View Full Version : Goodbye USA
scarlett_vancouver
12-01-2007, 10:02 PM
^ Wanna make out?
jannisary
12-01-2007, 11:04 PM
^ Wanna make out?
}:D Yes, I do. Perhaps I can catch a ride up your way on one of those black helicopters that keep circling my house. :O
Corgan
12-02-2007, 03:24 AM
Your eyes have been "opened up" by a video posted on a website!
This is why I fear for the future of our country.
I will be criticized because I don't buy into this conspiracy bullshit. A mindless sheep etc. But you who do buy into this conspiracy crap are mindless followers too! Just because someone posted it on the web, wrote a book, or made a film doesn't make them anymore truthful or accurate than our government.
when i posted that open up comment it was about the religion part. sorry, maybe i should have watched the whole thing before i made comments so people wouldn't ensenuate that i am a a part of the shitty american future. ::) i know i'm not the best at explaining my feelings, especially when i'm angry on the internet.
i LOVE conspiriacies, so i'm totally into this flick. if it makes me feel safe and secure thinking i know the truth, then who are you to try to make me feel like it isn't?
ps: i too was raised catholic in a catholic school... so i enjoyed thinking that there was a reasoning behind our religion... instead of not being able to question why we "believed" what we did.
Corgan
12-02-2007, 03:45 AM
can i also add that i feel kinda sheepish for screaming out my feelings on a messageboard?
when i first saw that i was overrun with emotion, and now that i've slept i'm pretty chilled out about it. funny what 8 hours sleep can do. i mean i still have my feelings but they aren't multiplied by shock.
Djoser
12-02-2007, 05:56 AM
It was Dwight D. Eisenhower, one of the most revered of all republicans, the man who led us through the worst years of the Cold War, who first warned us of the danger of the military-industrial complex.
To deny the fact that the vast majority of the world's wealth is in the hands of 1-2% of the population would be to bury one's head in the sand. And watching television is basically opening oneself up to propaganda in myriad forms. I'm not inclined to buy into the theory this YouTube video espouses, but the real truth is probably just as scary.
James Bond
12-02-2007, 07:24 AM
The 9-11 (inside job) conspiracy is easily provable. I figured out two hours after the second plane hit that this was an inside job.
There's a lot of evidence that this was an inside job, but I'll talk about one aspect for you to think about. It's almost impossible for an experienced pilot to hit those buildings, dead nuts, let alone someone who's never flown a jet before.
I seen an American Airline pilot being interviewed on TV and he said that (paraphrasing), "With my 30 years of flying comercial airlines, I could not duplicate the maneuvers of those "terrorists" who flew those airplanes (on 9-11).
The public doesn't know the spirals and hair-pin turns the jets made before they hit the buildings. Even an experienced pilot would have trouble accomplishing this. They flew the planes right into the buildings without making any practice runs. Impossible.
Now if a "terrorist" hit a building in New York City, any building, I might have some doubts, but to hit the World Trade Centers, right on, in the midst of all of those other buildings, is almost impossible. Plus, navigating the plane to go to New York City is a feat in itself, let alone hitting one particular building in the midst of thousands of buildings.
The odds of one plane hitting its target is 10,000 to 1; two planes hitting their targets is 1 million to one; the odds of 3 planes hitting their targets, right on like that, is a billion to one.
The odds of these "terrorists" hitting those buildings, even one building, is the same odds as someone who never drove a car before winning the Indy 500.
It's odd that people who never flew jets before (yeah, they flew simulators, so we're told, not the same thing) can fly these jets with more skill than the pilots in the Blue Angels.
The point I'm trying to make is that it wasn't "terrorists" who flew those planes.
I won't even get into the fact that the Air Force stood down while all of this was going on. :O
Melonie
12-02-2007, 08:11 AM
A North American Union sounds like a great idea! Mexican culture and Canadian social services, what's not to like?
... paying the bill for it !
If you want a real world example (sort of), have a look at the aftereffects of the merger between 'East' and 'West' Germany
(snip)"It was apparent in 1990 that years or decades would pass before the newly
freed Länder, or states, of the east would catch up with the west, which had
50 years of capitalism and democratic growth behind it. Few, however, could
have foreseen what would happen as growth in Europe's largest economy ground
to a halt.
>From 1991 to 1996 boosted by net financial transfers of €80bn a year,
massive infrastructure and property investments and dizzying wage increases
the east grew faster than the west. Since then, however, its nominal gross
domestic product has risen by 1.4 per cent a year on average, compared with
2.3 per cent in the west. Only last year, as the former West Germany flirted
with recession, did it register a slightly higher rate of growth.
“The east would need growth rates at least twice those of the west for
convergence to resume,” says Udo Ludwig, head of the macroeconomics
department of the Institute for Economic Research in Halle.
The €950bn in infrastructure subsidies, aid to businesses, and social
benefits poured by the west into the former communist republic were not
ineffective. Stripping out the spectacular bust in the region's construction
industry, production has risen slowly but steadily since the mid-1990s.
Living standards and life expectancy in the east are now closer to western
levels.
Towns such as Görlitz, Bautzen and Schwerin, once grey and derelict, now
boast beautifully renovated turn-of-the-century and medieval architecture.
Leipzig's railway station has turned into one of the country's largest
city-centre malls and the only one open seven days a week.
But the gulf between the two economies remains considerable. Unemployment
east of the Elbe river, which divides the former east and west, stood at
18.3 per cent last month, more than double the level on the other bank.
Almost half the east's population lives on state benefits. Although
two-thirds of the east's output is funded by German taxpayers' money, gross
domestic product per inhabitant in 2003 was still below €18,000 in all five
eastern states last year, compared with €22,900 in the poorest western
region. What is more, eastern GDP per head has only grown every year since
1991 because the east has lost 1m of its 18m inhabitants. "(snip)
(snip)"A government-sponsored opinion survey published in August showed that 60 per
cent of west Germans and 38 per cent of east Germans were satisfied with
democracy three years ago. But last year the proportion in the west had
risen to 66 per cent, while it dropped to 32 per cent in the east.
“There is a different understanding of democracy here,” says Antje Hermenau,
leader of the Green party in Saxony. “Many fail to recognise its benefits or
understand the importance of having a robust opposition.”
The western reaction to these views is growing animosity towards the east
Germans. Harald Schartau, the SPD leader in North-Rhine Westphalia, voiced a
popular view in his region when he told a Sunday newspaper this week that
there was “deep discontent [against the east] and with it potential for
populism”.
In Stern magazine an opinion poll by the Forsa Institute showed 24 per cent
of westerners wanted the Berlin wall back. “The goodwill has evaporated,”
says Raimund Grafe, a senior SPD official in Dresden. The tone is a stark
contrast to the solidarity and aid from all over Germany that followed
devastating floods in the east two summers ago.
Some economists and politicians say the image being cultivated in the west
is a caricature. Unification turned the GDR's economic and administrative
systems upside down, forcing most easterners to change jobs and increasing
economic insecurity for millions. Their willingness to work longer hours and
accept lower wages than their western counterparts was shown in 2003 when a
strike by the IG Metall trade union to cut working hours in the region
flopped due to lack of local support.
In fact, says Klaus Zimmermann, president of the DIW economic institute in
Berlin, eastern Germany's economic misery is rooted in political errors made
by the western architects of unification. The one-to-one conversion of the
valueless Ostmark into D-Mark was the original sin, he says, robbing eastern
Germany of the “monetary cushion” that might have sheltered its fragile
industry from globalisation.
More harmful, Mr Dohnanyi believes, were misguided subsidies to support
unproductive assets and the absence of tax incentives for new businesses.
Most damaging was the extension of the German welfare state to the east and
the decision to fund it through the social security contributions of western
employees and employers, burdening west German companies with the cost of
unification. “The government should have raised value-added tax instead, but
it decided to increase non-wage labour costs, which in the end killed jobs
in the west,” he says."(snip)
Melonie
12-02-2007, 08:44 AM
and on the subject of WTC conspiracy theories ...
and of course there are alternate 9/11 conspiracy theories out there as well, among them ...
(snip)"A casualty list for international victims of the 9/11 attack has been released. It should be remembered that the World Trade Center existed primarily for world trade --a profession where Jews and Israelis are frequently found. The international victims therefore should include a large number of Israeli citizens. Only one Israeli who worked in the World Trade Center (Ref. 3) was killed. (Obviously he failed to check his e-mail and missed the warning.)
There were no stories of people being warned not to fly on Sep. 11th. (That could have given away the whole attack and led to it being stopped by U.S. authorities.) Curiously four Israelis were killed on airplanes hijacked that day bringing the total of Israelis killed to five. (Ref. 4) How believable is it that New York is so full of Israelis that four die on airplanes, but only one Israeli dies in the twin towers dedicated to world trade? The airplanes held a few hundred people; the twin towers held fifty thousand, almost three thousand of whom died."(snip)
(snip)"A list for casualties in general was also compiled. (Ref. 5) The most common Jewish surnames that begin with "Silver" or "Gold" totaled a mere seven casualties (five beginning with "Gold" and two beginning with "Silver.") Only two "Cohen's" were victims. It would be no surprise if the total of Jewish casualties was much, much lower than their actual percentage of employees normally working in the World Trade Center. One unconfirmed estimate of the Jewish population of the WTC was 4000. If this number is correct, their casualties should therefore total about eight percent or 320.
Assuming that some Jews were warned about the 9/11 attack, this raises the issue of which Jews were receiving regular e-mails from Jewish organizations. Presumably the Mossad would have gotten the e-mail addresses of Jewish workers in the twin towers and then sent out a warning from some non-traceable source. It's entirely possible that 90 percent of the Jews may have been warned, but only half may have taken the warning seriously. The Mossad isn't going to explicitly identify itself in any such warning. People, who received warnings, would also like to stay on the "warning list." If they became whistle blowers, they might not get a warning -for example- about a coming nerve gas attack in New York.
The Israel camera crew filming the attack was pulled over by police and arrested. An article on this reports (Ref. 1) "The arresting officers said they saw a lot that aroused their suspicion about the men. One of the passengers had $4,700 in cash hidden in his sock. Another was carrying two foreign passports. A box cutter was found in the van. But perhaps the biggest surprise for the officers came when the five men identified themselves as Israeli citizens." One of the Israelis told officers "We are Israeli. We are not your problem. Your problems are our problems. The Palestinians are the problem." It is highly significant that this Israeli made this statement just hours after the attack when the origin of the attack was still a mystery (at least to us). Of course if the Israelis bothered to warn us, we could have prevented the attack so that we wouldn't be in a situation where "Your problems are our problems."
The Israelis arrested that day were part of a company called Urban Moving. The same news article notes "When the men were transferred to jail, the case was transferred out of the FBI's Criminal Division, and into the bureau's Foreign Counterintelligence Section, which is responsible for espionage cases, ABCNEWS has learned... One reason for the shift, sources told ABCNEWS, was that the FBI believed Urban Moving may have been providing cover for an Israeli intelligence operation." The ring leader of Urban Moving flew the coop as noted "Three months later 2020's cameras photographed the inside of Urban Moving, and it looked as if the business had been shut down in a big hurry. Cell phones were lying around; office phones were still connected; and the property of dozens of clients remained in the warehouse. The owner had also cleared out of his New Jersey home, put it up for sale and returned with his family to Israel." The article continues "The five men were held in detention for more than two months. Some of them were placed in solitary confinement for 40 days, and some of them were given as many as seven lie-detector tests." All of these Israelis arrested were deported back to Israel. One of the Israelis made an extremely suspicious remark on an Israeli talk show regarding 9/11 saying "Our purpose was to document the event." (Ref. 1) "(snip)
In the interest of equal time, it would also appear that Mossad made vigorous attempts to warn the CIA of an impending large scale terrorist attack in the weeks immediately preceding 9/11 ... which for whatever reason were not followed up on until AFTER the 9/11 attack had taken place ...
(snip)"There was anger among politicians at what many saw as the failure of the intelligence services, and some officials on Capitol Hill began canvassing support for a move to force George Tenet, the director of the Central Intelligence Agency, originally appointed by Clinton, to step aside.
James Traficant, a Democratic congressman from Pennsylvania, said that for years Congress had poured billions of dollars of largely unscrutinised funding into America's intelligence services, "yet we learnt of every one of these tragedies from Fox News and CNN"- two television channels. Senator Richard Shelby, a Republican member of the Senate intelligence committee, said it was "a failure of great dimension".
There are moves to address one severe shortcoming noted by many critics: the CIA's reliance on technological rather than "human" means to gather information, and its weakness as a means of finding out what Osama bin Laden is up to.
During the Clinton administration, Congress banned the CIA from recruiting as a paid informer anyone with a criminal record or who was guilty of human rights violations. James Woolsey, another former CIA director, said: "Inside bin Laden's organisation there are only people who want to be human rights violators. If you don't recruit them then you don't recruit anyone.""(snip)
Jesus w/out U
12-02-2007, 10:55 AM
Your eyes have been "opened up" by a video posted on a website!
This is why I fear for the future of our country.
I will be criticized because I don't buy into this conspiracy bullshit. A mindless sheep etc. But you who do buy into this conspiracy crap are mindless followers too! Just because someone posted it on the web, wrote a book, or made a film doesn't make them anymore truthful or accurate than our government.
It's people like you why I fear for this country and for this world. Sadly the public has been kept in the dark for so long, now that there's some light, they've forgotten how to use their eyes. This Zeitgeist movie is more than just "theory." Admittedly the North American Union merger is theory, but a damn good one anyone with the data and an I.Q. of 90 or higher (hell, possibly lower) could reasonably postulate. The rest of the movie however is fact, it has ALREADY HAPPENED. What makes this more true than what the Government says is THAT IT IS. Think about it, what reason(s) was this documentary made? Press for a political agenda? No political theories/ideologies are forwarded. Product endorsement? I for one fail to recall any ads (those advertising gurus just keep getting more subtle!). Monetary gain? I don't see how, as it is free for anyone with an internet connection. Open people's eyes? Yes.
jannisary
12-02-2007, 07:06 PM
A Challenge!
Here's a challenge for all you conspiracy theorists. Convince me. Show me something that I might actually believe. Now I'm not talking about some essay posted on the internet or some video clip.
There have been a lot of work, hard work by a lot of people to disapprove these conspiracies. This work has been peered reviewed and published in reputable journals. Investigators, civil engineers, structural engineers, technicians and others have spent thousand of hours documenting, studying, and the publishing their findings. These are the people I choose to believe. I can pick up a copy of the FEMA and American Society of Civil Engineers report, it has facts, it has citations, it has primary sources, secondary sources, research. There's a more recent study by a professor from Cambridge, peered reviewed, and published. It has facts, research, and citations.
Can anybody post a real article that supports this conspiracy bullshit? Show me a true scholarly article that proves the Pentagon wasn't hit by a jetliner. Show me a scholarly article that proves the WTC was brought down in a controlled demolition or some other conspiratorial manner. Let me say once again, I'm not talking about some essay wrote by some self appointed expert or some video that purports to show the "truth". I'm talking a REAL article, preferably one with footnotes or endnotes but other forms of scholarly citation will be acceptable. Citations? Yeah you know, where the author credits the source of the information he is using. That way I can look up these cited works and decide if they are legitimate sources. Hopefully these articles will include some information about the author, is he qualified to be writing about engineering? What is his educational background, etc.
So here is my challenge. Post an article, a link, or even just a good citation for these articles. If the article isn't available on the internet don't worry, just post the citation for it and I'll probably be able to find it. Can any of you seriously do that?
James Bond
12-02-2007, 07:24 PM
A Challenge!
Here's a challenge for all you conspiracy theorists. Convince me. Show me something that I might actually believe. Now I'm not talking about some essay posted on the internet or some video clip.
There have been a lot of work, hard work by a lot of people to disapprove these conspiracies. This work has been peered reviewed and published in reputable journals. Investigators, civil engineers, structural engineers, technicians and others have spent thousand of hours documenting, studying, and the publishing their findings. These are the people I choose to believe. I can pick up a copy of the FEMA and American Society of Civil Engineers report, it has facts, it has citations, it has primary sources, secondary sources, research. There's a more recent study by a professor from Cambridge, peered reviewed, and published. It has facts, research, and citations.
Can anybody post a real article that supports this conspiracy bullshit? Show me a true scholarly article that proves the Pentagon wasn't hit by a jetliner. Show me a scholarly article that proves the WTC was brought down in a controlled demolition or some other conspiratorial manner. Let me say once again, I'm not talking about some essay wrote by some self appointed expert or some video that purports to show the "truth". I'm talking a REAL article, preferably one with footnotes or endnotes but other forms of scholarly citation will be acceptable. Citations? Yeah you know, where the author credits the source of the information he is using. That way I can look up these cited works and decide if they are legitimate sources. Hopefully these articles will include some information about the author, is he qualified to be writing about engineering? What is his educational background, etc.
So here is my challenge. Post an article, a link, or even just a good citation for these articles. If the article isn't available on the internet don't worry, just post the citation for it and I'll probably be able to find it. Can any of you seriously do that?
http://img223.imageshack.us/img223/7636/wtc7demolitionjb8.gif
Here's actual footage of Building 7 that collapsed on 9-11. This building was never hit by a plane or falling debris. There were small fires in this building (how they got started, no one knows), but no steel-frame building has ever collapsed do to a fire in the 100 year history of the construction of steel-frame buildings. The only 3 steel-frame buildings to collapse from "a fire" in 100 hundred years were the Twin Towers and Building 7. That's odd.
Of course, this is a controlled demolition.
scarlett_vancouver
12-02-2007, 07:27 PM
^ methinks you don't quite get what 'credible sources' are. Imageshack hosted 'video' ain't it.
Melonie
12-02-2007, 07:35 PM
which conspiracy theory Jan ? that the WTC collapse was an inside job, or that the Mossad knew in advance that the attack was going to happen and warned Jewish WTC workers to 'call in' on 9/11. If it's the latter, the NYC police records of the arrested Israeli camera team and the actual lists of Jewish / Israeli WTC deaths and casualties are damn powerful documentation !!!
James Bond
12-02-2007, 07:47 PM
^ methinks you don't quite get what 'credible sources' are. Imageshack hosted 'video' ain't it.
The "credible sources" are owned by the Powers-That-Be. And since you have no idea who the Powers-That-Be are and how they operate, I don't expect you to believe me.
Most footage on the internet is in this form and I don't see why this is not credible.
That's actual footage that was shown on every TV set in the country.
Sometimes, ignorance is bliss and people don't want to know what's going on. It's impossible to try to convince them.
AlexxaHex
12-02-2007, 08:01 PM
Just ask yourself what Bush and his money and power-hungry cronies have to gain by falsifying documents in their favor and what a so-called "conspiracy theorist" has to gain from posting a free video on the net with OBVIOUS facts detailed within it.
I understand the difference between thinking there are aliens living in my garage and the fact that I am videotaped driving to work every day. This is very real. I'm sorry you can't see that the 9/11 reports were unbelievably skewed.
scarlett_vancouver
12-02-2007, 08:28 PM
The "credible sources" are owned by the Powers-That-Be. And since you have no idea who the Powers-That-Be are and how they operate, I don't expect you to believe me.
But you do. So OK, tell me. Succinctly, and with some sort of back up. I understand that the academic complex may well be 'in on it', but people that devote their lives to specialized study and are subject to scupulous peer-review of everything they publish is just more convincing to ignorant ol' me. Humour me!
Most footage on the internet is in this form and I don't see why this is not credible.
Does it need to be said...? Most footage (of anything) on the internet is irrelevant crap.
Sometimes, ignorance is bliss and people don't want to know what's going on. It's impossible to try to convince them.
And yet, you nobly take on the challenge. Kudos.
NB: personally, I find it equally possible that 9/11 was planned by the US gov as wasn't. I'm not personally arguing about that. More, I'm wishing people would be equally critical of the zeitgeist-loosechange info they receive as they are of the media-fed info.
James Bond
12-02-2007, 09:07 PM
Scarlett, I'll give you a site that's the tenth most popular blog in the country.
Each article on this site has a "credible news" source for the source. These articles are from around the World from different media outlets. Make this your source for daily news.
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/
jannisary
12-02-2007, 09:08 PM
which conspiracy theory Jan ? that the WTC collapse was an inside job, or that the Mossad knew in advance that the attack was going to happen and warned Jewish WTC workers to 'call in' on 9/11. If it's the latter, the NYC police records of the arrested Israeli camera team and the actual lists of Jewish / Israeli WTC deaths and casualties are damn powerful documentation !!!
I meant mainly the theory that the September 11 attacks on the WTC and the Pentagon were an inside job. The Mossad angle is an interesting one. But the essay you linked to is from the "Pro-White Forum"; that doesn't really sound unbiased to me. Here take a look at this link, since its from our dreaded government someone will scoff at it but at least it does site some sources. 4000 Rumor (http://usinfo.state.gov/media/Archive/2005/Jan/14-260933.html)
I took a minute to track your article: http://www.churchoftrueisrael.com/nsforum/ns9-29.html back to thishome page (http://www.churchoftrueisrael.com/). The content isn't surprising.
Melonie
12-02-2007, 09:24 PM
^^^ as is the case with many 'less than objective' websites that tend to collate a lot of information on a single page to make a single point, the fact that the website itself may not be a credible source in terms of independent content / opinion does not detract from the factual accuracy of the references they have cited. The NYC arrest reports of the Israeli camera team, the CBS news reports of the Israeli camera team's front business, the WTC casualty figures, and even the pre 9/11 Mossad reports are corroborated right and left in independent media.
BTW your US gov't official casualties list from the 4000 Rumor link actually supports the point made by the 'Mossad Angle'. Among the WTC casualties there was one Israeli citizen and 76 Americans of Jewish extraction. As pointed out in my original link, simple probability math would tend to expect that some 8% of the total WTC casualties i.e. some 320 should have occurred ... and instead only 77 occurred. The number is further skewed if the probability of Americans of Jewish extraction comprising a higher percentage of the employees working for Solomon Smith Barney and other financial companies in the WTC was higher than the 8% of Americans of Jewish extraction in the general NY City population (based on statistical participation rates of Americans of Jewish extraction in the business and finance profession). But even without exploring that possibility, and going with the straight 8% of general NY City population percentage, Jewish / Israeli casualties which occurred at the WTC are still statistically 'off' by a factor of more than FOUR TO ONE on the low side !!! This is impossible to ignore, and cannot be dismissed as a mere statistical 'abberation'.
What can't be proven, of course, is the derivative conspiracy theory that the US gov't was in fact aware of an impending attack on the WTC by islamic terrorists as a result of Mossad (and other sources), and that the US gov't chose not to prevent this attack in order to justify future military intervention in the middle east. The Israeli position was of course stated by one of the Israeli WTC camera crew members ... 'our problem is [now]your problem ... the Palestinians'
jannisary
12-02-2007, 09:33 PM
Melonie, you couldn't have missed these two paragraphs:
A total of 2,071 occupants of the World Trade Center died on September 11, among the 2,749 victims of the WTC attacks. According to an article in the October 11, 2001, Wall Street Journal, roughly 1,700 people had listed the religion of a person missing in the WTC attacks; approximately 10% were Jewish. A later article, in the September 5, 2002, Jewish Week, states, "based on the list of names, biographical information compiled by The New York Times, and information from records at the Medical Examiner's Office, there were at least 400 victims either confirmed or strongly believed to be Jewish." This would be approximately 15% of the total victims of the WTC attacks. A partial list of 390 Cantor Fitzgerald employees who died (out of 658 in the company) lists 49 Jewish memorial services, which is between 12% and 13%.
This 10-15% estimate of Jewish fatalities tracks closely with the percentage of Jews living in the New York area. According to the 2002 American Jewish Year Book, 9% of the population of New York State, where 64% of the WTC victims lived, is Jewish. A 2002 study estimated that New York City's population was 12% Jewish. Forty-three percent of the WTC victims lived in New York City. Thus, the number of Jewish victims correlates very closely with the number of Jewish residents in New York. If 4,000 Jews had not reported for work on September 11, the number of Jewish victims would have been much lower than 10-15%.
quoted from The 4000 Jews Rumor (http://usinfo.state.gov/media/Archive/2005/Jan/14-260933.html)
Melonie
12-02-2007, 09:38 PM
^^^ that isn't documented ... the official US casualties figures ARE documented ! Rumors cut both ways !
scarlett_vancouver
12-02-2007, 09:45 PM
Scarlett, I'll give you a site that's the tenth most popular blog in the country.
Each article on this site has a "credible news" source for the source. These articles are from around the World from different media outlets. Make this your source for daily news.
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/ (http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/)
Thank you. I will check it out later, maybe in conjunction with watching Zeitgeist.
(ps 10th most popular blog means nothing...Perez Hilton is probably #1. And I'm not gonna make it any one website my source for daily news, lol. Serious?)
Melonie
12-02-2007, 10:44 PM
i guess the greater point to be taken from all of this is the current 'credibility' factor which must be applied to every damn thing the public is 'told' ... including (and some would argue especially) official statements from some of our gov't agencies. This becomes even more of an issue when the general public must rely on the 'expertise' of certain scientists / statisticians / analysts, since the general public has no way of really knowing whether or not their expert opinions are truly correct ... nor has the general public any way of knowing if some of these scientists / statisticians / analysts are offering an objective opinion versus having a hidden 'stake' in one particular interpretation.
TheSexKitten
12-03-2007, 10:41 AM
A lot of you guys give the government WAAAAYYY too much credit. ::)
Katrine
12-03-2007, 11:02 AM
(snip)"A list for casualties in general was also compiled. (Ref. 5) The most common Jewish surnames that begin with "Silver" or "Gold" totaled a mere seven casualties (five beginning with "Gold" and two beginning with "Silver.") Only two "Cohen's" were victims. It would be no surprise if the total of Jewish casualties was much, much lower than their actual percentage of employees normally working in the World Trade Center. One unconfirmed estimate of the Jewish population of the WTC was 4000. If this number is correct, their casualties should therefore total about eight percent or 320.
)
That's hilarous. Granted I havn't read the entire site. I have heard this conspiracy before. So the only criteria that these 'tards looked for in the casualty list was jewish sounding last names?
I know a shiton of Jews that have names that were more Anglo-Euro, or even Arabic, based on family origin. Plus, jewish population is less than .5% of the world, even less. That theory is a joke.
Corgan
12-03-2007, 12:10 PM
Thank you. I will check it out later, maybe in conjunction with watching Zeitgeist.
if nothing else interests you on the zeitgeist, the religion thing was really interesting!
Optimist
12-04-2007, 12:01 AM
A lot of you guys give the government WAAAAYYY too much credit. ::)
It's not the government so much as it is the financiers. The government just does their bidding directly or indirectly.
The world's richest oligarchies manipulate things for financial gain. They're like royal families that rule through the government. They have the bulk of the cash and use that leverage to make more. They can lend to you or not lend to you. They can even make sure others won't lend to you and you are out of gas! They can employ your people or put them instantly out of work ensuring your area will be depressed and you'll be out of office. They can make it easy for you to trade or impossible through the politicians they choose to fund. That tiny 5-10% of the population can make a dog of a candidate a dictator to paralyze the life of a country to exploit it's wealth or destroy it so it cannot compete with an ally. They can back a great leader to bring a country off it's knees when the old ally gets uppity and wants out of exploitative agreements!
AlexxaHex
12-04-2007, 12:13 AM
Great points Optimist!
jannisary
12-04-2007, 10:25 PM
Damn, I'm so not impressed. Other than Melonie nobody has even tried to really defend these silly conspiracies. Oh we've had some spout off a few more but no one is really able to step up and give them a good defense.
Come on people! Its easy spout off that crap when no one calls you on it.
exotisch23
12-05-2007, 12:22 AM
if nothing else interests you on the zeitgeist, the religion thing was really interesting!
Ok, i've thought about it and the religion part has flaws to it, like for example they said Jesus's b-day was Dec. 25th when we all know that it's a made up birthday that Christians use to celebrate him.
AlexxaHex
12-05-2007, 12:25 AM
Damn, I'm so not impressed. Other than Melonie nobody has even tried to really defend these silly conspiracies. Oh we've had some spout off a few more but no one is really able to step up and give them a good defense.
Come on people! Its easy spout off that crap when no one calls you on it.
I'm not here to impress you. You either believe that the government is okay and actually protecting you and the silly paranoid hippies are your enemy or you know that something is not right with this world and you look into who is in power and you question shit for yourself.
Can you prove to me that this IS crap?
scarlett_vancouver
12-05-2007, 03:09 AM
I'm not here to impress you. You either believe that the government is okay and actually protecting you and the silly paranoid hippies are your enemy or you know that something is not right with this world and you look into who is in power and you question shit for yourself.
Can you prove to me that this IS crap?
There is middle ground there...a whole lot of it. There's no need to polarize.
The nature of 'proof' doesn't allow either side to make their point (try to prove anything. Anything, right now, do it!).
I don't think anyone is trying to prove that it isn't true (I'm referring to 9/11 being planned, but it could apply to anything). Just more saying "um, don't believe it just because the movie and some websites said so. Question your sources, ask for more evidence".
I don't want to put words in anyone's mouth but I will..I believe all the zeitgeist naysayers here are making the point not that the information in zeitgeist is false, but that it's foolish to believe the movie without consulting external (credible!!) sources and making an informed decision. And credible external sources supporting Zetgeist's theories have not been supplied, so far. So.
Imma go watch the damn thing.
James Bond
12-05-2007, 06:50 AM
Damn, I'm so not impressed. Other than Melonie nobody has even tried to really defend these silly conspiracies. Oh we've had some spout off a few more but no one is really able to step up and give them a good defense.
Come on people! Its easy spout off that crap when no one calls you on it.
Trying to convince you will be an impossible task. You don't have the common sense to figure this out. I can't put common sense in your brain. I can't prove to you that gravity exists, but I know it exists, it's common sense. The people behind these events don't leave evidence laying around.
OK, I'll give you an easy one. The Kennedy assassination. From the Zapruder film, you can see that Kennedy took a front head shot. Kennedy's brains BLOW BACK all over the trunk and street. Now, someone with common sense can see that he took a front head shot. I can't prove it, it something I can judge from looking at the film. The people who did this didn't leave any evidence and many of the witnesses mysteriously died.
If you can't figure this one out, then you're a lost cause. It's like a dog that's chasing his tail. The dog goes around and around and never catches its tail. That's what it's like trying to convince you. Where's the proof is your mantra. Don't need proof, you need common sense.
I can observe that Building #7 should not have collapsed from a few small fires. It's just physically impossible. I don't have proof, it's just common sense.
Dottie Rebel
12-05-2007, 08:26 AM
Ok, i've thought about it and the religion part has flaws to it, like for example they said Jesus's b-day was Dec. 25th when we all know that it's a made up birthday that Christians use to celebrate him.
The film was making a point about similarities in mythologies across cultures. Many of those figures may not have been born on that date or anywhere near it, but so goes the *mythology* of each. That's how I took that. In fact, this film supposes that Jesus never even existed.
Corgan, don't feel embarassed that you were so deeply shaken by this film. Unfortunately much of what it contains is not new to me and I spend nearly every day of my life in great despair over it.
Alexxa--the one thing no one ever says is "what the fuck can we DO"...I've given up hope of any sort of redemption. My only hope is that I can learn to find amusement along the strange trip that lies ahead for us all.
AlexxaHex
12-05-2007, 12:42 PM
I've known a lot of these things to be true for some time now also. I used to be very into political activism. I actually went down to D.C. for the Bush inauguration. But I was having a serious depressive episode at the time - protests and rallies gave me panic attacks. I feel more stable now, and I just want to educate other people about the truth and find out more for myself.
I boycott LOTS of things. I believe that your *not* spending your money on certain industries that are unethical is a very good way to protest. If something has too much packaging, it was tested on animals, it's full of sugar or no nutrition, I won't buy it. I can't feasibly go into every grocery store and set fire to the rice krispy treats so no one eats them, but I know they are bad for me so I don't give those people my money. I think a lot of cosmetic companies understand this concept very well. You can call the numbers on the backs of your Windex (or similar harsh chemical) bottles and tell Proctor and Gamble you are boycotting them and that you disapprove of them testing on animals.
Let people know you will not be a slave to materialism and consumerism.
There's a start.
Corgan
12-05-2007, 12:48 PM
why would you test windex on an animal?
AlexxaHex
12-05-2007, 02:12 PM
why would you test windex on an animal?
I really don't know, but it happens.
scarlett_vancouver
12-05-2007, 03:08 PM
Trying to convince you will be an impossible task. You don't have the common sense to figure this out. I can't put common sense in your brain. I can't prove to you that gravity exists, but I know it exists, it's common sense. The people behind these events don't leave evidence laying around.
&snip
If you can't figure this one out, then you're a lost cause. It's like a dog that's chasing his tail. The dog goes around and around and never catches its tail. That's what it's like trying to convince you. Where's the proof is your mantra. Don't need proof, you need common sense.
I'm saddened that you feel the need to resort to personal attacks and insults to try to make your point. It's not necessary.
I watched the film last night, and was definitely swayed (SWAYED, not toppled) by what was presented. Regarding religion, the concepts weren't new to me, so I took no convincing, though I still have no idea if the information presented is true (and definitely don't have the time or inclination to look it up).
Regarding parts 2 and 3...I still feel like I was given a very partial and biased view of events. It definitely seemed to make sense, however, especially in light of the HEAVY propaganda techniques used, it just also makes sense to me to seek out alternate sources of information. I don't expect to ever 'know' the truth anyways.
One can say it's all just 'common sense'...but please...do I have to give historical examples of things that have been considered 'common sense' in the past?
One question: why was all that stuff packaged up into one film? It kind of forces one to take an all-or-nothing approach...like if you 'believe' parts 1 and 2, you have to accept part 3. If you recognize one piece of information as fitting your truth paradigm, it makes it easy to accept the others.
mollyzmoon
12-05-2007, 04:28 PM
The nature of 'proof' doesn't allow either side to make their point (try to prove anything. Anything, right now, do it!).
I don't think anyone is trying to prove that it isn't true (I'm referring to 9/11 being planned, but it could apply to anything). Just more saying "um, don't believe it just because the movie and some websites said so. Question your sources, ask for more evidence".
There's this thing in philosophy called 'falsifiable'. If an argument is unfalsifiable, then it is usually considered a bad argument. Or really, a non-argument. You have to show that there is a way to make your assertion false. If I say 'I'm 22 years old', I can point to my birthday for proof. I can also show by the same means that saying I'm 22 in 2010 would be false. Thus my statement is truth functional.
It's like I say 'we're all living in a dream world created by a super villain...nothing is really here, it's all just seemingly real'. That's something I couldn't prove, but only assert. Just because you couldn't disprove it doesn't mean you have to believe it either. There are things we believe because we are rationally convinced by them, and then there are things we are persuaded to believe for other reasons.
TheSexKitten
12-05-2007, 05:15 PM
^^^ Schwing!! Thanks Mollyzmoon for being so wonderfully articulate. ;D
scarlett_vancouver
12-05-2007, 06:01 PM
There are things we believe because we are rationally convinced by them, and then there are things we are persuaded to believe for other reasons.
I agree, and absolutely respect that a person can believe whatever they want, for whatever reason they want.
However, if someone is going to call me ignorant for reserving judgement, they damn well better be able to tell me why. ;)
jannisary
12-05-2007, 06:03 PM
There is middle ground there...a whole lot of it. There's no need to polarize.
The nature of 'proof' doesn't allow either side to make their point (try to prove anything. Anything, right now, do it!).
I don't think anyone is trying to prove that it isn't true (I'm referring to 9/11 being planned, but it could apply to anything). Just more saying "um, don't believe it just because the movie and some websites said so. Question your sources, ask for more evidence".
I don't want to put words in anyone's mouth but I will..I believe all the zeitgeist naysayers here are making the point not that the information in zeitgeist is false, but that it's foolish to believe the movie without consulting external (credible!!) sources and making an informed decision. And credible external sources supporting Zetgeist's theories have not been supplied, so far. So.
Imma go watch the damn thing.
wanna make out, cause damn you're hot and that's a fine piece of writing! That was pretty much my point.
Critical thinking people, try it some time.
Dottie Rebel
12-05-2007, 09:18 PM
I've known a lot of these things to be true for some time now also. I used to be very into political activism. I actually went down to D.C. for the Bush inauguration. But I was having a serious depressive episode at the time - protests and rallies gave me panic attacks. I feel more stable now, and I just want to educate other people about the truth and find out more for myself.
I boycott LOTS of things. I believe that your *not* spending your money on certain industries that are unethical is a very good way to protest. If something has too much packaging, it was tested on animals, it's full of sugar or no nutrition, I won't buy it. I can't feasibly go into every grocery store and set fire to the rice krispy treats so no one eats them, but I know they are bad for me so I don't give those people my money. I think a lot of cosmetic companies understand this concept very well. You can call the numbers on the backs of your Windex (or similar harsh chemical) bottles and tell Proctor and Gamble you are boycotting them and that you disapprove of them testing on animals.
Let people know you will not be a slave to materialism and consumerism.
There's a start.
I headed up a PETA campaign agaisnt P&G for years. I spent a good two years in Cincinnati stalking AG Lafley and making progress against P&G animal testing. Did some great work. I chose animal rights because I was able to see immediate gains which meant immediate alleviation of suffering. I start a campaign to get Wet Seal to stop selling fur....a month later they cave...that's thousands of animals that no longer have to die due to my *direct* work. It was a unique situation as an activist because you don't usually get to see such immediate gratification.
But attempting to battle consumerism, the establishment, the erosion of the United States Constitution, the New World Order--whatever the hell. Working against that would seriously feel like trying to beat gravity. Like pissing up a rope. What on earth do you do? Attend protest marches and try to convince yourself that you're actually accomlishing something or just give up and admit that it's all going to hell and there is no hope?
Critical thinking people, try it some time.
You have a useless and ineffective attitude. It makes people not really care about what you have to say or want to engage in conversation with you. It must be nice to have everything figured out.
AlexxaHex
12-05-2007, 10:22 PM
I headed up a PETA campaign agaisnt P&G for years. I spent a good two years in Cincinnati stalking AG Lafley and making progress against P&G animal testing. Did some great work. I chose animal rights because I was able to see immediate gains which meant immediate alleviation of suffering. I start a campaign to get Wet Seal to stop selling fur....a month later they cave...that's thousands of animals that no longer have to die due to my *direct* work. It was a unique situation as an activist because you don't usually get to see such immediate gratification.
But attempting to battle consumerism, the establishment, the erosion of the United States Constitution, the New World Order--whatever the hell. Working against that would seriously feel like trying to beat gravity. Like pissing up a rope. What on earth do you do? Attend protest marches and try to convince yourself that you're actually accomlishing something or just give up and admit that it's all going to hell and there is no hope?
You have a useless and ineffective attitude. It makes people not really care about what you have to say or want to engage in conversation with you. It must be nice to have everything figured out.
^^Yeah, I'm having a hard time myself wanting to even communicate with someone like that. Jannisary reminds me of all the jerks at the club who want to ask me 10,000 questions about myself and my life and all but show my ID to prove my age and then NOT get a dance. Just a feeling I have.
Because instead of saying, "hmm this video is mildly interesting. I might look into more media of this nature so as to educate myself further.", he wants US to do all the convincing when its' obvious he isn't ready to have his reality shattered because the work you need to do toward enlightenment can't be done by someone else. I'm not trying to get anyone to buy memberships to my secret club house. I just want people to be aware and to question things for themselves.
I'm not going to do a whole bunch of bibliography work to back up everything someone else put the time into doing in a video so that a couple naysayers can be "impressed" by it. I'm just not. Take it or leave it buddy.
OH and Dottie - I think it's amazing that you've done the work you did. I'm certain that my presence in Washington didn't make much of an overall impact but there is strength in numbers. I wanted to show my support. I think when there are more people that sit on their couch doing nothing it's easier to program them with commercials and things. It's just important to be doing *something* you feel is worthwhile. Stand up for what you believe in. If you enjoy protesting, by all means do it. You made a difference through another path and that is something not everyone would have the ability or patience to do. If everyone stayed home because they thought it wouldn't make a difference then nothing would change.
It's important for me to live my life with passion and strive to have a lack of fear.
scarlett_vancouver
12-05-2007, 11:12 PM
^^Yeah, I'm having a hard time myself wanting to even communicate with someone like that. Jannisary reminds me of all the jerks at the club who want to ask me 10,000 questions about myself and my life and all but show my ID to prove my age and then NOT get a dance. Just a feeling I have.
Because instead of saying, "hmm this video is mildly interesting. I might look into more media of this nature so as to educate myself further.", he wants US to do all the convincing when its' obvious he isn't ready to have his reality shattered because the work you need to do toward enlightenment can't be done by someone else.
Jeez. And this is why threads disintegrate into catfights. Wtf is up with straight up insulting people? I have a similar opinion to Jannisary, and can only conclude that my time here and my vagina are the reasons I'm not a target. Yay for that. But it's pretty much the same result.
It's all in the name of discussion. Don't get so fucking mad when someone tries to get dialogue going.
What on earth do you do? Attend protest marches and try to convince yourself that you're actually accomlishing something or just give up and admit that it's all going to hell and there is no hope?
Well, I'd say, lead by example, stay open-minded, and choose your battles. I'll betcha we have a hell of a lot in common on the activism front (though I'm totally not interested in discussing it at this point), and through much trial and error, that what works for me and keeps me happy right now. Not because I know everything. Because you asked. And it's an answer.
Dottie Rebel
12-06-2007, 12:25 AM
Oh--by the way, Alexxa...(I'm running off to do something right now so no time for a proper reply but) I wanted to say I was NOT insulting you by saying that you were deluding yourself by going to protests. I was actually talking about myself. I wanted to make that clear :)
jannisary
12-06-2007, 09:49 PM
You have a useless and ineffective attitude. It makes people not really care about what you have to say or want to engage in conversation with you. It must be nice to have everything figured out.
My "critical thinking" comment was a bit sharp. But too many people, including some on this forum, are not being good critical thinkers. They are mindlessly accepting whatever is thrown out there at them. Whether that be the conspiracy theory crap, urban legends, or corporate and government propaganda.
^^Yeah, I'm having a hard time myself wanting to even communicate with someone like that. Jannisary reminds me of all the jerks at the club who want to ask me 10,000 questions about myself and my life and all but show my ID to prove my age and then NOT get a dance. Just a feeling I have.
Don't worry, if I'm interested in you enough to talk very much, I'd definitely be buying a dance or two or 5 or 6. What this really has to do with the discussion in this thread I'm not sure about.
Because instead of saying, "hmm this video is mildly interesting. I might look into more media of this nature so as to educate myself further.", he wants US to do all the convincing when its' obvious he isn't ready to have his reality shattered because the work you need to do toward enlightenment can't be done by someone else. I'm not trying to get anyone to buy memberships to my secret club house. I just want people to be aware and to question things for themselves.
You presume too much. I'm not ignorant of the various conspiracy theories. I'm fairly well educated on them actually. I've run in that crowd, at least one wing of it anyways. What I want is for some of the people spouting off this conspiracy stuff is to back up some of the claims and assertions they and you are making. You won't because you can't.
I'm not going to do a whole bunch of bibliography work to back up everything someone else put the time into doing in a video so that a couple naysayers can be "impressed" by it. I'm just not. Take it or leave it buddy.
Bibliography work? Works Cited? Eh, who needs that crap anyways. The people producing these videos, pamphlets, books, and various conspiracy crap seem to have that attitude. And if they do just happen to give a source, it is something that can't be independently verified. They are also good in citing a secondary source which got its information from another secondary source which got its information from a third secondary source, etc ..etc.
Trying to convince you will be an impossible task. You don't have the common sense to figure this out. I can't put common sense in your brain. I can't prove to you that gravity exists, but I know it exists, it's common sense. The people behind these events don't leave evidence laying around.
At one time "common sense" told people the world was flat.
I can observe that Building #7 should not have collapsed from a few small fires. It's just physically impossible. I don't have proof, it's just common sense.
[QUOTE/]
So this "observation" you've performed, was that at the scene or purely through the videos posted. Because people at the scene seem to have made a different observation.
Have you ever bothered to read this article:Implosion World (http://www.implosionworld.com/Article-WTC%20STUDY%208-06%20w%20clarif%20as%20of%209-8-06%20.pdf)
Also for all you people convinced that the Pentagon wasn't hit by American Airlines Flight 77, here's a lengthy but quite informative article. Pentagon Building Performance Report (http://www.fire.nist.gov/bfrlpubs/build03/PDF/b03017.pdf)
I'm sure this won't convince some of you. That's okay. You've got your minds made up, perhaps clouded with zealotry. There's no reason for personal attacks but those weren't unexpected. Some of you like to promote these theories and claims, disparaging good men and women who have served our country in one form or another. These conspiracy theories especially the ones surrounding September 11 are an insult to all of the men and women who died on the planes, in the World Trade Center, and in the Pentagon. They are an insult to the rescue workers, the investigators, the engineers, the clean-up workers and everyone else who worked at the WTC and the Pentagon. But some of you just throw these assertions around.
But even more disappointing is how some other members just seem to willingly accept this bullshit without a word, without a complaint. Some even eat the shit right up and start believing it might be true too. That's why I quoted Corgan in my initial post. Sorry Corgan but you just happened to be an obvious and recent example of something that happens far too much.
AlexxaHex
12-06-2007, 10:41 PM
The issue seems to be that YOU believe one thing happened and I believe that a completely different thing happened.
I believe that my sources of information have been very credible. I can't necessarily remember where I have seen every piece of information and footage that has made me disbelieve that 9-11 was an attack by Afghan terrorists, or any other than my own nation's leaders.
Michael Moore's 9-11 movie, various clips of CNN reports, books relating to aristocratic bloodlines and their interest in keeping the world suffering and at war (David Icke comes to mind), and EVEN the circumstances surrounding the case, the motives of the parties involved and statements taken from the supposed pilots. I have seen photos of explosions INSIDE the towers many feet below where the planes crashed into the building. I have seen footage of the buildings collapsing without planes hitting (tower 7), the pics of the molten metal which could not have been caused by airline fuel.
This is NOT a theory. It is not a conspiracy. A conspiracy theory is based on a very loose interpretation based on paranoia. This however is fact.
Just check this out for instance:
and
But then again these are just "videos on the internet" so the source and content must not matter much. ::)
Your "Implosion World" article does not discuss the fact that airline fuel would not have caused all the metal structures to melt as it were. They actually appear to be cut so that the structure could be weakened:
I have said nothing derogatory about the men and women who have served our country, those who lost lives and loved ones to these internal terrorist attacks...those who stayed and helped clean up the mess only to be pissed on like beggars when needing assistance for the medical problems they've acquired during the cleanup. That sir, is on Uncle Sam and his big pockets. No, I'm not the one you should be angry at.
AlexxaHex
12-06-2007, 10:43 PM
Jeez. And this is why threads disintegrate into catfights. Wtf is up with straight up insulting people? I have a similar opinion to Jannisary, and can only conclude that my time here and my vagina are the reasons I'm not a target. Yay for that. But it's pretty much the same result.
It's all in the name of discussion. Don't get so fucking mad when someone tries to get dialogue going.
Well, I'd say, lead by example, stay open-minded, and choose your battles. I'll betcha we have a hell of a lot in common on the activism front (though I'm totally not interested in discussing it at this point), and through much trial and error, that what works for me and keeps me happy right now. Not because I know everything. Because you asked. And it's an answer.
Soooo you are angry because I'm not arguing with you? Is that why you came here? I can do that if you want...but I wasn't offended by anything you said. Generally when people have an opposing statement or position to post I would consider it and even research it if possible but often I leave it alone. This time, however I had a bone to pick with some of the things he said and ways he said them. Not you.
scarlett_vancouver
12-07-2007, 12:02 AM
^ No, I'm not angry...just frustrated.
I def. don't want to argue. I'm having the same conversation/argument on another board right now, lol, so quite possibly I'm displacing things over here. Apologies.
:hug: