Metanet Forums

Zeitgeist is a movie, that lasts for around two hours. After watching it though, I'd call it a documentary. It's essentially split into four parts, and after watching them all, you will probably see the world in a somewhat clearer view. At least, that's how I would sum it up.

The first part is about religeon. It essentially goes through the bible, and point by point disproves it.

The second part is about 9/11, and the myth surrounding it. 9/11 is more-or-less proven to have been committed by the USA government. Written down like that it sounds ridiculous, but the evidence that the documentary uses is pretty compelling.

The third part is about the central banks, and how we're all essentially their puppets. This is where it gets complex, and I don't think I could do it justice in a few sentences. Don't worry if you don't know what a central bank is - all is explained.

The fourth part is a conclusion. It talks about how all of these things have been used to manipulate us towards an end purpose. That being, to form a global alliance to control us all. To get chips implanted in every single human being which contains all their money, their identification, their location via satellite tracking, everything. The movie says that the world is moving towards this ultimatum, where everything and everyone is controlled and monitored.

The movie contains way more depth than I would like to go into at 2am in the morning, but rest assured that it is something that you absolutely must watch. It's fascinating from the start (or at least, the eight minute-ish) to the end, and isn't based on speculation and legend. It uses concrete evidence constantly to prove its points and on a personal level, I'm pretty convinced. See for yourself, you can watch it online right here: Zeitgeist

The central bank part, it uses an example of the US's Federal Reserve System and how its a privately owned sector which basically controls the government AND us citizens.

i saw this a couple years ago, and i remember checking out on of the 'fact's on the religion part. they say that jesus' crucifixion is an analogy to the sun passing through the crux constellation, hitting its center... yeah, no. the crux has never been passed through by the sun.
good job, facts!

when i want religion disproved, i'll use actual sources, thanks. i'm also going to go out on a limb here and blame hippies for this.
ps, paranoids
(i still eat meat and fast food just fine after watching food inc)

The first part is about religeon. It essentially goes through the bible, and point by point disproves it.

Huh. I bet this documentary is insightful, intelligent, and in no way crazy. I should check it out!

9/11 is more-or-less proven to have been committed by the USA government.

Never mind.

Destiny wrote:The first part is about religeon. It essentially goes through the bible, and point by point disproves it.

Oh, cool. We need more of these to be public. The more angles of attack at organized religion, the faster it will crumble.

Destiny wrote:The third part is about the central banks, and how we're all essentially their puppets. This is where it gets complex, and I don't think I could do it justice in a few sentences. Don't worry if you don't know what a central bank is - all is explained.

Right on. I thought that shit was bananas when the US Treasure basically sold America to a collection of private banks in the 70's. I'm not the sort of person who would devote his life to trying to correct this, but I think it's very important to know.

Destiny wrote:9/11 is more-or-less proven to have been committed by the USA government. Written down like that it sounds ridiculous, but the evidence that the documentary uses is pretty compelling.

Whhhh--

Destiny wrote:The fourth part is a conclusion. It talks about how all of these things have been used to manipulate us towards an end purpose. That being, to form a global alliance to control us all.

Um... well, two for four, anyway.

Destiny wrote:To get chips implanted in every single human being which contains all their money, their identification, their location via satellite tracking, everything.

Ooh, that actually sounds incredibly useful. I can't wait for the day. I mean, I've got pretty much all of that covered through a combination of my bank card and Google Latitude on my cell phone, but that's not exactly common. If a majority of people were hooked up to services like those, life would be a-to-the-mazing.
And --- gasp! --- everyone will suddenly be accountable for their actions!? Oh, the horror! What dystopia is this? Let it not come to pass!

Oh gods not this shit again. Didn't that nutty kid Amadeus watch that stupid movie and make some ridiculous post about it?

Zeitgeist is a movie, that lasts for around two hours. After watching it though, I'd call it a documentary. It's essentially split into four parts, and after watching them all, you will probably see the world in a somewhat clearer view. At least, that's how I would sum it up.

No, that's what happens when you read Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance or anything by Immanuel Kant.

The first part is about religeon. It essentially goes through the bible, and point by point disproves it.

Suki is right but this is still a waste of time considering that the target audience is entirely composed of atheists.

The second part is about 9/11, and the myth surrounding it. 9/11 is more-or-less proven to have been committed by the USA government. Written down like that it sounds ridiculous, but the evidence that the documentary uses is pretty compelling.

In reality, 9/11 was pulled off by terrorists. Go read the Popular Mechanics article on it.

The third part is about the central banks, and how we're all essentially their puppets. This is where it gets complex, and I don't think I could do it justice in a few sentences. Don't worry if you don't know what a central bank is - all is explained.

Yeah, the banks have paid off lots of government officials. This is kinda spot-on.

The fourth part is a conclusion. It talks about how all of these things have been used to manipulate us towards an end purpose. That being, to form a global alliance to control us all. To get chips implanted in every single human being which contains all their money, their identification, their location via satellite tracking, everything. The movie says that the world is moving towards this ultimatum, where everything and everyone is controlled and monitored.

That's stupid. The tech to do that won't even be around for years. And shit, do you think government officials want to be accountable for their actions? Really? The Eliot Spitzers of the world won't stand for this.

The movie contains way more depth than I would like to go into at 2am in the morning, but rest assured that it is something that you absolutely must watch. It's fascinating from the start (or at least, the eight minute-ish) to the end, and isn't based on speculation and legend. It uses concrete evidence constantly to prove its points and on a personal level, I'm pretty convinced. See for yourself, you can watch it online right here: Zeitgeist

The movie is the product of the overactive imagination of a paranoid schizophrenic. Fucking.

scythe wrote:In reality, 9/11 was pulled off by terrorists. Go read the Popular Mechanics article on it.

I know that it's nitpicking, but I think you could very easily argue that the Bush administration /were/ terrorists. It's such an ambiguous term, really. :/

I just finished watching it, and I am fucking incensed.
I do not take kindly to being controlled and used like a pawn.
Wake up, people. We need to take matters into our own hands, and rise up to crush our inhuman oppressors.

EDIT: Wait, shit, I thought this thread was about The Matrix, not that Zeitgeist crap again.

DOUBLE EDIT: What the hell do you mean, "The Matrix was not a documentary"??

Hahaha, yeah, I can see its similarities the The Matrix in that sense.

Am I the only one that thought what it said about 9/11 was actually really quite convincing? When you put all the facts together like it does, I can't imagine any terrorist group being able to organize something like that. Especially not the part about the conveniantly timed training program, and the content of it. And the government wouldn't release the security camera footage that would reveal the plane hitting pentagon? What's that about? If it was really a terrorist attack, wouldn't they want that out to the public so we can all see it?

Destiny wrote:Am I the only one that thought what it said about 9/11 was actually really quite convincing?

You're meant to be convinced. That's what propaganda does.

Destiny wrote:Hahaha, yeah, I can see its similarities the The Matrix in that sense.

Am I the only one that thought what it said about 9/11 was actually really quite convincing? When you put all the facts together like it does, I can't imagine any terrorist group being able to organize something like that. Especially not the part about the conveniantly timed training program, and the content of it. And the government wouldn't release the security camera footage that would reveal the plane hitting pentagon? What's that about? If it was really a terrorist attack, wouldn't they want that out to the public so we can all see it?

It doesn't really show many facts. Go read the Popular Mechanics article. Or read Maddox's article, if yelling gets through to you better. There is no evidence whatsoever that the events of September 11 were a government conspiracy.

Destiny, you would make an excellent journalist in the style of Hearst.

It's been a while since I've watched Zeitgeist, so I'm going to pull up some stuff from Wikipedia.

wikipedia wrote:Part I, entitled The Greatest Story Ever Told, questions religions as being god-given stories, arguing that the Christian religion specifically is mainly derived from other religions, astronomical facts, astrological myths and traditions, which in turn were derived from or shared elements with others. In furtherance of the Jesus myth hypothesis, this part argues that the historical Jesus is a literary and astrological hybrid, nurtured politically in the interest of control.

I never thought that Christianity being a meld of other religions was even slightly contentious. Even our hardcore Lutheran school taught us about how certain traditions were shaped to fit in with the existing beliefs and schedules of different communities. So if you buy that Christianity is bullshit, which isn't hard to do, it's just the next logical step to realise that it was 'nurtured politically in the interest of control'. Marx realised it way before Zeitgeist, and I really doubt he was the first.

wikipedia wrote:Part II, entitled All the World's a Stage, uses integral footage of several 9/11 conspiracy theory films to illustrate how the September 11 attacks were either orchestrated or allowed to happen by elements within the United States government in order to generate mass fear, initiate and justify the War on Terror, provide a pretext for the curtailment of civil liberties, and produce economic gain.

The U.S. definitely made the most of 9/11 and completely milked the situation to pursue its interests overseas and at home. Hardly surprising, and hardly unexpected. It's a bit much to go from here to "The government MADE IT HAPPEN", though you can see why it's tempting to believe so after seeing exactly how the tragedy was, and continues to be, exploited by the ruling class.

wikipedia wrote:Part III, entitled Don't Mind the Men Behind the Curtain, argues that three wars of the United States during the twentieth century were waged purely for economic gain by what the film refers to as "international bankers". The film alleges that certain events were engineered or were allowed to happen as excuses to enter into war including the sinking of the RMS Lusitania (a factor in the US decision to enter World War I two years later), the Attack on Pearl Harbor (which was the opening attack of the Japanese on the US in World War II), and the Gulf of Tonkin Incident (which led to the escalation of the Vietnam War).

Countries only ever enter into wars when their interests are at stake. Uncontentious, yeah? And 'national interest' for the US (and pretty much every other country ever) is the interests of that country's economy, which is to say that country's capital. Again, not a huge stretch. Capital is controlled by bankers. Yeah. Bankers secretly pull the strings of the government? Not so much. It's just that their interests are completely disproportionately represented.

Also, of COURSE the Gulf of Tonkin incident was more or less fabricated. There was ONE incident, involving the Maddox, and the captain himself has explained that THEY initiated the firefight, while in international waters. But it's hardly the most scandalous excuse given for increasing US involvement. Didn't they first ship troops over based on a mistaken report of torpedos being fired against some different ship? Imaginary torpedos, which the crew later explained were due to a malfunction of the radar equipment? I forget the details, but I think Marilyn Young and Daniel Ellsberg wrote some interesting stuff about it. Anyway, iunno why they'd want to focus on WW1, WW2 and Vietnam in the first place when the U.S. has done plenty of nastier things which much more transparent motives throughout Latin America. Chile, Argentina, Nicaragua, etc etc etc.

And then they talk about brain implants.

Eh. Yeah. This bit pretty much reminds me of that mockumentary "Dark Side of the Moon" where they make fun of moon landing conspiracy theorists by putting together some completely convincing footage and interviews and slowly turning things more and more absurd until the whole thing becomes hilarious. This is the point where Zeitgeist just gets funny.



I think Zeitgeist works as a film because it very persuasively destroys a bunch of widely- held beliefs about religion and the way the U.S. government works. And then, after you realise that all of this stuff about religion and war and 9/11 is a lie, they put together some weird conspiracy theory about what happened instead. It's convincing because it creates this revelation that the world isn't how you believed it was and then substitutes some weird alternative explanation of the way the world works. It's also only convincing if you've never realised before that, hey, economics DOES drive war! Or, hey, religion HAS been used to placate the masses and keep them from rebelling! Or even, hey, the government IS cynical enough to exploit a tragedy! (And maybe cynical enough to let it happen, but that's waaaaay away from being proven)

If, on the other hand, you've spent some time reading and talking to some Anarchists, Marxists, left- wing liberals, etc, half of what Zeitgeist goes on seems completely obvious, and the other half just seems laughable.

I'm half surprised there isn't a part 5 explaining how we didn't land on the moon.

If, on the other hand, you've spent some time reading and talking to some Anarchists, Marxists, left- wing liberals,

I've tried to talk to people like that, but we usually just end up arguing for days or even weeks. I for one may be a little pessimistic, but I'm also not completely cynical nor paranoid, so I'm not buying any of this Zeitgeist crap except maybe the bank part.

ＭＡＸＸＸＯＮ wrote:

If, on the other hand, you've spent some time reading and talking to some Anarchists, Marxists, left- wing liberals,

I've tried to talk to people like that, but we usually just end up arguing for days or even weeks. I for one may be a little pessimistic, but I'm also not completely cynical nor paranoid, so I'm not buying any of this Zeitgeist crap except maybe the bank part.

I was actually saying that if you've spent some time talking to some intelligent people with radical political views, they'll point out a bunch of the same stuff that Zeitgeist points out, and then draw completely different, far more plausible conclusions. (You know, stuff to do with the ruling class and the way society works). People like Paul D'Amato, Naomi Klein, the good folks at ZMag, that kind of thing.

formica wrote:I was actually saying that if you've spent some time talking to some intelligent people with radical political views, they'll point out a bunch of the same stuff that Zeitgeist points out, and then draw completely different, far more plausible conclusions. (You know, stuff to do with the ruling class and the way society works). People like Paul D'Amato, Naomi Klein, the good folks at ZMag, that kind of thing.

I've tried to talk to people like that, but we usually just end up arguing for days or even weeks. What can I say? People with radical political views and I tend to disagree on their radical political views. Funny how that is.

I've tried to talk to people like that, but we usually just end up arguing for days or even weeks. What can I say? People with radical political views and I tend to disagree on their radical political views. Funny how that is.

Ok, I was a little aggressive. My apologies.

hairscapades wrote:

formica wrote:I was actually saying that if you've spent some time talking to some intelligent people with radical political views, they'll point out a bunch of the same stuff that Zeitgeist points out, and then draw completely different, far more plausible conclusions. (You know, stuff to do with the ruling class and the way society works). People like Paul D'Amato, Naomi Klein, the good folks at ZMag, that kind of thing.

I've tried to talk to people like that, but we usually just end up arguing for days or even weeks. What can I say? People with radical political views and I tend to disagree on their radical political views. Funny how that is.

Yeah, that's the problem I have with all of the radical political groups at my uni. They're aggressive dicks who pretty much argue along the lines of "You can't like capitalism and not like homophobia, YOU RACIST HOMOPHOBIC SCUM" and generally piss everyone, including me, off.

But a) the arguments work MUCH better when written down and fully referenced than when they come from an outraged unwashed well- to- do- uni student rebelling against the shallowness of his parents' wealth or something (seriously, Paul D' Amato's Meaning of Marxism is really, really convincing. Half of it- mostly the parts where he says "THE ONLY SOLUTION IS A SOCIALIST REVOLUTION"- I think is bullshit, but it's very convincing bullshit, much moreso than Zeitgeist)
b) A lot of non- radical type people- Naomi Klein (The Shock Doctrine is amazing), Howard Zinn, Chalmers Johnson, John Ralston Saul, even Joseph Stiglitz, and he was the president of the World Bank for a while- make the same sorts of arguments about how, exactly, the US and the world is run and whose interests it serves. I'm not just talking about radical "JOIN OUR REVOLUTIONARY PARTY"- type people.


Anyway, this is all off- topic. All I'm trying to say is that Zeigeist points out a bunch of stuff that's already been pointed out by other people, and that these other people have argued that some much more compelling stuff using the same facts.

I think the only part of Zeitgeist I don't really care for is its conclusion. Implants containing all of that information and functions? So what? Unless you're planning on finding a way onto a wanted list of some sort, then surely the benefits far outweigh the drawbacks? I actually think that they sound like a good thing. Imagine what would happen to crime rates and the such.

Dude, you're a crazy person.

DemonzLunchBreak wrote:I don't think so, 'Hooz. In fact, I think we should just give every crime the death penalty, and put cameras everywhere so that every crime is on tape. That way, no one will commit any crimes.

If this is a good idea then why do no societies like this exist/prosper?

hairscapades wrote:

DemonzLunchBreak wrote:I don't think so, 'Hooz. In fact, I think we should just give every crime the death penalty, and put cameras everywhere so that every crime is on tape. That way, no one will commit any crimes.

If this is a good idea then why do no societies like this exist/prosper?

I'm pretty sure he was kidding.

hairscapades wrote:

DemonzLunchBreak wrote:I don't think so, 'Hooz. In fact, I think we should just give every crime the death penalty, and put cameras everywhere so that every crime is on tape. That way, no one will commit any crimes.

If this is a good idea then why do no societies like this exist/prosper?

This is England.