Zeitgeist Movie.

OmegaRED

Regular people are stupid and will believe anything. I'd rather let smart people (like Popular Mechanics) dissect the theories to find the truth...big surprise it's usually the most obvious explanation (ie terrorists).

[hobo]eclipse

o cmon omega get real, people cant be regular and smart? (whoever defines people as smart and regular anyway?)

OmegaRED

As George Carlin wisely says: "Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that."

[hobo]eclipse

and the other half then......?

Talk about troll'n up a topic

Falstaff

if that were true then we all are stupid sir, I think otherwise, but your entitled to your opinion, I give most the benefit of the doubt. But I am not sure how you measure wisdom, but my benchmark is pretty high and just admitting your not as smart as you think you are is one step closer to being smarter.

OmegaRED

We're all ignorant or stupid about something, I used to believe in everything from angels to Loch Ness Monster, I understand how people fall for this crap. The only measure of wisdom I know of right now (at this point in my life) is to attempt to see the world for what it really is and limit the amount of illusions and fantasies that I believe in.

Well excuuuuuuuuuuse me

I didn't mean to interrupt this ongoing investigation. I'll step aside and let you Zeitgeist crusaders open our eyes to the truth.

Falstaff

a man's life must be shaped by the knowlege that he embraced

[hobo]eclipse

Just look at all these Architectural and Engineering Professional who don't want to accuse anybody of anything, but would like a new investigation because with their knowledge of the architectural and engineering laws they find it very hard to believe the "official story".

This only about 1/3 to 1/2 of the people listed here not to mention there is also pilots and scholars for 911 truth

OmegaRED

Compile a list of architects and engineers who support the official version of the events to make it fair. I imagine the list would be 100 times as long which is why no one has tried

[hobo]eclipse

none the less, would it make these professionals opinions any less valid?

Wouldn't such a drastic difference in the opinions of professionals on the same subject just scream to let science speak and have a true investigation where all sides are granted the same access to express their beliefs/concerns/facts into the accounts of the day?

Reckless187

Just remember that anything that goes against the thinking of the majority is considered weird, lies & a conspiracy theory & is always 100% wrong because strange & weird things never happen in this world of ours. It's pointless even having a discussion like this as the subject matter will always be just a theory as there is hardly ever enough evidence to prove otherwise or it's been well covered up, sorry, not covered up as that sort of thing never happens.

Judas

Actually, we live in a sociaty that is spoon fed our information through TV and magazines, newspapers and any other media.

A considerable amount of information that "counters" what the majority have read or have understood for so long is usually burnt alive before it can gets it's head outa the ground..... barried over and over again.


IMO, everyone is stupid, that's a fact, we are all really really stupid creatures, just some are smarter then others at some things.

What i would like to see,

That list, incorrporating EVERYONE that is in those proffesions around the world, devided into 3 thirds, the ones that are damn sure this shit didn't go down like it should have, the ones that know are the fence knowing the official story is bullshit, and the side that is pro brainwashing imo.

I would be the least serprised that there is more in the middle then the 2 other sides combined, and i would be the bit surprised if the 2 competeing sides had either similare numbers, OR, the "official story" side has LESS.....

Kazeko

Many things and there may be two posts.


1. Was 9/11 plotted by the U.S Government, as Andrew Russo wants you to believe?

So what? - What if it was?

It identifies Democracy as a massive failure to prevent coercive control. (which the US Media already does, Youtube and Andrew Russo included.)

Also... what happens if it's identified as false? We just burn the politicians at the stake and move on?

Rather than focus on your emotions that have been flared by the sanctioned violation of your free will, how's about we ask "Well, if that's the case, then what do we do with it?"

2. Here's your first GLARING INACCURACY.

The people who said they were IRS agents and couldn't find where, taxes were written into law...?

First, The 16th amendment, which was officially ratified by 42 states, where only 36 were necessary. Ohio, which was not officially recognized as a state when the amendment was ratified, is irrelevant, as you still have another 5 states that ratified the amendment.

Second,
United States Code; Title 26 IS the Internal Revenue Code.
You can find it in Westlaw, Lexisnexis, or on the IRS.Gov website or at ANY local library.

This, is a GREAT example of what I mentioned in #1, above. - People don't look before they believe. People will accept ANYTHING as fact without trying to find out if what they've been told is even correct.

Those proclaimed IRS agents, are no longer employed by the IRS, because they lacked the mental faculty required for their respective positions.

Should you require, I'd gladly bring to light the MULTITUDE of court cases, that have tried these arguments already, before a jury, and failed.

Don't forget. Al Capone went to jail for Tax Evasion. NOT Racketeering or any other crime. TAX EVASION.


3. The Security and Protection Partnership is an initiative (NOT AN ACT) intended to prevent drug smuggling and to protect Intellectual Property Rights between Canada, the US and Mexico.

IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH CURRENCY. Again, this is publicly available information. Lou Dobbs, and CNN were lying through their teeth to get ratings, because CNN AND OTHER NEWS AGENCIES ARE FOR-PROFIT BUSINESSES THAT WANT YOU TO WATCH THEIR STATION AND RECOGNIZE THEIR BUSINESS.

And they got EXACTLY what they were looking for.

3. I've already cited the inherent fallacies in the arguments against the Federal Reserve Bank (which includes the Federal Reserves of other countries and their purpose) in previous posts. Suffice it to say that the value of a dollar is synonymous with production, and those who produce - Businesses.
When the value of the dollar drops, US companies win, foreign companies lose. This is the very reason that the FRB has sought to push the value of the US dollar down for the last thirty years - it's good for US companies.

Go look at Toyota's massive profit loss and stock drop in the US over the last two years and ask yourself why, when they're the most popular car on the road.


4. The sad truth is; Russo is preaching anarchy as a form of socialism. - Corporate America (The FRB) gets nothing, the Government gets nothing, and subsequently, neither do the people. Exonerate the proletariat, and trash business and government - Organization.


Here's my quote for the night.

"Each activity and each need of the individual will thereby be regulated by the party as the representative of the general good. (Democracy) There will be no license, no free space, in which the individual belongs to himself. This is socialism, not such trifles as the private possession of the means of production. (Property) Of what importance is that, if I range men firmly within a discipline they cannot escape? Let them then own land, or factories as much as they please. The decisive factor is that the state, through the party, is supreme over them, regardless whether they are owners or workers. All that, you see, is unessential. Our socialism goes far deeper...

The people about us are unaware of what is really happening to them. They gaze fascinated at one or two familiar superficialities, such as possessions and income and rank and other outworn conceptions. As long as these are kept intact, they are quite satisfied. But in the meantime, they have entered a new relation; a powerful social force has caught them up. They themselves are changed. What are ownership and income to that? Why need we trouble to socialize banks, and factories? We socialize human beings."

I won't say who I just quoted. Only that this quote is the scariest thing that I've EVER come across in my life. I hope that someone understands why I quoted this.


Leaders, are still that. They lead people incapable of leading themselves.


Humans are beings of Volitional Consciousness. Rational thought requires cognitive effort. It does not happen automatically, like the beating of your heart.

Zeitgeist conveys emotion. If you agree with it, without asking "WTF?" first, then you've given up your capacity for rational thought, and subsequently - your Free Will.



"Who is John Galt?"

(Note: Do not confuse Libertarians with Radical Capitalists.)

RSOblivion

@Kazeko - Thanks for pointing out the codes regarding the IRS. One slight problem though, its only minor and most people yell semantics whenever its mentioned, but does any of the IRS documents pertain to a man? So far all I have read in Australian documents (and many US documents) pertain to Persons, Individuals and Corporate bodies. So how does it apply to a man?

First you need a definition of Persons & Individuals to understand where I am coming from. Blacks 1st edition describes Persons as "Bodies Corporate or Bodies Politic". That isn't a man. They are legal fictions created to describe entities which can only exist on paper in writing rather than physically as a living breathing bloke.
Individuals are men who are directly in the employ of the Governing body or residing within a military base (actual wording is fort but the terminology is updated). Now that means again that your average man is not eligible to pay tax. Though it does mean that 1/3 of all Americans are eligible to pay tax as the Government is the largest employer in the States.

At no point have I found or been noticed that a man is eligible to pay any of his hard earned assets to the government. Even the Constitution protects against this, though an amendment did let the floodgates open for abuse of the tax system which was only ever designed to be used upon Governmental employees and businesses.

Kazeko

My immediate response (without pouring through tax code and US Code) is this.


It's already been tried in 2006, in two different contexts.

Internal Revenue Bulletin (IRB) 2006-15.
Internal Revenue Bulletin - April 10, 2006 - Rev. Rul. 2006-18

Similar case, slightly different context.
#06-345: 06-02-06 Federal Court Halts Tax Evasion Scheme


The same issue discussed in IRB 2006-15, was also previously tried in 1994, in the case of Pabon v Commissioner.


Were I to call you an "Employee" the accuracy of my statement would not be far from the truth. You are an employee. The relativity provided by the subjective definition of your employer is assumed in context.

Edit: 05/13/2008
Further definitions and clarifications. To directly answer the question regarding "a person..."

The Truth About Frivolous Tax Arguments - Section I

The relevant case law is included therein.

Mores to the point, I would ask two simple questions.

1. Have you ever read the 16th amendment? Like, the document it's self? It's pretty clear what the definitions of "Persons, Individuals and Corporate Bodies" are intended to mean.

2. If the US Government IS exploiting the tax system, then draw a few conclusions.
A. Over 52% of the total INCOME tax revenue (not including what's collected in social security, or from corporate america) collected by the US Government is paid for by people who make over $350k annually. Who's covering the $542 BILLION dollar gap if this is the case? Federal Employees? The ACTUAL approximate of Federal Employees (excluding the US Postal Service) is 1.8 million, or about .59% of the United States' 304 million people. - Decimal points make a BIG difference. The Federal Government doesn't even pay that amount to all of it's federal employees combined, as wages. Mores to the point, why would they not just reduce federal pay scales by a certain percentage, if ONLY federal employees were subject to tax?

B. Social Welfare programs are out the door. All the federally provided subsidies, assistance etc, is GONE. So, Pick your poison. Pay taxes, or place social welfare program recipients (like TANF, Supplemental Security Income, Social Security/Disability Insurance etc) on the street.


Please note: My purpose here, is to destroy the BS conspiracy theory wrought by concrete-bound, context dropping, whim-worshiping sects of both the left AND the right who cling to the idea that "THE MAN IS OUT TO GET YOU AND CONTROL YOUR LIFES." (And I don't agree with any of them!)

End Edit.

Conspiracy Theory, is the most irrational, baseless, mystical (Pardon the language) Bullshit I have ever come across.

Why?
Because if what conspiracy theorists say is true, and the political leaders are out to control you in a Matrix-like fashion, they're doing a damned good job of it, and you should be impressed. You should be giving people more credit than that.


Protip: I don't agree with the tax system either. But my reasons aren't as simple as defrauding the IRS through "nit-picky" interpretations of tax code. My aim, is to change the whole system. (I'm not trying to de-value your argument, btw. Merely citing that the interpretation is menutia. You agree or disagree with the system. If you disagree, then identify what you disagree with, and identify what's necessary to change it, how you think it SHOULD be, even if it means NO taxation period. The prospect of finding "loopholes" in the tax law to avoid paying taxes in the first place, is like chasing your own tail. You're not really accomplishing ANYTHING.



Also don't forget: If it worked, don't you think H&R Block, or Jackson & Hewitt would have figured it out already? Save yourself the $25,000 dollar fine.

RSOblivion

lol I like the detail you go into. Finally someone who actually reads what they write and has a belief that makes sense. However I disagree with you conspiracy statement. When does a theory become a conspiracy theory (with the stigma attached to that label)?

For the IRS (pardon my ignorance on USA IRS codes and law but I'm an Aussie and lived in the UK for many years, only stopped in LA once for a couple of hours) they use their semantic arguements and crap in court all the time, yet when used against them they point out intentions and assumptions that the alleged offender is assumed to have known (in some cases not all I might add ). This leads to rather bad levels of inaccuracy when it comes to case law, especially when the entire legal system uses the IRS as a valuable tool (how else could they invent all this money from the charging of people with criminal acts when no criminal act has been committed), its not gonna burn its own tool for obvious reasons. Very few judges/magistrates or whatever would stand against the IRS due to far too much political clout wielded by the organisation.

TBH I am not fussed about the ATO (Australian Tax Office) as here they made a rather huge blunder. They were never legally ratified to the position they hold. A freedom of information request sent to them to confirm their legal ratifications yielded a response that approx. said:
"Unfortunately we cannot comply with your request as the documents requested do not appear to exist. If we can be of any further help please let us know."
That mild statement holds the floodgates wide open as all you need to do is notice them with a letter stating that you are happy to fill in the forms requested upon proof that they have any jusrisdiction over you to compel you to do so, proof of jusridiction required.


I like your quote of Hitler. I raise you this:
"Fascism is capitalism in decay"
That is just as scary as yours with the implications for the western culture.

You are right about Zeitgeist coveying emotion. However without emotion we are nothing. Emotion gives us things to cherish (it used to be loved ones, though now people are more materialistic) as well as ideals to aspire to. However emotion can also override rational thought and therefore you need to be in control of your emotions to be able to have true rational thought. Nothing against OmegaRed, but in most of his posts in this thread there has been tons of emotion and not much other than belief in his statements. One springs to mind where he would take Popular Mechanics more seriously than the architect who disagrees with them. Thats a common thing with both sides of the story. People believe what they want and therefore create their own reality where that is correct.

Having seen the Popular Mechanics report and their second one too, I have looked at the alternative films as well and finally I did my own research into the collapsing of the Towers and comparisons to other demolitions and non-demolition collapses.
My findings while not an expert or even trying to sound like one did throw up interesting questions. The Towers definately did not come down in a classic demolition. If it was a demolition then there was far too much explosive used. Tower 7 can only be called a classic demolition, there is no other explanation. Having seen the alleged images of the inferno in the building, then listening to the fire fighters reports over the radio and the firefighters saying to the camera crews that its coming down, I would have to say that was a planned demolition. But how could they have set it up and planned it on the same day it was executed in the time frame they had? It takes days if not weeks to set up the explosive charges to drop a tower of that size yet it came down perfectly in its footprint within hours of the Towers falling.
Back to the towers. Again no collapse I have seen occured as fast as those towers. 10s and 9s for the two tallest buildings. That is basically freefall. You look at the projected times for pancake collapses and you find that 30s to 1m30s is the projected time. 30s being the fastest possible due to the resistance of the floors colliding and then moving again with the least resistance possible for the collapse. 1m30s was a more realistic time according to the information I have seen.

This is just one of the many aspects involved in the Tower collapses. Another would be the heat weakening of the structure. This is completely up in the air between the two camps. The "Official" version stating it being the major causal factor after the planes collided. The Opposition pointing out that the temperatures needed for such justification are not possible with Jet fuel alone. Now that leaves 2 possibilities.
1)Either the fire was not the causal factor for the collapse of the top sections of the Towers causing the rest of the collapse.
2)The fire was the causal factor. This unfortunately leads to what was on fire that could cause such high temps to melt the beams in the Towers.
The explanation given that the office equipment and the jet fuel can burn hot enough to melt it is not satisfactory. Many metallurgists have debunked that official claim. So that means either the planes had something on them that burnt extremely hot, that the extremely high temp material was present in the building already or that something else caused the beams to give way.
I don't know which it is for sure but I have my suspicions.

Anyway thats enough for the moment I have to go make Crysis run better