the film, I then said that I do not share those opinions.  Are you saying that I as an individual do not have the right of free thought as I have specifically stated you do have the right to?  Are you saying that free thoughts must be assimilated into a re-education of the mind such that they can be uniform, perfect, and collective?

Is it not possible to have individuals with varying opinions?  Creative self expression, freedom of the mind?

Or is your point that if I am not acceptable to the "understanding of PJ" like you understand him then I am not worthy of self expression?

I asked if you allowed for the possibility that you missunderstand PJ? I asked twice now and both times you did not answer the question I asked.

[squarepusher]

If you want to stand in the ring and say "I AM THE ULTIMATE BLOGGER GOD, LOOK AT ALL THE BLOGGERS I CRUSH WITH MY POWERFUL AUTHORITATIVE STATEMENTS" go ahead it will lead nowhere. If you want to show a little humility and allow for the possibility that others can teach you something if you listen and are open to learning then there is a possibility that you can gain something. Are you here to learn or to compete with other bloggers and rule them all with your superiority? Most are not here to learn which is why bloggs so often turn into futile wars that never end.

Hey dude, that's why I posted these questions. Those questions are gaping holes I see in this whole Project Venus theory and I'm asking YOU, ie. the Zeitgeist 'truthers', to come up with a sensible answer to those questions.

I'm not like Peter Joseph in that interview sitting on my high horse claiming to be the all-knowing, all-powerful mind. I put those questions out there because he did not address them and started dancing around them - so I'm wondering if the viewers of his film have a better idea of the underlying structure of this new society.

Basically, if you're going to do this, you need a fleshed-out plan. Ie: you need the equivalent of a Constitution, the equivalent of a seperation of powers, or else the whole thing will come undone or be co-opted in a very short time.

[Dok]

Im lazy as hell and just want to lay around and mostly just do drugs and have sex. I cant wait for PJ's world so i can truly do what i want and have everything i want supplied to me.

Don't forget to sing Cum-ba-ya.

[TheGoodFight1984]

this is horrible. I feel mildly embarrassed for Mr. Joseph. AJ had a great opportunity for a great debate here but pissed it into the wind out of what seems to be self-righteousness.. oh dear.