Anything Forums

Zeitgeist

So I just watched this documentary, "Zeitgeist the movie". I have to say I don't know how to feel about it. It makes some fantastic claims, kinda scary. Most of it seems pretty logical to me, but the skeptic in me thinks it all fits together too well. And as I haven't (and probably never will) done all the research I'm kinda halfway between "holy crap that's scary" and "holy crap those are some crackpot theories".

It's worth a watch though, it'll get you thinking if nothing else.

The movie clocks in at almost 2 hours and comes in 3 parts, the first looking at religion (specifically Christianity) and traces them to astrological origins, and particularly noting the similarities between Jesus Christ and Horus of Egyptian mythology.

The second part talks about 9/11 and speculates at it being orchestrated by our own government in order to launch a war in the middle east and pick away at our civil rights.

The third part (where it really starts getting strange) pulls it all together with a world domination plot by international bankers. Yeah, that's right, I said world domination plot. The thing is, by the time I got to that part, as skeptical as I was, I couldn't say it was BS outright. I'm by no means a believer, but the idea that it could be possible scares me. And at the same time I know that I'm being lead upon a path from the plausible to the fantastic. I guess I need to do me some research.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:3310, old post ID:60256

The problem is that a lot of people who watch films like these don't seem to understand that a decent filmmaker and screenwriter will construct a convenient set of "facts", imagery, and questions to implant their own logic or way of thinking into the viewer. Michael Moore does it expertly, the creators of "Loose Change" did a fair job, and after reading various other little conspiracy plots (be they about the Illuminati, communist takeovers, corporate evils, etc.) it can be very difficult to step away and NOT be as skeptical as you ought to be.

The fact is, we'll never know ever detail about what happened on 9/11. However, when there is primarily speculation and little to no hard evidence to back up a position, it becomes undefeatable. You can neither prove, nor disprove a negative - that's why religion still exists and will always exist.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:3310, old post ID:60272

Lot of people don't seem to like moore but after watching a couple of his films I'd have to say he's good at what he does. We don't have to agree 100% with everything, but definately lot of things he reveils are eye openers.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:3310, old post ID:60285

Even former Moore fans don't like Moore. He's deceptive - conveniently leaves thing out and even weaves deliberately false or misleading scenes to make you think a certain way about something. Whether or not the same can be said of his new one, "Sicko", I refuse to put any more money in his already swollen pocketbook.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:3310, old post ID:60286

As far as sicko is concerned, sure it's not telling the whole truth, he's cherry picking which stories he speaks about in the movie, not to mention the falir for the dramatic. BUt there are a few thigns you can't overlook.

1) the Healthcare industry is a for profit industry with shareholders whose interests they must keep above all else. And also, Healthcare companies make more money the fewer claims they pay out. You can argue that they cannot deny too many claims because the market will strike back. But you cannot deny that their concern is money and when it comes to health that's kinda bad.

2) Universal Healthcare systems can work. If they couldn't, France, Canada, the UK, Cuba, etc would've dropped them by now.

3) Healthcare companies don't like the idea of Universal healthcare.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:3310, old post ID:60292

Stasi wrote: The problem is that a lot of people who watch films like these don't seem to understand that a decent filmmaker and screenwriter will construct a convenient set of "facts", imagery, and questions to implant their own logic or way of thinking into the viewer.  Michael Moore does it expertly, the creators of "Loose Change" did a fair job, and after reading various other little conspiracy plots (be they about the Illuminati, communist takeovers, corporate evils, etc.) it can be very difficult to step away and NOT be as skeptical as you ought to be.

The fact is, we'll never know ever detail about what happened on 9/11.  However, when there is primarily speculation and little to no hard evidence to back up a position, it becomes undefeatable.  You can neither prove, nor disprove a negative - that's why religion still exists and will always exist.

Yeah, I see what you mean. The creators list their sources, but even their sources look kinda sketchy.

I am convinced, however, that the government hasn't told us every thign they know about 9/11 (and probably never will). And it is rather convenient how they've used the tragedy to such great effect in justifying war, sweeping grabs for presidential power, and the loss of privacy and civil rights.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:3310, old post ID:60293

manadren wrote: As far as sicko is concerned, sure it's not telling the whole truth, he's cherry picking which stories he speaks about in the movie, not to mention the falir for the dramatic. BUt there are a few thigns you can't overlook.

1) the Healthcare industry is a for profit industry with shareholders whose interests they must keep above all else. And also, Healthcare companies make more money the fewer claims they pay out. You can argue that they cannot deny too many claims because the market will strike back. But you cannot deny that their concern is money and when it comes to health that's kinda bad.

2) Universal Healthcare systems can work. If they couldn't, France, Canada, the UK, Cuba, etc would've dropped them by now.

3) Healthcare companies don't like the idea of Universal healthcare.

Well sure, I generally agree with these points, but at the same time, I question whether the government should be the entity that provides everyone with the service. I believe everyone should be guaranteed healthcare coverage until they're 18. After that, I have no qualms with a wholly, or mostly privatized system so long as there are competent regulations and oversight on the industry.

I have not exhaustively studied the healthcare systems of Canada, France, etc. so I really don't know how much waste goes on, or where it falls short, etc. I do know that the AMA has conducted studies and believes that universal health care can have a positive effect on a population's health. Though, with so many innovations and discoveries occurring in the medical front here, I'm not sure if that's a function of the privatized nature of it, or what.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:3310, old post ID:60311

manadren wrote:

Stasi wrote: The problem is that a lot of people who watch films like these don't seem to understand that a decent filmmaker and screenwriter will construct a convenient set of "facts", imagery, and questions to implant their own logic or way of thinking into the viewer.  Michael Moore does it expertly, the creators of "Loose Change" did a fair job, and after reading various other little conspiracy plots (be they about the Illuminati, communist takeovers, corporate evils, etc.) it can be very difficult to step away and NOT be as skeptical as you ought to be.

The fact is, we'll never know ever detail about what happened on 9/11.  However, when there is primarily speculation and little to no hard evidence to back up a position, it becomes undefeatable.  You can neither prove, nor disprove a negative - that's why religion still exists and will always exist.

Yeah, I see what you mean. The creators list their sources, but even their sources look kinda sketchy.

I am convinced, however, that the government hasn't told us every thign they know about 9/11 (and probably never will). And it is rather convenient how they've used the tragedy to such great effect in justifying war, sweeping grabs for presidential power, and the loss of privacy and civil rights.

I agree. It is plausible that the government either orchestrated it or was deliberately negligent in doing anything with the intelligence they did have beforehand, but to assert that this is the case is a strong accusation. In any case, since we're talking about the Bush Administration here, I'd lean more towards incompetence than deliberate wrongdoing.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:3310, old post ID:60312