Zeitgeist Addendum**must see**

[elirien]

Originally Posted by googleboy

or this one:

Venus is synonymous with the old Testament name Lucifer.


and here is a good read

The new Zeitgeist film features and is seemingly dedicated to a man named Jacque Fresco. He is the man behind the Venus Project. It’s been my belief for a while now that Peter Joesph and most of those behind ZG are Mystery School Initiates and more specifically Theosophists.

Now, what does this have to do with the cybernetic/mystical symbol above? Please reread my initial post and then read the following taken from a PDF file on the Venus Project’s home page enitled, Imagining the Cybernetic City: The Venus Project.

Having identified today’s problems as technical in nature it is not surprising that Fresco foresees a cybernated society where as ‘AI develops, machines will be assigned the tasks of complex decision-making in industrial, military and governmental affairs … This would not imply a take-over by machines’ (Ibidem 56).9

It won’t be a take-over because, as it is already argued – at various degrees of alarm and/or approval – within contemporary post-humanist discourse, ‘the division between living bodies and technology is increasingly difficult to maintain’ and ‘we are well on our way to becoming machinic’ (Armitage 1999, 2)10. In other words, we will become machine ourselves, our salvation as a species resides in the loss of our humanity as we know it: ‘When biological technology becomes further advanced, human beings as we know them, will become a modified species. If we as human beings fail to include the possibility of this development in our overall, social evolution we will witness the decline of our
species’ (Fresco 2002, 141).

Besides the obvious, that this type of communal living is based completely on socialism… ask yourself about the timing of this film with the economic turmoil of the hour. Ask yourself why PT1 of ZG attacking Christianity is exactly the same thing that Bill Cooper exposed as the teachings of the Mystery Schools before he was killed.

According to Alice Bailey’s The Externalization of the Hierarchy, “The new world order must be appropriate to a world which has passed through a destructive crisis and to a humanity which is badly
shattered by the experience.
”
The new world order must lay the foundation for a future world order which will be possible only after a time of recovery, of reconstruction, and of rebuilding.”

Don’t believe that everyone exposing the NWO is fighting on the right side of things. The NWO we’ve had revealed to us is the scapegoat for the coming NWO which will be billed as the kingdom of God.

Zeitgeist is all part of the global shift in consciousness that the Theosophists have been calling for, for well over a century. Lots of truth, but just enough BS to indoctrinate you into their train of thought.

There’s much more to Fresco than just a man that hates commercialism… then again, he charges a hundred bucks for a photo of one of his egg carton like homes, or space ages robo-builders.

Looks to me this “thing” shows a link between cybernetics and occultism that shouldn’t be overlooked. Especially when the core of Theosophy teaches that through science and technology the god of this world will be able to manifest. Their god, is named for Venus… and his name is Lucifer.

be well
GB

*****

Beautiful

Here you go guys. http://conspiracyclothes.com/nowhere...st_2review.wmv

Please watch this 14 minute video about Zeitgeist addendum if you liked the film. It gets a little deeper then what googleboy has written (which is very good imho). Thank you googleboy.

addendum :P : This is also a very interesting video about Zeitgeist http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vPXc1QcmYDY

[googleboy]

Originally Posted by elirien

Beautiful

It gets a little deeper then what googleboy has written (which is very good imho). Thank you googleboy.

it was just copy - paste work )
(someones else view that I liked...)

but thanks anyway


be well
GB

***

edit: typo

[Southsea]

A few hours ago I heard that Alex Jones is going to try and get the producer of Addendum on to his show to discuss the points raised by Alex, once he's satisfied himself about where they're coming from with it. I think AJ is just being protective, like any shepherd worth his salt.

Just my thoughts

[elirien]

Originally Posted by Southsea

A few hours ago I heard that Alex Jones is going to try and get the producer of Addendum on to his show to discuss the points raised by Alex, once he's satisfied himself about where they're coming from with it. I think AJ is just being protective, like any shepherd worth his salt.

Just my thoughts

I think that is a good idea to question the films motives though. Who better to answer then the producer/director/.. ? What do you think Alex is protecting?

[anonypony]

For those who have already seen Zeitgeist Addendum and are interested to know more about the world financial system and how it came to be, I recomend 'The money Masters'.

It is long and detailed documentary, but as I said if you are interested to know more, it is well worth watching. It is very well documented throuout and although it seems it was produced in the mid nineties, it is so relevant now!!!

The money masters can be viewed from here http://lawparadox.com/ top of the page

The more people understand how it really works, the better it is for us all!

[anonypony]

Last week a friend send me the 'Commons committee invites 'viewers' to send in questions' news item (see below). She wrote: "I reckon you might have some good questions for them"

I wrote back saying:

I will ask a succession of questions seeking short factual answers:

Q: Who does the British gov borrow the money from?

Q: Who owns the bank of England, the federal reserve, all other central and world banks including the IMF?

Q: Who issue the money the British gov borrows?

Q: Since most of world governments, their services and the assets of most people of this earth, are based on borrowed funds, who really owns the world?

Should be interesting.... If at all allowed...

Commons committee invites 'viewers' to send in questions

One of the privileges of being a member of a Commons select committee is that you get to interrogate ministers and other powerful figures. But now it seems that the Treasury select committee is contracting part of that job out to members of the public.

It's just sent out a press release saying that it's inviting members
of the public to submit questions to be put to Alistair Darling,
Mervyn King and Adair Turner at a subsequent hearing. I'm sure it
won't be quite the same as a radio phone-in – "Clive from Maidenhead
wants to know what you're doing about the inter-bank lending rate" –
but that seems to be the direction in which they're heading.

As far as I know, this is a first for a select committee. John McFall,
the chairman, explains why he's doing it in the press notice (which
should be on the committee's website soon).

Taxpayers are naturally very concerned about the scale of this
investment. The committee hopes that by providing people with the
chance to have us put their questions to those in charge, we can
provide a constructive way of engaging the public on a matter of such
deep concern to the whole country.

[TranceAm]

What a wonderful movie.

They didn't rework ZG 1. And most facts INCLUDING the reuse of the meme about resurrection by Jesus still stand. (Why be original, if it worked before?)

The money system.... What can one say, but "Bankers, something not to bank on!"

The Future, hopeful, but dare we make THAT change... And what are we going to do with people, that are like ticks embedded in the current system, and won't come out voluntairy, or give up their power voluntairy.. One would almost say or claim that that is why 911 happened was set of as justification to "prevent" a system change from happening.

Funny that ZG 2 mentioned something I stated not to long ago to Magii in another thread about money and products he made.

OK, when do we start working towards this world.. And how to initiate the first steps?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AyqfEo7FMeo

http://www.totse.com/en/ego/literary_genius/162642.html

[elirien]

Originally Posted by TranceAm

What a wonderful movie.

They didn't rework ZG 1. And most facts INCLUDING the reuse of the meme about resurrection by Jesus still stand. (Why be original, if it worked before?)

Interesting isn't it? Those questions are still unanswered and undermine imho the whole theory Peter puts out. Shouldn't that be addressed first for the case of reliability or credibility?

Originally Posted by TranceAm

The money system.... What can one say, but "Bankers, something not to bank on!"

The Future, hopeful, but dare we make THAT change... And what are we going to do with people, that are like ticks embedded in the current system, and won't come out voluntairy, or give up their power voluntairy.. One would almost say or claim that that is why 911 happened was set of as justification to "prevent" a system change from happening.

Funny that ZG 2 mentioned something I stated not to long ago to Magii in another thread about money and products he made.

OK, when do we start working towards this world.. And how to initiate the first steps?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AyqfEo7FMeo

http://www.totse.com/en/ego/literary_genius/162642.html

Even with the venus project there is this main problem: How could anyone expect to 'convert' the people that scammed the masses with illusionary money (and this is on a world scale because of the IMF and world bank) and systems to suck them dry? I mean the main problem was not the guy who earned a buck working as a waiter anyway. The problem were the people that created centralized banking or banking on itself that prophecied money out of nothing which means energy or resources out of nothing (so that venusian people can understand it as well just joking).

[TranceAm]

Originally Posted by elirien

Interesting isn't it? Those questions are still unanswered and undermine imho the whole theory Peter puts out. Shouldn't that be addressed first for the case of reliability or credibility?

Hello my friend.
Well, isn't the NOT adressing them, an answer by itself, and now the credibitly and reliability part is on the other side... They claim ressurection so they prove.... 1st that Christ did it, and did it first. (The "Original" so to speak.)
And extraordinary claims demand extraordinary proof beyond the 5th.

Originally Posted by elirien

Even with the venus project there is this main problem: How could anyone expect to 'convert' the people that scammed the masses with illusionary money (and this is on a world scale because of the IMF and world bank) and systems to suck them dry? I mean the main problem was not the guy who earned a buck working as a waiter anyway. The problem were the people that created centralized banking or banking on itself that prophecied money out of nothing which means energy or resources out of nothing (so that venusian people can understand it as well just joking).

Just my opinion, but isn't the first step explaining to ALL people how that money system works.. And I think we are in the middle of that phase... And by giving all the people the information connected to the problem, we might get the critical mass needed to get to the solving of that problem.

First of all: The DEBT they claim you have to them, doesn't exist. It is an illusionary chain around people's necks, that is there as long as people want to believe it is there.

Second of all, There is an honor debt to all the people Non-American that exchanged their lifetime and countries resouces for American Debt bills. That WAS the "Free Lunch".

Your thoughts?

[sprocket]

Yes, the 'Addendum' was very good. It's sobering to think that every dollar/euro/yen/GBP etc. in existence, be they real or 'virtual', in reality hold a negative value - to clear a nation's debt would require all that have been created, (from nothing!) PLUS the accumulated interest on the principal - but since there would be none outstanding, this shortfall would have to be 'borrowed' - hence, you find yourself in a Hell of sorts!!!

Looked at another way, with every penny you earn, bill you pay, or product you buy, you are in reality an active participant in indebting your country, creating nothing, just generating more debt!

Death to all Bankers...

[elirien]

Originally Posted by TranceAm

Hello my friend.
Well, isn't the NOT adressing them, an answer by itself, and now the credibitly and reliability part is on the other side... They claim ressurection so they prove.... 1st that Christ did it, and did it first. (The "Original" so to speak.)
And extraordinary claims demand extraordinary proof beyond the 5th.

Hi TranceAm, here we are again and I'm happy to be here.

Well the thing they didn't address was if all religions were solar cults in its essence. The 'debunkers' (don't like that word. Sounds like they were offering an alternative to truth), or fact checkers so to speak claim that the facts they show on Maxwell's research is bs. Not just the ressurection aspect but also if Jesus of Nazareth was real or just some concept embedded in astro-theology (which just reeks bs imho but one has to have an open mind on this matters). The claims which were false in the first film and from biased information which were unproven theories from secret society members (the secret society membership is here the un-important part imho). They didn't find any facts supporting these claims.

Originally Posted by TranceAm

Just my opinion, but isn't the first step explaining to ALL people how that money system works.. And I think we are in the middle of that phase... And by giving all the people the information connected to the problem, we might get the critical mass needed to get to the solving of that problem.

First of all: The DEBT they claim you have to them, doesn't exist. It is an illusionary chain around people's necks, that is there as long as people want to believe it is there.

Second of all, There is an honor debt to all the people Non-American that exchanged their lifetime and countries resouces for American Debt bills. That WAS the "Free Lunch".

Your thoughts?

Well actually no. The first part explains how the federal banking system works not how money works. It details how what represented the people's effort and labor as a transactional medium based on gold (which makes it a resource based economy) was transformed into a system which is based on nothing and sucks the labor of the people and transfers it to a select few which is not the problem of money but how it is being used. Am I wrong in interpreting it this way?

Later on the venus project tries to throw the baby out with the bathwater by generalizing problems which are very localized on the administration of money.

Well this is how I see it. I hope you can find the holes in my story because I think I convinced myself pretty much with this.

cheers

[sprocket]

Originally Posted by elirien

.....Well actually no. The first part explains how the federal banking system works not how money works. It details how what represented the people's effort and labor as a transactional medium based on gold (which makes it a resource based economy) was transformed into a system which is based on nothing and sucks the labor of the people and transfers it to a select few which is not the problem of money but how it is being used. Am I wrong in interpreting it this way?

Later on the venus project tries to throw the baby out with the bathwater by generalizing problems which are very localized on the administration of money.

Well this is how I see it. I hope you can find the holes in my story because I think I convinced myself pretty much with this.

cheers

The notion of a monetary system's ability to enslave a nation was well known even to Lincoln, who declined offered loans (and the exorbitant interest rates they would entail) from european banks to finance the war, instead opting to create a 'real' currency instead - the Greenback! This 'problem' was further acknowledged by the european banks themselves in corrospondence where they stated that the greenback could not be tolerated and allowed to stand, as they would have no control over it...

The point of this opener is to highlight that this corrupt monetary system is very much a global issue, and not just confined to the US - afterall, this was the system of 'choice' (at least for the Bankers!) in use in Europe, long before it 'spread' to the USA. Presently, practically every major monetary system is a Fiat currency based on fractional banking - and the 'Addendum' movie does a great job in showning what a farce this system is!

And when you realise that banks worldwide are right now in the process of being "baled-out" by taxpayers - in essence, getting Central banks to generate more worthless 'money' from nothing, while passing all liabilities to the taxpayers - and ultimately, what will have changed? Just more debt created! In Chess parlance, we are being set-up for a Check-Mate! Maddening...

[elirien]

Originally Posted by sprocket

The notion of a monetary system's ability to enslave a nation was well known even to Lincoln, who declined offered loans (and the exorbitant interest rates they would entail) from european banks to finance the war, instead opting to create a 'real' currency instead - the Greenback! This 'problem' was further acknowledged by the european banks themselves in corrospondence where they stated that the greenback could not be tolerated and allowed to stand, as they would have no control over it...

The point of this opener is to highlight that this corrupt monetary system is very much a global issue, and not just confined to the US - afterall, this was the system of 'choice' (at least for the Bankers!) in use in Europe, long before it 'spread' to the USA. Presently, practically every major monetary system is a Fiat currency based on fractional banking - and the 'Addendum' movie does a great job in showning what a farce this system is!

And when you realise that banks worldwide are right now in the process of being "baled-out" by taxpayers - in essence, getting Central banks to generate more worthless 'money' from nothing, while passing all liabilities to the taxpayers - and ultimately, what will have changed? Just more debt created! In Chess parlance, we are being set-up for a Check-Mate! Maddening...

O.k. but don't you think that the greenback is the resource based economy model? Can you see a difference?

[sprocket]

Originally Posted by elirien

O.k. but don't you think that the greenback is the resource based economy model? Can you see a difference?

Technically, it is "resource-based", but I prefer to go along with the Venus project's definition (or at least, my understanding of it) - ie. a currency-less society. Afterall, what changes with a gold-backed currency? Nothing imo, sure it is actually worth something - in contrast to all current fiat currencies - and therefore the current farcical situation of "monetising" away money shortages (with the inevitable de-valuation this necessitates) would not exist.

However, you are still stuck with all the greed-based problems associated with this current system - a perfect example relates to oil: despite our 'space-age technology', the internal combustion engine is largely identical in construction and performance to what was available 120 years ago, despite hugely more efficient designs being available even that long ago! This is the result of greed, pure and simple. If the greed-incentive to impede progress didn't exist, polutionless cars that ran on water would have been available a century ago...

[elirien]

Originally Posted by sprocket

Technically, it is "resource-based", but I prefer to go along with the Venus project's definition (or at least, my understanding of it) - ie. a currency-less society. Afterall, what changes with a gold-backed currency? Nothing imo, sure it is actually worth something - in contrast to all current fiat currencies - and therefore the current farcical situation of "monetising" away money shortages (with the inevitable de-valuation this necessitates) would not exist.

However, you are still stuck with all the greed-based problems associated with this current system - a perfect example relates to oil: despite our 'space-age technology', the internal combustion engine is largely identical in construction and performance to what was available 120 years ago, despite hugely more efficient designs being available even that long ago! This is the result of greed, pure and simple. If the greed-incentive to impede progress didn't exist, polutionless cars that ran on water would have been available a century ago...

Do you really think that when the white collar slave decides to rephrase his monetary system that greed would just swish away? Abolishing fiat money is just one minimal step to the moral and ethical high ground that would remember people that nothing comes from nothing.

I didn't read their book after their wondrous simplifications and demagogy in Zeitgeist addendum. I would be very glad if you could 'enlighten' me what does really change besides labels on the economy that so much resembles just any other economy model (communism, socialism or even capitalism).

Suppression of technology has nothing to do with economy model but has to do with the unmoral behavior of the central banking profession whom we know is used by corrupt, sick, occultist individuals. But that spiritual aspect is unimportant now is it? Just the corrupt behavior of Joe sixpack is the problem not bohemian grove, illuminism, luciferianism, theosophism etc.

[sprocket]

Originally Posted by elirien

Do you really think that when the white collar slave decides to rephrase his monetary system that greed would just swish away? Abolishing fiat money is just one minimal step to the moral and ethical high ground that would remember people that nothing comes from nothing.

I didn't read their book after their wondrous simplifications and demagogy in Zeitgeist addendum. I would be very glad if you could 'enlighten' me what does really change besides labels on the economy that so much resembles just any other economy model (communism, socialism or even capitalism).

Suppression of technology has nothing to do with economy model but has to do with the unmoral behavior of the central banking profession whom we know is used by corrupt, sick, occultist individuals. But that spiritual aspect is unimportant now is it? Just the corrupt behavior of Joe sixpack is the problem not bohemian grove, illuminism, luciferianism, theosophism etc.

It will never be the remit of white-collar workers to decide a monetary system - decisions like this have and always will be made by a tiny minority so long as tyrannical organisations such as the Illuminati are allowed to exist! Just consider the present US elections, they continually talk of freedom and choice, yet the only candidates that can even hope to stand a chance of being elected must by default have hundreds of millions of dollars in campaign funds - so by default, anyone who makes it this far, are bought and paid for, this having been decided long in advance by a select few!

Neither did I read their book and I would agree that their 'vision' as presented is indeed simplified, but considering they had 15-20 minutes, I think they did a pretty good job! And as they themselves admitted, it is far from perfect, but is a lot better than what is currently available. As for what changes it could manifest, consider what would happen if tomorrow the world governments told us that we were in imminent danger of being invaded by little green guys, and the world as a whole must prepare for this. Instantly, this inslaving monetary system would be forgotten about, with the whole world adopting a true "resource-based" existence - the farmers would feed us, their machinery and equipment needs would be met by industry, and on and on. This didn't happen during our own major wars precisely because they were orchestrated to a large extent by bankers, who were funding both sides simultaneuously! Remove this 'dead-wood' though and you would see just how well the human race as a whole can work together, while also highlighting how un-necessary a currency-based economy really is...

I'm well aware that technology suppression has nothing to do with an economic model, but it nicely highlights just one of the ugly facets of a greed-based monetary system, how technological advancement, however necessary, can be stunted or stopped althogether (as with the I.C.E) by a tiny minority of unscrupulous individuals...

[elirien]

Originally Posted by sprocket

As for what changes it could manifest, consider what would happen if tomorrow the world governments told us that we were in imminent danger of being invaded by little green guys, and the world as a whole must prepare for this. Instantly, this inslaving monetary system would be forgotten about, with the whole world adopting a true "resource-based" existence - the farmers would feed us, their machinery and equipment needs would be met by industry, and on and on. This didn't happen during our own major wars precisely because they were orchestrated to a large extent by bankers, who were funding both sides simultaneuously! Remove this 'dead-wood' though and you would see just how well the human race as a whole can work together, while also highlighting how un-necessary a currency-based economy really is...

Besides the quote above I agree with you totally. What I didn't like on your approach is again the same thing I mentioned before. Yes the bankers are scum but that's it. There is nothing more that would change if you continue with a centralized system. Those war scenarios where the people work their ass off for resources happened every time. Not only with wars but also natural disasters like the earthquakes in my country and other various occasions in other countries. If you take the stealing element out of the system it will work. Of course there are other non-beneficial details like representative democracy but these can be altered for a better existence and choice in government.

Originally Posted by sprocket

I'm well aware that technology suppression has nothing to do with an economic model, but it nicely highlights just one of the ugly facets of a greed-based monetary system, how technological advancement, however necessary, can be stunted or stopped althogether (as with the I.C.E) by a tiny minority of unscrupulous individuals...

That I agree upon too. You are very right.

[TranceAm]

Originally Posted by elirien

Hi TranceAm, here we are again and I'm happy to be here.

Well the thing they didn't address was if all religions were solar cults in its essence. The 'debunkers' (don't like that word. Sounds like they were offering an alternative to truth), or fact checkers so to speak claim that the facts they show on Maxwell's research is bs. Not just the ressurection aspect but also if Jesus of Nazareth was real or just some concept embedded in astro-theology (which just reeks bs imho but one has to have an open mind on this matters). The claims which were false in the first film and from biased information which were unproven theories from secret society members (the secret society membership is here the un-important part imho). They didn't find any facts supporting these claims.

But the point is that they don't have to. The one with the first claim proves.
The claim is that Jesus existed and did extraordinairy things.. (All fine and dandy, since it ain't mandatory anymore to believe in that..)
The strange thing that happens is that one first has to approve to this claim, before one can have a counter claim or have an alternative claim... And has to come up with proof that discounts the first claim before we even can get to the second claim, or back to the neutral situation without the now disproven first claim.. And giving the information to justify a reasonable doubt ain't enough to counter the first claim, although reasonable doubt was enough to stake the first claim...

Originally Posted by elirien

Well actually no. The first part explains how the federal banking system works not how money works. It details how what represented the people's effort and labor as a transactional medium based on gold (which makes it a resource based economy) was transformed into a system which is based on nothing and sucks the labor of the people and transfers it to a select few which is not the problem of money but how it is being used. Am I wrong in interpreting it this way?

The way I see it, is that the real wealth of people, "life time converted to money by work", becomes a wealth expressed in paper/fiat money, that can be stolen from, by the means of devaluation or inflation of the money supply. This in contradiction to an exchange of life wealth to gold, since gold has its own value, and thus lifetime has a "hard" value....:-) and that is hard to steal from if you can't get your hands in the sock under that matress.
Am I wrong in seeing it this way, or Am I defining your point of view differently?

Originally Posted by elirien

Later on the venus project tries to throw the baby out with the bathwater by generalizing problems which are very localized on the administration of money.

I don't know, the bigger picture does reveal that wars are created by the bankers to get countries on their knees with the loans they need for warfare.
If that wasn't the case, then the US & the WOrld would be full of libraries, and palaces thus without the need for the Venus Project. That ain't the case, although a double wide is still luxury over that war torn piece of concrete in Bagdad.

Originally Posted by elirien

cheers

Cheers...

[elirien]

Originally Posted by TranceAm

But the point is that they don't have to. The one with the first claim proves.
The claim is that Jesus existed and did extraordinairy things.. (All fine and dandy, since it ain't mandatory anymore to believe in that..)

Wait a second. The claim by Zeitgeist is that every religion they show on there (Islam is not shown by the way) is an astro cult, which the elite and the sheople believe in as the worship of the one true god, which is bs. in the case of christianity (not catholicism by the way. That is a pantheistic cult). I don't know how much you care about slandered people in this case but I get upset if someone is called a schill or psy-ops (which Alex Jones was called before he pressed the israeli side of 9/11).

Originally Posted by TranceAm

The strange thing that happens is that one first has to approve to this claim, before one can have a counter claim or have an alternative claim... And has to come up with proof that discounts the first claim before we even can get to the second claim, or back to the neutral situation without the now disproven first claim.. And giving the information to justify a reasonable doubt ain't enough to counter the first claim, although reasonable doubt was enough to stake the first claim...

What do you mean by approve? I can't approve plain unproven falsehood. Did you approve what Commander Adama over here or all the 14th October Rescue squad spread? If you mean that I should see it as a proposition then be sure that I did. Why would I discuss this if I didn't? These seem like word games rather then a debate here

Originally Posted by TranceAm

The way I see it, is that the real wealth of people, "life time converted to money by work", becomes a wealth expressed in paper/fiat money, that can be stolen from, by the means of devaluation or inflation of the money supply. This in contradiction to an exchange of life wealth to gold, since gold has its own value, and thus lifetime has a "hard" value....:-) and that is hard to steal from if you can't get your hands in the sock under that matress.
Am I wrong in seeing it this way, or Am I defining your point of view differently?

Lifetime nice phrasing Well not different altogether but there are certain details. First of all the sweat of your brow (or other organs) doesn't necessarily exchange to fiat money. I do believe that not all money is fiat money in every country. I e-mailed our central bank over here to get an answer for the country I live in right now. Beyond that, it's exactly what I meant.

Originally Posted by TranceAm

I don't know, the bigger picture does reveal that wars are created by the bankers to get countries on their knees with the loans they need for warfare.
If that wasn't the case, then the US & the WOrld would be full of libraries, and palaces thus without the need for the Venus Project. That ain't the case, although a double wide is still luxury over that war torn piece of concrete in Bagdad.

Cheers...

Well exactly my friend. Although not only are the bankers to blame but all of us who give them their support. If the Venus project was just about that then I would have no problem with it (which would be a very just cause by the way). But re-phrasing the NWO with all this "info" based on the theosophic crowd with occult visuals like that "handmade pyramid shining through the sun" is not for me.

By the way it would also be nice to hear from the "I luv Zeitgeist" crowd. Not that I am singling (spelling!?) myself out here. Let's look at it in more detail rather then a piece of entertainment (I say it every time. I luv this series soundtracks )

[TranceAm]

Originally Posted by elirien

Wait a second. The claim by Zeitgeist is that every religion they show on there (Islam is not shown by the way) is an astro cult,

I thought they made a very good case of that... And since Islam acknowledges Jesus Christ as another Messiah, they acknowledge the other religions basis for existence, and get credibility back from it. (If Jesus was a Messiah, then Mohamed can be a Messiah.) I think they upped the ante a little bit, and place the bar a lot higher by adding the claim, the "last" one... No other will follow. I might be wrong, on hearsay.

Originally Posted by elirien

What do you mean by approve?

Sorry about that, My bad, I should have written acknowledged.

Let me give an example of what I mean, and see how far you approve of it.

A person mind can (Considering believing anything but in this case say "God".) in a virgin state, when he has never heard of that meme before... Needles to say, In this world, one has to be a little child unable to understand language to be in this state.

The moment the meme is introduced in the persons mind, accompanied with the proof as surrounding us and supplied by the religions that go around (Complete sometimes with the carrot/stick approach and endless indoctrination from several sources..),
The person can do 2 things, Either accept it, or reject it.
Accepting it means becoming in a believer. (And Xerox the meme.)
Rejecting it means changing from virgin to an unbeliever...

However, in case unbelieving or later believing something different, now in every discussion case this meme, the person has to prove that the meme is untrue before putting forward his own proof for his own case... He has to acknowledge the meme as something that can be disproved, while it has never been proven to start with...

Originally Posted by elirien

These seem like word games rather then a debate here

Word games? Nono, it is World Games. And according to religions that go around: Winner takes all. :-)

Again a pleasure.

P.S Commander Adama? Lorne Greene or Edward James Olmos?
http://www.battlestargalactica.com/index.htm

[elirien]

Originally Posted by TranceAm

I thought they made a very good case of that... And since Islam acknowledges Jesus Christ as another Messiah, they acknowledge the other religions basis for existence, and get credibility back from it. (If Jesus was a Messiah, then Mohamed can be a Messiah.) I think they upped the ante a little bit, and place the bar a lot higher by adding the claim, the "last" one... No other will follow. I might be wrong, on hearsay.

Yup you are right as far as I know (please correct us if we write bs here). But if Jesus is not to proven a myth then I don't think that would work either. His station as a prophet is of course another issue. I won't comment on that one since I don't think that I have read enough Torah, Bible and Koran to detail this.

Originally Posted by TranceAm

Sorry about that, My bad, I should have written acknowledged.

Let me give an example of what I mean, and see how far you approve of it.

A person mind can (Considering believing anything but in this case say "God".) in a virgin state, when he has never heard of that meme before... Needles to say, In this world, one has to be a little child unable to understand language to be in this state.

The moment the meme is introduced in the persons mind, accompanied with the proof as surrounding us and supplied by the religions that go around (Complete sometimes with the carrot/stick approach and endless indoctrination from several sources..),
The person can do 2 things, Either accept it, or reject it.
Accepting it means becoming in a believer. (And Xerox the meme.)
Rejecting it means changing from virgin to an unbeliever...

However, in case unbelieving or later believing something different, now in every discussion case this meme, the person has to prove that the meme is untrue before putting forward his own proof for his own case... He has to acknowledge the meme as something that can be disproved, while it has never been proven to start with...

I approve your ideas Well the thing is you have a third option besides believing (as you said xeroxing the meme) and rejecting and thus being a non-believer. Researching it. Convincing yourself based on your research before this meme. Truth is the ultimate meme since it can't be copied and not spread. It is a constant that is not open for interpretation based on physical entities. You can acknowledge its existence or not. That are the only options.

In case of Zeitgeist's claims on religion it is just a meme rather then obvious truth. It fails when being tested. Jesus was not a myth as neither was Aleister Crowley for example. Both are individuals that have claims about the beyond. Both have documentation that proves their existence. Both have religious scripture.

Originally Posted by TranceAm

Word games? Nono, it is World Games. And according to religions that go around: Winner takes all. :-)

Yeah, that's the main thing that bothers me with religion anyway. Don't get me wrong. I'm not a supporter of religion and mass movements. The idea of a winner in this universe where I just know of a little bit about life on this particular planet seems too human derived to be universal truth anyway

Originally Posted by TranceAm

Again a pleasure.

P.S Commander Adama? Lorne Greene or Edward James Olmos?
http://www.battlestargalactica.com/index.htm

As it always is for me. Oh I know of the comparison. Makes me also think about George Green

[Reveling John]

Originally Posted by elirien

Hi TranceAm, here we are again and I'm happy to be here.

The first part explains how the federal banking system works not how money works. It details how what represented the people's effort and labor as a transactional medium based on gold (which makes it a resource based economy) was transformed into a system which is based on nothing and sucks the labor of the people and transfers it to a select few which is not the problem of money but how it is being used. Am I wrong in interpreting it this way?
cheers

First off, this is a really interesting thread and I thank everyone for submitting their unique arguments.

Now, as far as the quote above is concerned, let me state that:

GOLD IS NOT A RESOURCE. Gold is a commodity that we have historically used as a measure of wealth, but a currency system backed by gold is NOT resourced-based because GOLD IS NOT A RESOURCE.

Neither is silver, platinum, diamonds, rubies, jewels..... the wealth that these commodities represent is not resource-based. The idea of these things measuring wealth is a complete ABSTRACTION.

For more on that line of thought, check out Alan Watts, who I've mentioned on this forum before.

And if you are wondering what a commodity is, here is wikipedia to the rescue:

A commodity is anything for which there is demand, but which is supplied without qualitative differentiation across a market. In other words, copper is copper. Rice is rice. Stereos, on the other hand, have many levels of quality. And, the better a stereo is, the more it will cost. The price of copper is universal, and fluctuates daily based on global supply and demand..

Also, socialism, as you can conclude for yourself by studying the economies of western/northern Europe gives the government control of capital, not resources. Here's another important fact: CAPITAL IS NOT A RESOURCE. Thus socialism (and communism for that matter) is not a resourced-based economy.

Once again wikipedia provides us with an definition of capital:

In economics, capital or capital goods or real capital refers to items of extensive value. The term can also be applied to the amount of wealth a person controls or is capable of controlling.

Capital goods may be acquired with money or financial capital. In finance and accounting, capital generally refers to financial wealth, especially that used to start or maintain a business, sometimes referred to as Cash flow.

To some of the other points: When people dispute the credibility of Zeitgeist (1st or 2nd) they NEVER, NOT ONCE mention what they would do if they interpretted the movies and their messages as literal communications. I don't care if you think this religioun or that religioun are real. I don't care if you think the Venus project is a veil for socialism or the new world order.

What are you going to DO about the social/economic/humanitarian crisis that we face?
What ACTION have you decided upon, if any?

Let's talk about that.

By the way, instead of attacking Jaque Fresco on the basis of his appearance in Zeitgeist Addendum, why not respond to his actual writings? There is plenty to be found on the Venus Project website, from which this excerpt has been pulled:

The monetary system has been a useful, but interim tool, it came into being as a means of placing a value on scarce objects and labor. The monetary system of course replaced the barter system, which involved direct trading of objects and labor. However, just as there was no universal-bartering standard in the past, there is no global monetary system today. Individuals and groups, now as in the past, however, still need to exchange objects and labor for today’s goods and services. The unequal distribution of skills, resources and materials throughout the world necessitates global trade.

Until the last few decades, the monetary system functioned to a degree. The global population of three billion was not over consuming world resources and energy, global warming was not evident, and air and water pollution were only recognized by a relative few. The start of the 21st century however finds global population at an exponentially rising six billion, with resources and energy supplies dwindling, global warming a reality, and pollution evident worldwide. Planet earth is in crises and the majority of world population cannot meet their basic needs because people do not have the means to purchase increasingly expensive resources. Money is now the determinant of people’s standard of living rather than the availability of resources.

The monetary system is now an impediment to survival rather than a means of facilitating individual existence and growth. This imaginary tool has outlived its usefulness. The limitations on earth’s population now caused by the monetary construct can be phased out. It is not money that people need but the access to goods and services. Since humanity requires resources to exist, the replacement system should provide those resources directly to people without the impediment of financial and political interest for their private gain at the expense of the lives and livelihood of the populous. The replacement system is therefor logically a resource-based economy. This global resource based economy would be gradually phased in while the monetary system is phased out.

All of the world's economic systems - socialism, communism, fascism, and even the vaunted free enterprise capitalist system - perpetuate social stratification, elitism, nationalism and racism, primarily based on economic disparity. As long as a social system uses money or barter, people and nations will seek to maintain positions of differential advantage. If they cannot do so by means of commerce they will resort to military intervention.

War represents the supreme failure of nations to resolve their differences. From a strictly pragmatic standpoint it is the most inefficient waste of lives and resources ever conceived by any creature on the planet. This crude and violent way of attempting to resolve international differences has taken on even more ominous overtones with the advent of elaborate computerized thermonuclear delivery systems, deadly diseases and gases, and the threat of sabotage of a nation's computer networks. Despite the desire of nations to achieve peace, they usually lack the knowledge of how to arrive at peaceful solutions.

War is not the only form of violence in the developed and underdeveloped countries that is superimposed upon the populace by inadequate social arrangements. There is also hunger, poverty, and scarcity. As long as there is the use of money, the creation of debt, and economic insecurity these conditions will perpetuate crime, lawlessness, and resentment. Paper proclamations and treaties do not alter conditions of scarcity and insecurity. And nationalism only tends to help propagate the separation of nations and the world's people.

Even the signing of a peace treaty cannot avoid another war if the underlying causes are not addressed. The unworkable aspects of international law tend to freeze things as they are. All of the nations that have conquered land all over the world by force and violence would still retain their positions of territorial and resource advantage. Whether we realize it or not, such agreements only serve as temporary suspensions to conflict.

Attempting to find solutions to the monumental problems within our present society will only serve as temporary patchwork, prolonging an obsolete system.

In this world of constant change it is no longer a question of whether we choose to make the necessary changes; it is now mandatory that we take on this challenge and adopt these new requirements or face the inevitable decay of our present social and economic institution.

This is the dilemma we must face head-on, and the solutions we arrive at must fit the circumstances of the "real-world." There appears to be no other way than to update our outlook and create a newer direction by relegating the old values to past civilizations. Unfortunately, this may not be accomplished prior to the point of no return in the global economy.


RESOURCE-BASED ECONOMY

Presented here is a straightforward approach to the redesign of a culture, in which the age-old inadequacies of war, poverty, hunger, debt, and unnecessary human suffering are viewed not only as avoidable, but totally unacceptable. This new social design works towards eliminating the underlying causes that are responsible for many of our problems. But, as stated previously, they cannot be eliminated within the framework of the present monetary and political establishment. Human behavior is subject to the same laws that govern all other physical phenomena. Our customs, behaviors, and values are byproducts of our culture. No one is born with greed, prejudice, bigotry and hatred - they are learned. If the environment is unaltered similar problems will reoccur.

These aspirations cannot be accomplished in a monetary based society of waste and human exploitation. With its planned obsolescence, neglect of the environment, outrageous military expenditures and the outworn methods of attempting to solve problems through the enactment of laws, these methods are bound to fail. Furthermore the belief that advanced technologies would lead to an improvement in the quality of life for most people is not the case in a monetary system. More and more companies are adopting the tremendous benefits of automation, resulting in increased production with fewer employees.

Corporations’ short-term concern with profit will ultimately result in the demise of the world monetary based economies. If the monetary system continues to operate, we will be faced with the condition of more technological unemployment, today referred to as downsizing. From 1990 to 1995, companies dismissed a staggering 17.1 million employees, many of these due to automation. Automation will continue to replace people well into the foreseeable future, resulting in the lack of purchasing power for these displaced workers. Despite expanding global markets, the human cost in terms of displaced workers and a disenfranchised populous, will inevitably bring about massive and unmanageable social problems.

During the 1930's, at the height of the Great Depression, the Roosevelt administration enacted new social legislation designed to minimize revolutionary tendencies and to address the problems of unemployment. Jobs were provided through the Works Progress Administration, Civilian Conservation Corps, National Recovery Act, transient camps, and Federal Arts projects. Ultimately, however, World War II pulled the U.S. out of that worldwide depression. If we permit current conditions to take their natural course, we will soon be faced with another international recession of potentially greater magnitude.

At the time of this depression the US had only 600 first class fighting aircraft at the beginning of World War II, we rapidly increased production to 90,000 planes per year. Did we have enough money to pay for the required implements of war? The answer is no. Neither did we have enough gold. But, we did have more than enough resources. It was the available resources and personnel that enabled the U. S. to achieve the production and efficiency required to win the war. Unfortunately, such an all-out effort is only considered in times of war or disaster.

We live in a culture that seems to work collectively only in response to a crisis. Only in times of war do we call upon and assemble interdisciplinary teams to meet a threat from human aggression. Only in times of national emergency do we do the same to resolve a natural or man-made threat. Rarely, if ever, do we employ a concerted effort to help find workable solutions to social problems. If we apply the same efforts of scientific mobilization toward social betterment as we do during a war or disaster, large-scale results could be achieved in a relatively short time.

The Earth is still abundant with resources. Today our practice of rationing resources through monetary methods is irrelevant and counter-productive to the well-being of people. Today’s society has access to highly advanced technologies and can easily provide more than enough for a very high standard of living for all the earth’s people. This is possible through the implementation of a resource-based economy.

Simply stated, a resource-based economy utilizes existing resources rather than money, and provides an equitable method of distribution in the most humane and efficient manner for the entire population. It is a system in which all natural, man-made, machine-made, and synthetic resources would be available without the use of money, credits, barter, or any other form of symbolic exchange. A resource-based economy would utilize existing resources from the land and sea, and the means of production, such as physical equipment and industrial plants, to enhance the lives of the total population. In an economy based on resources rather than money, we could easily produce all of the necessities of life and provide a high standard of living for all.

To further clarify the concept of a resource based economy consider this example: A group of people is stranded on an island with enormous purchasing power including gold, silver and diamonds. All this wealth would be irrelevant to their survival if the island had few resources such as food, clean air, and water. Only when population exceeds the productive capacity of the land do problems such as greed, crime, and violence emerge. On the other hand, if people were stranded on an island that was abundant with natural resources producing more than the necessities for survival, then a monetary system would be irrelevant. It is only when resources are scarce that money can be used to control their distribution. One could not, for example, sell the air we breathe, the sand on the beach, or the salt water in the ocean to someone else on the island who has equal access to all these things. In a resource-based economy all of the world's resources would be held as the common heritage of all of the earth’s people, thus eventually outgrowing the need for the artificial boundaries that separate people – this is the unifying imperative.

We must emphasize here that this approach to global governance has nothing whatever in common with the present aims of a corporate elite to form a world government with themselves and large corporations in control, and the vast majority of the world's population subservient to them. Globalization in a resource-based economy empowers each and every person on the planet to be the very best they can be, not to live in abject subjugation to a corporate governing body.

All social systems, regardless of political philosophy, religious beliefs, or social customs, ultimately depend upon natural resources, e.g. clean air and water, arable land, and the necessary technology and personnel to maintain a high standard of living. This can be accomplished through the intelligent and humane application of science and technology. The real wealth of any nation lies in its developed and potential resources and the people who are working toward the elimination of scarcity and the development of a more humane way of life. A resource-based economy would use technology to overcome scarce resources by utilizing renewable sources of energy; computerizing and automating manufacturing, inventory and distribution; designing safe, energy-efficient cities; providing universal health care and relevant education; and most of all, by generating a new incentive system based on human and environmental concern.

Unfortunately, today science and technology have been diverted from these ends for reasons of self-interest and monetary gain through the conscious withdrawal of efficiency, or through planned obsolescence. For example, it is an ironic state of affairs when the U. S. Department of Agriculture, whose function is to conduct research into ways of achieving higher crop yields per acre, pays farmers not to produce at full capacity while many people go hungry. Another example is the choice of some companies to illegally dump solid waste into oceans and rivers to save money, when more ecologically sound disposal methods are available. A third example is the failure of some industries to install electrostatic precipitators in their factories’ smokestacks to prevent particulate matter from being released into the atmosphere, even though the technology has been available for over 75 years. The monetary system does not always apply known methods that would best serve people and the environment.

In a resource-based economy, the human aspect would be of prime concern, and technology would be subordinate to this. This would result in a considerable increase in leisure time. In an economy in which production is accomplished primarily by machines, and products and services are available to all, the concepts of "work" and "earning a living" would become irrelevant. But if the human consequences of automation are unresolved, as they are today, then it renders all the advances of science and technology of much less significance.

The utilization of today’s high speed and large capacity computer systems, otherwise known as the "Information Superhighway" or Internet, could assist us in defining the variables and parameters required for the operation of a resource-based economy that conforms to environmental needs. Over-exploitation of resources would be unnecessary and surpassed.

Many people believe that there is too much technology in the world today, and that technology is the major cause of our environmental pollution. This is not the case. Rather, it is the abuse and misuse of technology that should be our major concern. In very simple terms, a hammer can be used to construct a building, or to kill another person. It is not the hammer that is the issue, but how it is used.

Cybernation, or the application of computers and automation to the social system, could be regarded as an emancipation proclamation for humankind if used humanely and intelligently. Its thorough application could eventually enable people to have the highest conceivable standard of living with practically no labor. It could free people for the first time in human history from a highly structured and outwardly imposed routine of repetitive and mundane activity. It could enable one to return to the Greek concept of leisure, where slaves did most of the work and men had time to cultivate their minds. The essential difference is that in the future, each of us will command more than a million slaves - but they will be mechanical and electrical slaves, not fellow human beings. This will end forever the degrading exploitation of any human being by another so that he or she lives an abundant, productive, and less stressful life. Perhaps the greatest aid in enhancing the survival of the human race is the introduction of cybernation, the electronic computer, and artificial intelligence, which may very well save the human race from its own inadequacies.

A resource-based economy calls for the redesign of our cities, transportation systems, and industrial plants so that they are energy efficient, clean, and conveniently provide the needs of all people both materially and spiritually. These new cybernated cities would have their electrical sensors' autonomic nervous system extended into all areas of the social complex. Their function would be to coordinate a balance between production and distribution and to operate a balance-load economy. Decisions would be arrived at on the basis of feedback from the environment. Despite today’s mania for national security, and subsequent intrusions into everyone’s personal affairs, in a world-wide resource-based economy where no one need take from another, it will be considered socially offensive and counterproductive for machines to monitor the activities of individuals. In fact, such intrusion would serve no useful purpose.

To further understand the operation of cybernation in the city system, for example, in the agricultural belt the electronic probes imbedded in the soil would automatically keep a constant inventory of the water table, soil conditions, nutrients, etc. and act appropriately without the need for human intervention. This method of industrial electronic feedback could be applied to the entire management of a global economy.

All raw materials used to manufacture products can be transported directly to the manufacturing facilities by automated transportation "sequences" such as ships, monorails, trains, pipelines, and pneumatic tubes, and the like. All transportation systems are fully utilized in both directions. There would be no empty trucks, trains, or transport units on return trips. There would be no freight trains stored in yards, awaiting a business cycle for their use. An automated inventory system would be connected to both the distribution centers and the manufacturing facilities, thus coordinating production to meet demand and providing a constant evaluation of preferences and consumption statistics. In this way a balanced-load economy can be assured and shortages, over-runs, and waste could be eliminated.

The method for the distribution of goods and services in a resource-based economy without the use of money or tokens could be accomplished through the establishment of distribution centers. These distribution centers would be similar to a public library or an exposition, where the advantages of new products can be explained and demonstrated. For example, if one were to visit Yellowstone National Park, one could check out a still or video camera on-site, use the camera, and if they do not want to keep it, return it to another readily accessible distribution center or drop-off point, thus eliminating the individual’s need to store and maintain the equipment.

In addition to computerized centers, which would be located throughout the various communities, there would be 3-D, flat-screen televised imaging capabilities right in the convenience of one's own home. If an item is desired, an order would be placed, and the item could be automatically delivered directly to a person's place of residence.

With the infusion of a resource-based, world economy and an all-out effort to develop new, clean, renewable sources of energy, (such as geothermal, controlled fusion, solar heat concentrators, photovoltaics, wind, wave, tidal power, and fuel from the oceans), we will eventually be able to have energy in unlimited quantity that could serve civilization for thousands of years.

To better understand the meaning of a resource-based economy consider this: If all the money in the world were to suddenly disappear, as long as topsoil, factories, and other resources were left intact, we could build anything we chose to build and fulfill any human need. It is not money that people need, but rather it is freedom of access to most of their necessities without ever having to appeal to a government bureaucracy or any other agency. In a resource-based economy money would become irrelevant. All that would be required are the resources, manufacturing, and distribution of the products....

-From The Future and Beyond by Jacque Fresco

While we are all furiously researching, which I believe most people on this site are doing in earnest, let's try to remember that there is a point to all of this homework. I can't tell you what the point is for you, but I know that for myself, I want to determine the most appropriate action to take for the betterment of my life and the life of everyone on this planet. I suppose yall have to figure out your own individual objectives and when you do find it, make sure that your intellectual efforts are being properly directed toward that goal.

Great Love,
John

[elirien]

Originally Posted by Reveling John

First off, this is a really interesting thread and I thank everyone for submitting their unique arguments.

Now, as far as the quote above is concerned, let me state that:

GOLD IS NOT A RESOURCE. Gold is a commodity that we have historically used as a measure of wealth, but a currency system backed by gold is NOT resourced-based because GOLD IS NOT A RESOURCE.

Neither is silver, platinum, diamonds, rubies, jewels..... the wealth that these commodities represent is not resource-based. The idea of these things measuring wealth is a complete ABSTRACTION.

Well first of all I want to thank you for joining the debate. It is very important that at least we in the "truth seeker" milieu look at what actually is meant in all the documentaries, documents, philosophy and conspiracy of course. It begins to feel like an obligation for me almost and I'm very happy to see like minded, curious people.

The definition of resource in Dictionary.com is:

–noun
1. a source of supply, support, or aid, esp. one that can be readily drawn upon when needed.
2. resources, the collective wealth of a country or its means of producing wealth.
3. Usually, resources. money, or any property that can be converted into money; assets.
4. Often, resources. an available means afforded by the mind or one's personal capabilities: to have resource against loneliness.
5. an action or measure to which one may have recourse in an emergency; expedient.
6. capability in dealing with a situation or in meeting difficulties: a woman of resource.

source: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/resource

Well since we all write on a computer which uses gold as a resource to transfer data in the central processing unit I think that this idea is a fallacy alone by the idea that Gold, Silver, platinum, etc. have no use and are a distraction. I won't go into monatomic gold since I don't know its composition directly but I know it is made from gold and it is being claimed that it has direct effects on the human body.

I want gold the same as I want a roof over my body and food to feed my self. It is useful in the necessary setting and has become a necessity for humans that want to research anything based on their life. Products of mining are resources.

Originally Posted by Reveling John

For more on that line of thought, check out Alan Watts, who I've mentioned on this forum before.

And if you are wondering what a commodity is, here is wikipedia to the rescue:

Dictionary.com definition:

–noun, plural -ties.
1. an article of trade or commerce, esp. a product as distinguished from a service.
2. something of use, advantage, or value.
3. Stock Exchange. any unprocessed or partially processed good, as grain, fruits, and vegetables, or precious metals.
4. Obsolete. a quantity of goods.

source: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/commodity

Let's look at it in the case of gold.

1. Yes that is defining it in one use.
2. This as well.
3. Well obviously.
4. Kinda.

We could conclude that the use of gold is what is its definition in this aspect. You can either use it as a Resource or a commodity.

Originally Posted by Reveling John

Also, socialism, as you can conclude for yourself by studying the economies of western/northern Europe gives the government control of capital, not resources. Here's another important fact: CAPITAL IS NOT A RESOURCE. Thus socialism (and communism for that matter) is not a resourced-based economy.

Once again wikipedia provides us with an definition of capital:

Same problem here imho. If money is based on gold and if you have a fort knox still going then capital is a resource or at least capital is comprised partly of resource (I don't know what is being used by governments as physical evidence for capital. I could use some help here, especially from you government agents lurking around here :P ).

Originally Posted by Reveling John

To some of the other points: When people dispute the credibility of Zeitgeist (1st or 2nd) they NEVER, NOT ONCE mention what they would do if they interpretted the movies and their messages as literal communications. I don't care if you think this religioun or that religioun are real. I don't care if you think the Venus project is a veil for socialism or the new world order.

What are you going to DO about the social/economic/humanitarian crisis that we face?
What ACTION have you decided upon, if any?

Let's talk about that.

Sure. This will be pretty off topic but you asked for it buddy

---Rant ahead---

My problem with his the thesis of non religious and religious solutions to this problem is this: No one knows where the heck we are from and where the heck we are going. We don't even know what the heck we are for certain.

Now a solution for this would be "attacking" occultism and don't mean hermetic orders or other secret societies for that matter. The occultism I'm talking about is embedded right here in your backyard so to speak. This occultism starts when your mom tells you that you have been brought here by birds and ends with a scientist telling you that you are a chemical chance. It's covering up information and fallacies. It's finding the intellect "holier" then the human being itself. What do I think is a solution? Don't lie neither to others nor to yourself (which is the most perpetrated crime around). Do you think that this "satanic" system so to speak could live one second if there were a decent and un-romanticized answer to why this is happening. People love to support liars because they know that these will cover up their own. And people love to also blame them for their indifference and ignorance. That rethoric about "God" or "The Devil" made me do it is the main thing about this mental prison.

What do I think I should do? I should close the channels supporting this system without damaging the free will of others. I should inform myself in every aspect of everything that I can find without prejudice and other dramatized memes or thought forms. If someone likes my approach they are open to implement that, but I couldn't care less if they didn't because it is their life even if we are one consciousness experiencing itself subjectively.

That's the action. Be sure what you meddle with and get informed. Share that information so that it can be bettered through your fellow men and women. The most beautiful thing that I find in this movie the ending of a sentence: "...because they are no longer relevant anymore." (or something like that). Truth dissolves falacies and gives you the power to choose wisely.

---Rant over---

Originally Posted by Reveling John

By the way, instead of attacking Jaque Fresco on the basis of his appearance in Zeitgeist Addendum, why not respond to his actual writings? There is plenty to be found on the Venus Project website, from which this excerpt has been pulled:

I know I am stretching my limits here but could you post this in a topic just about the venus project. I know that Zeitgeist Addendum and the project are kind of embedded but I think the venus project should be discussed just as the venus project. Even though I am sure even if the venus project is proven to be completely out of context that the director won't change his mind that connects him to this project as he didn't when his views on religion were proven false.

Originally Posted by Reveling John

While we are all furiously researching, which I believe most people on this site are doing in earnest, let's try to remember that there is a point to all of this homework. I can't tell you what the point is for you, but I know that for myself, I want to determine the most appropriate action to take for the betterment of my life and the life of everyone on this planet. I suppose yall have to figure out your own individual objectives and when you do find it, make sure that your intellectual efforts are being properly directed toward that goal.

Great Love,
John

I second that.

Be good John.

[Reveling John]

Originally Posted by elirien

Well first of all I want to thank you for joining the debate. It is very important that at least we in the "truth seeker" milieu look at what actually is meant in all the documentaries, documents, philosophy and conspiracy of course. It begins to feel like an obligation for me almost and I'm very happy to see like minded, curious people.

I feel the same way, Elirien, like it's become my new job. Ironic, seeing as I'm currently unemployed

The definition of resource in Dictionary.com is:

–noun
1. a source of supply, support, or aid, esp. one that can be readily drawn upon when needed.
2. resources, the collective wealth of a country or its means of producing wealth.
3. Usually, resources. money, or any property that can be converted into money; assets.
4. Often, resources. an available means afforded by the mind or one's personal capabilities: to have resource against loneliness.
5. an action or measure to which one may have recourse in an emergency; expedient.
6. capability in dealing with a situation or in meeting difficulties: a woman of resource.

source: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/resource

The problem with dicitionary definitions is that when you we use words to create sentences we have to choose which definitions apply to each word. If you use all six of those definition for 'resource' and apply that same approach to each word in the sentence, you'll get more than a billion different meanings for that sentence, because of course, the definitions themselves are made up of words, each of those words having multiple definitions. So we need to choose ONE definition in order for this conversation to have any meaning. Further more the way Jacque uses the term resource, he is using it as a synonym for NATURAL resources, which is even more specific. Here's what I mean:

In actuality, no one should make decisions as to how this blueprint will be designed. It must be based on the carrying capacity of our planet, its resources, human needs and the like.

-From The Future and Beyond by Jacque Fresco

So, since my use of the term RESOURCE will always be in reference to NATURAL RESOURCES let's look further into the definition of natural resource:

Natural resources are naturally occurring substances that are considered valuable in their relatively unmodified (natural) form. A natural resource's value rests in the amount of the material available and the demand for it. The latter is determined by its usefulness to production. A commodity is generally considered a natural resource when the primary activities associated with it are extraction and purification, as opposed to creation. Thus, mining, petroleum extraction, fishing, hunting, and forestry are generally considered natural-resource industries, while agriculture is not.
-wikipedia.org

Now, when it says that a resource's value "rests in the amount of the material available and the demand for it," it is defining VALUE within the context of a monetary-based economy. All of your definitions that use the terms VALUE, MEASURE, WEALTH, CAPITAL, and ASSETS are projections of a monetary-based understanding of the resources available to us. So basically when using such definitions as a foundation for argument, you are arguing from the perspective of consciousness that measures everything and defines everything on a scale of supply and demand, which in this manifestation of the world economy are total ABSTRACTIONS. Look at what's happening to the stock market. The economy is shrinking despite that fact that there has been NO CHANGE IN THE QUANTITY OF NATURAL RESOURCES in the last three weeks AND NO CHANGE IN THE DEMAND FOR THESE RESOURCES. If there is an observable change in REAL demand it would actually be an increase, which should result in an expanding economy, and yet...

Think about the housing "bubble" in the US. In July it was reported that the foreclosure crisis had left 2 MILLION homes (in the US alone) standing empty, with the price of these properties plummeting. Is there no demand for houses? My city (los angeles) alone had EIGHTY THOUSAND homeless people at the beginning of this year. San Francisco has TWENTY THOUSAND. New York has FORTY THOUSAND. Is there a demand for homes? Google the term "Tent City" or "Bushville", and you will find that the rate of homelessness in this country is SKY-ROCKETING EXPONENTIALLY. There is SUPPLY and there is a HUGE DEMAND, so why aren't these houses selling, and why is the market price crashing? This would indicate that supply and demand AS DEFINED IN A MONETARY-BASED WORLD ECONOMY IS A COMPLETE ABSTRACTION, having very little relationship to the actuall PHYSICAL MEASUREMENT of SUPPLY and the actual human need expressed as DEMAND.

Well since we all write on a computer which uses gold as a resource to transfer data in the central processing unit I think that this idea is a fallacy alone by the idea that Gold, Silver, platinum, etc. have no use and are a distraction. I won't go into monatomic gold since I don't know its composition directly but I know it is made from gold and it is being claimed that it has direct effects on the human body.

Furthermore, the DEMAND for gold, silver, or platinum is not based on their uses as conductive or semi-conductive materials, which has only come about in the last 60 years or so, although this may be changing at this point in time. However, in the periods of time when money was backed by a gold standard it was not a useful resource of any kind, except as a representation of wealth or capital.

And I didn't say DISTRACTION although that could be applied ironically. The term I'm using is ABSTRACTION:

In philosophical terminology, abstraction is the thought process wherein ideas are distanced from objects.

Abstraction uses a strategy of simplification, wherein formerly concrete details are left ambiguous, vague, or undefined; thus effective communication about things in the abstract requires an intuitive or common experience between the communicator and the communication recipient.

For example, many different things can be red. Likewise, many things sit on surfaces (as in picture 1, to the right). The property of redness and the relation sitting-on are therefore abstractions of those objects.

-wikipedia.org

I want gold the same as I want a roof over my body and food to feed my self. It is useful in the necessary setting and has become a necessity for humans that want to research anything based on their life. Products of mining are resources.

And yet your DEMAND for gold is not effecting the PRICE (i.e. VALUE) of gold. Rather the value of gold, which fluctuates daily, despite a finite REAL supply and an exponentially increasing REAL demand, is determined by how gold COMMODITIES are selling on the stock market. Notice that COMMODITY is an inherently monetary-based distinction and would have no use in a (natural) resource-based economy.

We could conclude that the use of gold is what is its definition in this aspect. You can either use it as a Resource or a commodity.

Yes you can and the fact that you can use it as a COMMODITY gives owners of gold and gold stock an incentive to ARTIFICIALLY LOWER THE SUPPLY of gold in circulation (which they do, in the same way that they control the supply of silver, diamonds, plantinum, oil, beans, rice, corn, EVERYTHING - despite millions of people having a REAL need/demand for these items). For this same reason stock traders who speciallized in short-selling are given incentive to ARTIFICIALLY INCREASE SUPPLY so that when the commodity looses value they can make money off of the sale (short sellers make money when a stock sells at a loss). This is EXACTLY what they did in the MORTGAGE and DERIVATIVE markets, which led to the sub-mortgage crisis because (and this is freaking insane) THEY PROFIT FROM OUR LOSSES. If gold were ONLY a resource, and it's value were ONLY determined by your REAL need and my REAL need to harness it as a conductive material, our valuation would be completely disconnected from the way we currently assign value to this material. In other words it would have REAL VALUE, but this is IMPOSSIBLE IN A MONETARY SYSTEM.

If money is based on gold and if you have a fort knox still going then capital is a resource or at least capital is comprised partly of resource (I don't know what is being used by governments as physical evidence for capital. I could use some help here, especially from you government agents lurking around here :P ).

That's the whole point, friend. NOTHING IS BEING USED AS PHYSICAL EVIDENCE FOR CAPITAL. That's the whole freakin point.

NOTHING.

Our entire economic model is base on FAITH. It is pure ABSTRACTION. That is why when people get afraid the whole thing starts to fall apart.

From BBC News:

Fear grips global stock markets

...In a day of major panic selling, the Dow Jones index fell as much as 5% in the US before ending down 1.5%.

The fear is that the financial crisis will tip the world into a recession....

Investors increasingly fear a global recession, despite interest rate cuts and cash injections by central banks...

"Fear has been running all over Wall Street," said Dave Henderson, a floor trader on the New York Stock Exchange...

-BBC News

It's right in front of our faces and in the very language that we use to describe the collapse. We have lost FAITH which is the only thing that our capital is supported by. Better put:

CAPITAL IS FAITH.

Those that wield capital and leverage wealth are wielding FAITH and leveraging FAITH. Now that we are loosing FAITH, now that we are SEEING that the whole system revolves around a MIND GAME, the whole thing is falling apart. The ABSTRACTION is no longer believable.

Everyone who reads this and feels that there is atleast some truth to what I'm saying should check out Alan Watts. In this short lecture he lays it out sooooo clearly:
http://www.youtube.com/view_play_lis...906&playnext=1




I will leave this responce to the realm of capital V.S. resource management. I did read what you had to say about religioun and I quite agree with your position that nobody really knows what's going on and that you've made it your goal to find out for yourself. I love it. DO YOU!

As you formulate further responses on this subject try to apply this meme to your thought process:

"Is this thought the product of a monetary system? What would this thought look like in the absence of wealth and capital?"

Great Love,
John

P.S. I've started a new thread for discussing the venus project here:
http://projectavalon.org/forum/showt...9869#post59869

[elirien]

Originally Posted by Reveling John

I feel the same way, Elirien, like it's become my new job. Ironic, seeing as I'm currently unemployed

Well I am employed but if this continues this way I'll be probably broke, have an internet documentary, some esoteric books and shot by a U.N. peace officer that tried to "reason" with me for an rfid chip Not that I see death as doom and gloom but I also don't see it as a "release" from something. I like to give my back to uncle "I dunno ****" on this matter Well let's continue with the main topic.

Originally Posted by Reveling John

"Is this thought the product of a monetary system? What would this thought look like in the absence of wealth and capital?"

I like to first adress this sentence since it is exactly reflecting my feelings. I don't know if feelings are to be trusted on anything (not that I'm against them. Their heaps of fun many of the times ) but this is an important sentence that kind of sets the stage or is sort of a point of reference to return when one get's lost in the "fact jungle".

I don't define myself with an external source anymore. I still have some connections to the external on this matter but I'm trying hard to root them out. I couldn't care less if this monetary system fails (which it will). I don't believe that I am a product of any system. I'm not trying to define myself with the past. I am neither a grandson of Jesus neither of Atatürk. I am what I am and I don't know what the hell it is

Originally Posted by Reveling John

The problem with dicitionary definitions is that when you we use words to create sentences we have to choose which definitions apply to each word. If you use all six of those definition for 'resource' and apply that same approach to each word in the sentence, you'll get more than a billion different meanings for that sentence, because of course, the definitions themselves are made up of words, each of those words having multiple definitions. So we need to choose ONE definition in order for this conversation to have any meaning. Further more the way Jacque uses the term resource, he is using it as a synonym for NATURAL resources, which is even more specific. Here's what I mean:

Well that sentence from Mr. Fresco doesn't define his view on resources. It just states the blueprint of his theory should be customized for the elements he lists there. Gold is a natural resource by the way.

Originally Posted by Reveling John

So, since my use of the term RESOURCE will always be in reference to NATURAL RESOURCES let's look further into the definition of natural resource:

Again applies to gold.

Originally Posted by Reveling John

Now, when it says that a resource's value "rests in the amount of the material available and the demand for it," it is defining VALUE within the context of a monetary-based economy. All of your definitions that use the terms VALUE, MEASURE, WEALTH, CAPITAL, and ASSETS are projections of a monetary-based understanding of the resources available to us.

So basically when using such definitions as a foundation for argument, you are arguing from the perspective of consciousness that measures everything and defines everything on a scale of supply and demand, which in this manifestation of the world economy are total ABSTRACTIONS. Look at what's happening to the stock market. The economy is shrinking despite that fact that there has been NO CHANGE IN THE QUANTITY OF NATURAL RESOURCES in the last three weeks AND NO CHANGE IN THE DEMAND FOR THESE RESOURCES. If there is an observable change in REAL demand it would actually be an increase, which should result in an expanding economy, and yet...

If the theory here is that natural resources worth or value should be evaluated by their appliances and rarity then I'm all for that. But I can't see how that could tie in with the idea of using papers representing the resource itself. Ok. The economy model of today is bs. I am saying that of course and the ideals built on scarcity (which is virtual anyway) are also bs. Still I can't see the connection of a representative paper.

Originally Posted by Reveling John

Think about the housing "bubble" in the US. In July it was reported that the foreclosure crisis had left 2 MILLION homes (in the US alone) standing empty, with the price of these properties plummeting. Is there no demand for houses? My city (los angeles) alone had EIGHTY THOUSAND homeless people at the beginning of this year. San Francisco has TWENTY THOUSAND. New York has FORTY THOUSAND. Is there a demand for homes? Google the term "Tent City" or "Bushville", and you will find that the rate of homelessness in this country is SKY-ROCKETING EXPONENTIALLY. There is SUPPLY and there is a HUGE DEMAND, so why aren't these houses selling, and why is the market price crashing? This would indicate that supply and demand AS DEFINED IN A MONETARY-BASED WORLD ECONOMY IS A COMPLETE ABSTRACTION, having very little relationship to the actuall PHYSICAL MEASUREMENT of SUPPLY and the actual human need expressed as DEMAND.

As I said above you are totally right on that one. The basis on defining worth with supply and demand graphs is moronic to say the least. I'm a fresh business student and am reading about this bs lately and I can just perceive not optimization of the usage of natural resources but digitization of the human being with these hollow and idiotic economic models. You don't need to change your transactional media to make them better. You just need a brain and good will.

Originally Posted by Reveling John

Furthermore, the DEMAND for gold, silver, or platinum is not based on their uses as conductive or semi-conductive materials, which has only come about in the last 60 years or so, although this may be changing at this point in time. However, in the periods of time when money was backed by a gold standard it was not a useful resource of any kind, except as a representation of wealth or capital.

Yeah or perhaps used as a resource for making cups, perhaps the holy grail :P. But there is this monatomic gold issue that reaches far into the times of moses and the pharaohs. I'm not sure if you are familiar with that. It does put a lot of worth on the gold.

And of course there is the sitchin story with enlil and enki creating us as gold miners... Since I don't trust him I can skip that as some sort of father christmas story.

Originally Posted by Reveling John

And I didn't say DISTRACTION although that could be applied ironically. The term I'm using is ABSTRACTION:

Sorry. That was my fault. Although it is kinda close

Originally Posted by Reveling John

And yet your DEMAND for gold is not effecting the PRICE (i.e. VALUE) of gold. Rather the value of gold, which fluctuates daily, despite a finite REAL supply and an exponentially increasing REAL demand, is determined by how gold COMMODITIES are selling on the stock market. Notice that COMMODITY is an inherently monetary-based distinction and would have no use in a (natural) resource-based economy.

Yes.

Originally Posted by Reveling John

Yes you can and the fact that you can use it as a COMMODITY gives owners of gold and gold stock an incentive to ARTIFICIALLY LOWER THE SUPPLY of gold in circulation (which they do, in the same way that they control the supply of silver, diamonds, plantinum, oil, beans, rice, corn, EVERYTHING - despite millions of people having a REAL need/demand for these items). For this same reason stock traders who speciallized in short-selling are given incentive to ARTIFICIALLY INCREASE SUPPLY so that when the commodity looses value they can make money off of the sale (short sellers make money when a stock sells at a loss). This is EXACTLY what they did in the MORTGAGE and DERIVATIVE markets, which led to the sub-mortgage crisis because (and this is freaking insane) THEY PROFIT FROM OUR LOSSES. If gold were ONLY a resource, and it's value were ONLY determined by your REAL need and my REAL need to harness it as a conductive material, our valuation would be completely disconnected from the way we currently assign value to this material. In other words it would have REAL VALUE, but this is IMPOSSIBLE IN A MONETARY SYSTEM.



That's the whole point, friend. NOTHING IS BEING USED AS PHYSICAL EVIDENCE FOR CAPITAL. That's the whole freakin point.

NOTHING.

Our entire economic model is base on FAITH. It is pure ABSTRACTION. That is why when people get afraid the whole thing starts to fall apart.

From BBC News:



It's right in front of our faces and in the very language that we use to describe the collapse. We have lost FAITH which is the only thing that our capital is supported by. Better put:

CAPITAL IS FAITH.

Those that wield capital and leverage wealth are wielding FAITH and leveraging FAITH. Now that we are loosing FAITH, now that we are SEEING that the whole system revolves around a MIND GAME, the whole thing is falling apart. The ABSTRACTION is no longer believable.

Everyone who reads this and feels that there is atleast some truth to what I'm saying should check out Alan Watts. In this short lecture he lays it out sooooo clearly:
http://www.youtube.com/view_play_lis...906&playnext=1

Very true all of the above except again money as a media for transaction. I still think the problem is with the wrong interpretation of the system. Using resource not as resources but as symbols for virtual assets or as you above mentioned as symbols for blind submission is the problem. Capital became faith years ago first when the priest dudes began collecting gold for their "church". It's a long subject which I won't go into here. But as I stated before the only problem I have with your research is that you see money as what it is defined by the federal bank of america. Money is not only that.

Originally Posted by Reveling John

I will leave this responce to the realm of capital V.S. resource management. I did read what you had to say about religioun and I quite agree with your position that nobody really knows what's going on and that you've made it your goal to find out for yourself. I love it. DO YOU!

Great Love,
John

P.S. I've started a new thread for discussing the venus project here:
http://projectavalon.org/forum/showt...9869#post59869

Well at least I'm gonna try which is more fun and interesting then simulations of this search that is being presented to us in moronic plots in TV-Cinema

Thank you for your posts John. I'm sure we will arrive at a conclusion in a short time. Maybe we should gather these in a text file and use them on the forums we visit, blogs etc. I2ll be over at your new post later on in the day (got to work occasionally ).

Be good all of you.