Skip to content
Welcome guest. | Register | Login | Add
About | Wiki | Legacy

Let's bring down the system being constructed with our own flesh, blood and being

25 replies [Last post]
User offline. Last seen 10 years 4 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 2007-09-14
Folks, I know we're on quite

Folks, I know we're on quite a hot topic here, but I suggest that we should all try to be a bit cooler and relaxed about all this. After all we're all friends, sort of. Right?

Of course we all know that a lot of shit is going on this world. Ever has and always will be. Some countries have more shit on their hands, my homecountry, Germany, used to be digging in it up to the ellbows in the early 20th century, the Americans now have to stick their nose into every crap they're not supposed to be interested in, etc. etc.

The big (big big big) problem I see here is that we can't prove a shit. Of course there's a lot of bright people there coming up with information from sources that might be relyable, or not. Who knows if, for example, some ex-CIA-guy really tells the truth about things going totally wacky in the agency? Maybe he's just pissed off because he was fired and now wants to pee on somebody's shoes. But maybe he really tells the truth. We don't know, we can't validate.
And that's the point. We can't validate. We can neither validate the "official" version, nor the "lunatic" version (I don't want to call anybody here or elsewhere a lunatic, I just pick up this expression for this point.).
But what we can do is to live out our freedom of believing what we want to believe. And this is a fundamental freedom nobody can take away from you.

Most people believe the default opinion because it's channeled to them everyday to the media. That's the sheep, which we have so many off on this planet.
Some people believe the "conspiracy theories", because they really sound plausible, because they are disappointed of some government, because ... of the wonderful wizard of Oz...
And some people believe the default opinion because they simply believe that it's that way. Maybe not 100%, but more or less.

And I think that the only group who's doing it wrong is the first one, because they just blindly follow what Tellievision tells them, without thinking about it.
The other two groups are living out their freedom to choose which opinion they want to believe. And as long nobody can prove either side wrong, with undeniable evidence, which is very (very very very) unlikely to happen, they can all believe that they are right.

So, who are we to tell people which opinion to believe? I think in this particular case we are nobody! Why? Because we cannot fucking prove anything! We are better in telling people about the advantages of a free computing environment; much better.
But still, I don't say we shouldn't discuss this kind of topic. Of course we can, and we should. Why? Because it's our freedom to do so! But we should respect each others opinions, without taking out the shirt saying "I'm with stupid ->".

Really folks, all that shit is far beyond our reach. And I think it's not worth it to get a goddamn headache about something we simply cannot change. We don't have to like and neither accept the default opinion, but we must not discriminate those who, by decision, believe it.
What we can do is try to make a difference where we can. There's so much bad stuff going on right around all of us. Be a good example for children, your own or others, be active in a community, help old people learn to use computers (preferably with free software). We can do so much good, and we can make a difference, but we simply cannot make it in a large scale like that, it's just beyond reach.
That it is beyond reach (maybe I said this already, I don't remember, if so please forgive my confused mind), doesn't mean we shouldn't care. By far not. If we stop caring we stop thinking and turn into...? Right, sheep! And I don't want to be a sheep, because the biggest advantage of a sheep for me is that it makes a great BBQ! But we might try to "care a bit less", just so much that our heads stop pounding, but still we keep thinking about what different sources tell us, and try to fine-tune our bullshit-detectors every time we see, read or hear something new. There's still enough time to get a headache when shit is rolling your way; and the question is not "if", the question is "when" (no, I'm not talking asteroids here).

By the way, what I missed to mention in my first post (I talked too much, so I forgot to mention it) is that I didn't watch Zeitgeist (yet). I am not sure if I will watch it. The discussion so far is heated enough, and I pretty much have my opinion of what's going on in the world, without having to watch Zeitgeist or the latest "Uncle Sam wants you"-collection.

Well, this time without links to Monty Python sketches, Mayday Anthems and other music, but I hope my point is clear. If not, feel free to ask.
This post got a lot longer than I intended, but in this situation it just came out like that, and it felt right. It is totally unreviewed, has not been written top-down (you should see me write posts like this, you'd laugh your asses off over the way I bounce through the text and add a paragraph here and another one there), but it's 100% honest.

I still suggest that you follow the links of my previous post, maybe they'll help to calm down some heated tempers. ;-) Or watch some South Park, that always helps me.

Okay, enough confusing stuff from my side. I hope you read it carefully and try to see a meaning in all this.

User offline. Last seen 11 years 31 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 2004-08-23
Here's a page that kills the
memenode's picture
User offline. Last seen 10 weeks 2 days ago. Offline
Joined: 2004-07-12
tbuitenh wrote: Its
tbuitenh wrote:

Its arguments about equivalences between religions are very shaky at best, and totally unnecessary to make the point about American style Christianity it wants to make.

Well I agree they aren't really necessary, though I still wonder what makes them shaky.. Personally what was presented in the first part of the documentary for me is pretty much a last nail in a coffin of religion for me, with or without such comparisons. Parallels with astrology which are quite amazing pretty much did it for me.

tbuitenh wrote:

All it says about 9/11 is a VERY selective choice from the hundreds of different things people have said about those events, and it presents that selective choice as the absolute truth.

What you're basically saying is that they have an upfront message and they're merely finding and presenting evidence that supports this. Then of course it is selective! It's like making a claim and then after being challenged to back it up with some valid arguments and/or evidence you do so, if you have any.

So what you're saying here is pretty much irrelevant. What is relevant is whether the evidence selected and shown really is valid or not. Contrasted with the official story which may or may not have its own evidence or arguments we can use the same argument of "it was forged" or "it was selected" against both. This proves neither side as right. I'm not saying, however, that one side might not have more compelling arguments and evidence than the other. In fact, I've gotten convinced that the Zeitgeist side here actually has more to offer.

But if arguments and evidence don't do it, leaving both sides fairly equal then I suggest using your own logic and reasoning - what makes more sense? That's where we can disagree, but obviously I am coming to believe that it does make sense that the 9/11 incident is not what we are told it was.

tbuitenh wrote:

Again "proving" who is at fault for 9/11 is irrelevant.

Well I simply disagree, as I already said. Knowledge is power. The current state of confusion only helps delay and weaken the movement for change. If people knew what exactly happened there they will be better equipped and motivated to act, adding to the power of the movement, not to mention the mass awakening that could be happening if everyone actually knew that for a while there they've been had - it inspires greater vigilance and pursuit of awareness in the future. I just wouldn't write that off as irrelevant.

tbuitenh wrote:

I guess others will hate me for saying this, but 9/11 was just a minor event in comparison to the processes it is part of, which were already going on long before it.

You sound like you believe the basic premise of the story, unless the process you are referring to is something else than I'm thinking off. But the statement itself is something I can agree with.

However, even if it is minor in comparison to the processes, it can still be significant enough for the uncovering of its truth to be important. And the reasons are what I said above. No matter how "minor" it is compared to something else, it is still huge. Earth is minor to our sun and our sun is minor to betelgeuse.. etc.. It is still big for us.

And yes, that does underscore the importance of discussing the process as well. If 9/11 was a huge symptom of a process, one which can help motivate people to discuss the process and gain insight to it, then the process itself is incredibly more significant, absolutely essential to analyse.

tbuitenh wrote:

I don't care much whether the poor excuse for all of that was fake or real.

That goes in the same vein of the above.. I understand what you mean about the fake/real nature of the incident not making much of a difference to the sole fact that it is used as an excuse to do some terrible things. I just don't agree that it is completely unbeneficial and irrelevant to uncover what the exact nature of it was. Let's put it like this. As long as that matter remains unclear it will be much easier for people to dismiss whichever case we present them with. There are still many people in the world, for example, which believe in certain justifications to war. I have even spoken to some American soldiers on an IRC channel who still believe that the Iraq war can be justified.

I suppose that I do believe that cheesy saying: "the truth shall set you free". One will be a much more compelling anti-Iraq-war activist, for example, if (s)he knew the truth of 9/11 than if his/her answer to that question was "I don't know, it's irrelevant".

Besides, I think it is fair to say that the 9/11 event still can get people fired up enough to actually get involved. You may consider this to be foolish human nature (always needing some sort of an emotional bait), but that's how it is. We are all humans. I don't see any wrongs in mobilizing people to care by suggesting that the official 9/11 story is not necessarily the one that is true, and pursuing what really did happen. Heck, there's been a great amount of work on that already and some have already presented their conclusions, hence Zeitgeist. You may or may not believe it, ultimately, but everyone will decide for themselves. In any case it is better that it was done, that it is getting people to rise up, than if we just sat there and ranted "ohh the process is that matters, not the symptoms, so you should bla bla.. " We need something concrete to chew on, not some abstract ideas, and through these concrete cases we can more easily get to grasp the abstract ideas as well and hold on to them.

tbuitenh wrote:

So, it's using poor arguments (conspiracy nonsense style arguments even) to get to a correct (although maybe overexaggerated) conclusion.

So it comes down to your disagreement with the method rather than the result. And the method is what I've been talking about just above. I still think it is too harsh to dismiss even those arguments as "conspiracy nonsense". But, if you believe they are poor arguments to get to the same conclusion, do you have any better ones, aside from pointing to the abstract idea of there being a process... Which process? Give me something concrete. How would you get people to question their authorities more? How would you get people to become more suspicious of the media? How would you get people to rise up against the continued uniting of the world based on false pretenses and around corrupted values? How do you stop war?

These are some tough questions. I think in the end you may realize that merely theorizing is not going to help, that you in fact need marketing.. oh.. indeed propaganda - the same thing I've conceded to using to promote Free Software. But to do this effectively I don't think you can ignore the sensitive issues such as 9/11 and what their truth was.

tbuitenh wrote:

But please use real arguments instead of this one-sided fear mongering propaganda crap that will only drive the unconvinced away from what IS the right conclusion.

What fear mongering? Mentioning RFID chips? I guess ones fear mongering is anothers warning. The first would dismiss it as "oh gosh stop scaring me" and the other would thankfully say "good you brought this to my attention, it's indeed very important to be aware off". So please define fear mongering and then point to where it has been occurring.

I guess what you want is an un-emotional debate about what is essentially a very emotional topic, and it really is if it revolves around the notion that we have been continuously manipulated without even being fully aware of it. You may be completely cold headed about that, but with that, but some of us do feel that their dignity as human beings has been so severely violated.

Emotions are human.

__________________

Daniel Memenode signature

memenode's picture
User offline. Last seen 10 weeks 2 days ago. Offline
Joined: 2004-07-12
Ok, thanks, I guess that's

Ok, thanks, I guess that's where I can find some reason why you think they are shaky. Smiling

As said in my previous post, whether comparisons with other religions are true or not is not as relevant to me as the arguments and evidence which make religion as a whole not something I should live by and accept, at least to me personally. Bible has been quite incredible and sometimes convincing, as you well know, but the astrological parallels, quite unexpectedly precise at that, really throws it off course for me...

__________________

Daniel Memenode signature

memenode's picture
User offline. Last seen 10 weeks 2 days ago. Offline
Joined: 2004-07-12
Well I apologize if I

Well I apologize if I offended anyone. You're damn right it's an emotional topic. When I was watching the movie quite a few times I was literally mad with anger and incredibly sad at the same time. We can talk all we want about semantics, but if the answer to the following question is "yes" then I think every one of us has a full right to scream and cry his soul out if you feel that way:

"Have we been manipulated so severely that we served as willing pawns in somebody elses plan for personal empowerement at the expense of the whole world?"

Yes I have. I am a very sympathetic man. I loved what I perceived USA was some years ago. The day 9/11 happened I was in awe and felt quite compassionate for US people and actually supported USA in whatever activities they will take to stop this new kind of threat.. Today I feel utterly ashamed of ever holding such thoughts. I feel I was brainwashed and manipulated. And to think, how many other people have felt the same way, supporting the agenda which led to such destructions like ones in Iraq and Afghanistan as well as the worldwide (not just US) chilling effects on freedom.

Oh indeed, there is plenty to be emotional about. And it is these emotions which drive us to try to make a difference, to be more suspicious and rebellious in the future against any authority who may try to brainwash us again for their dirty purposes.

reptiler wrote:

We can do so much good, and we can make a difference, but we simply cannot make it in a large scale like that, it's just beyond reach.

Very true. In fact, what movies and materials like this one ultimately lead me towards is an understanding of the possibility of formation of an ultimate movement for freedom and individual empowerment and against authority as a fraud, against manipulation of human beings, centralization of power, war and greed.

This movement is envisioned as one that will be formed on top of what we know as a Free Software movement, because software is a technological tool that empowers individuals. On top of that are then Free Culture movements, Free Speech/expression movements and all the various sub movements including the 9/11 Truth Movement which encourages people to really "snap out of it" and doubt the default message so that they can more easily proceed to crush down the old system that is moving us all in a bad direction..

I've heard that one way to go in USA is to vote for Ron Paul (also apparently a favourite of many geeks), but I'm not american and this is just something I saw on one of these sites. Supposedly he is to end the war in Iraq and cancel the federal reserve system, which is already a great way forward..

But there is so much more needed.. EU must be abolished or reformed into a real decentralized union. There is no third option. North American Union must be discussed more than it is, to gain insight into its real nature and oppose it if it is anyhow suggesting the centralization of power. Same goes for Asian and African unions.

Even if you don't believe in everything some of the participants of this new meta-movement are saying, if you see a common thread, you should participate. So if you don't care about what 9/11 was, but still see the process that is going on which is common to what most others in this movement see, participate! On the same token, if you for example don't believe all software should be free, you're still eligible to participate in this big movement. We don't have to agree on all the details, but as long as we all see that the general direction of the world is towards MORE centralization of power, uniting for the benefit of an elite rather than all people, warring as a business model and continuous dramatic restrictions of freedom - we can unite in this big anti movement - anti-what? Against the direction we are being taken in.

__________________

Daniel Memenode signature

User offline. Last seen 11 years 31 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 2004-08-23
If you want to get angry

If you want to get angry about something for which there is real evidence, just read all the freedom depriving laws that have been passed everywhere, and look up in the news archives which reasons politicians cited for introducing them. Those are hard facts for which there simply is no excuse.

The processes I talked about are not only the erosion of freedoms, but also the world conflicts that have been going on for a much longer time already.

From the things I've read written by those who disagree with part 1, I am now convinced that part is complete bullshit, and most of it directly copied from a book written by some new age loony. That doesn't invalidate parts 2 and 3, but it sure casts a shadow.

About parts 2 and 3, I agree we are ruled by money, and those with money are a big influence on plans for unifying the world for all the wrong reasons, and I agree no further.

User offline. Last seen 11 years 31 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 2004-08-23
Another interesting related

Another interesting related url: http://www.debunking911.com

memenode's picture
User offline. Last seen 10 weeks 2 days ago. Offline
Joined: 2004-07-12
tbuitenh wrote:If you want
tbuitenh wrote:

If you want to get angry about something for which there is real evidence, just read all the freedom depriving laws that have been passed everywhere, and look up in the news archives which reasons politicians cited for introducing them. Those are hard facts for which there simply is no excuse.

Well.. indeed.

tbuitenh wrote:

From the things I've read written by those who disagree with part 1, I am now convinced that part is complete bullshit, and most of it directly copied from a book written by some new age loony.

Yah "new age loony" is just your own subjective expression here apparently put in as an incentive for dismissal. Again, and as I've said on IRC too, this is the kind of thing I don't really like. It's fine to disagree. It's fine to put forth arguments and evidence that disprove a certain theory. But throwing adjectives like that around helps noone.

And sorry to be so critical. Also as said on IRC, we're different, we have different ways of exploring and searching and we both agree that dogmas are bad so don't usually get stuck on one perception of truth or one theory too long, but there is a better way to address someone who is considering a certain theory that you disagree with than throwing adjectives and labels that call for outright dismissal instead of constructive observation.

And thanks for that 911 debunking link. Interesting stuff. I'm still not regretting that I watched Zeitgeist. It's nice to be shocked every once in a while so we can keep awake and vigilant. And many of the things in Zeitgeist I still consider to be quite close to the truth while the final conclusion is something I would definitely accept as a good one. "Love of power" vs. "Power of love"

I still recommend everyone who didn't, to watch Zeitgeist. Of course, do keep your critical eye fully functional. Think for yourself.

__________________

Daniel Memenode signature

User offline. Last seen 11 years 31 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 2004-08-23
I might write "someone who

I might write "someone who makes up their own facts" instead of "loony"...

memenode's picture
User offline. Last seen 10 weeks 2 days ago. Offline
Joined: 2004-07-12
After reading some further

After reading some further reviews and comments on this movie, not surprisingly, it made quite an impact. A lot of the people say that there is at least some misinformation in this movie while others agree with it. But most of them would apparently concede that it is a good "jolt" of encouragement to think for ourselves and be more suspicious of what we're being told and how we're being led.

In fact, it appears that even the actual authors of Zeitgeist don't necessary put the content of the videos as absolute truth that needs no questioning. The end of a statement page says:

Quote:

It is my hope that people will not take what is said in the film as the truth, but find out for themselves, for truth is not told, it is realized.

Seems fair enough to me, albeit the movie is quite suggestive in itself. It is a little bit paradoxical in that it is definitely propaganda, but with a message that essentially encourages not readily believing propaganda. It is almost like a test. They give you an incredibly compelling piece of propaganda that at the same time tells you not to believe it out right leaving it up to you to resist its own appeal and check for the truths yourself, to use your brain instead of just keeping ignorant and entertained.

In any case, while I initially mostly fell for it, I am a little bit more suspicious of the content. I still think a lot of what it says makes sense and that the final conclusion and intended result are good things though.

Some review links (comments are especially interesting):

http://www.boingboing.net/2007/08/06/jay-kinney-reviews-z.html
http://thegreatrealization.wordpress.com/2007/06/29/zetigeist-movie/
http://www.rustylime.com/show_article.php?id=549

__________________

Daniel Memenode signature

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.