28
Nov
07

Movie Review: Zeitgeist – The Movie

Title: Zeitgeist – The Movie
Release: 2007
Genre: Documentary
Run Time: 116 Minutes
Author: Peter Joseph
Rating: 68%
URL: http://www.zeitgeistmovie.com/ (watch online)

After an excessively long introduction, Zeitgeist launches into a dissection of religion (titled “The Greatest Story Ever Told”), and by religion the film-makers mean Christianity. A brief summary of astrology gives way to a comparison of earlier Middle-Eastern mythologies to the mythology which predated all of them. Indeed there are many coincidences to between the Egyptian Sun God Horus and the central figures of later faiths:

  • Horus was born December 25th to the virgin Isis
  • He was adorned by three “kings” who followed an eastern star
  • He was deemed a prodigy at 12 and was baptized at the Age of 30
  • He traveled with 12 disciples and traveled around performing miracles like healing the sick and walking on water
  • His alternate names included “Lamb of God”, “The truth, the light”
  • He was betrayed, crucified, buried from the dead and rose three days later

Anyone who paid attention during Sunday school or at least made an effort to read a bible (a group encompassing fewer Christians that one would think) should be a bit uneasy, as the Story of Jesus Christ is nearly identical – only the names differ. Strangely (or perhaps not) the same general sequence of events can be found many other mythologies across the world. The film then attempts to link common attributes of these stories to astrological symbolism and does a fairly convincing job of it.

None of this information (or at least the discussion of its legitimacy) should be new to armchair theologians, but it was not initially clear why Christianity was singled out above all others for astrological plagiarism – it was not the first, last or worst offender among the emerging faiths. Eventually, the answer is provided – the Romans apparently invented the myth of Jesus Christ solely to exercise social and economic control over Europe. Never mind Karl Marx’s Opiate of the Masses attack – the Zeitgeist narrator directly refers to Christianity and similar faiths as “the fraud of the age”. Them be Fightin’ words.

Alas, Zeitgeist is a film about conspiracy theories – an emphatic diatribe of how small groups of shadowy figures conspire to control the masses.

Bush’s Brawn

The second part of the movie, titled “All the World’s a Stage”, attempts to prove that the US government plotted the 9/11 attacks in New York and contracted the dirty work to international resources. Provided evidence includes a mixture of the apparent “TV clips of witnesses describing a second explosion”, the questionable “government efforts to hide any conclusive evidence of a Boeing 757 hitting the Pentagon” and the perplexing “the demolition-like accuracy with which the buildings collapsed”. Again, the viewer is presented with a series of facts that are true or at least believable, some arousing anecdotes and a consequential induction that implicates shadowy powers.

If film-maker Peter Joseph can be credited for one thing, it’s flawlessly utilizing Dale Carnegie’s yes-yes technique to influence the viewer. Like any good conspiracy theorist, he starts with information that is true (yes #1), follows with information that is apparent enough to make the viewer question previous dogma (yes #2) and inserts his interpretation of what is driving those occurrences (in this case, that the US government intentionally detonated the twin towers). One major distinction between a conspiracy theory and a valid explanation is that conspiracy theories rarely work inversely as deduction. As a Math Professor of mine loved to recite, proving all poodles are dogs does not prove all dogs are poodles.

Hand in my Pocket

The third section is called “Don’t Mind The Men Behind The Curtain” and deals with disproportionate influence exercised by early banking tycoons like JP Morgan and John D Rockefeller. The stock market crash of 1929 is alleged to have been deliberately engineered by the “international bankers” to allow a large-scale cash grab and easy purchase of failed rivals. The 1933 American gold seizure, establishment of the US Federal Reserve and the major world wars of the 20th century are also attributed to the objectives of the international bankers, who stood to gain from the interest on loans made to both the state and consumers. These bankers are never clearly defined after the first generation of financial barons. More alarmingly, the Federal Income Tax is declared unconstitutional – a declaration backed by a pair of former IRS agents who testify to avoiding tax payment for years without penalty. Perhaps they could share what they know with Wesley Snipes.

Zeitgeist closes, strangely, with a motivational speech about unity and how the human race should unshackle themselves from the social structures imposed by a diabolical few. It did provide levity for an otherwise bleak film, but nonetheless sounded kitschy.

Worth a Tin-Foil Hat?

Is Zeitgeist worth the watch? Probably, as you can watch it for free via the URL provided above. The movie also provides an opportunity to test your critical thinking – the real enjoyment in indulging conspiracy theories is not self-congratulation for being skeptical, but being able to explain precisely where they fail.

Conversely, you may find yourself occasionally saying “wait a minute!” and questioning what you thought you knew. Sadly, conspiracy theories are one of the few remaining outlets for some good old-fashioned, politically-incorrect debate, and one area Zeitgest excels at is stimulating debate. Invite a friend or two over and have fun.

Update (2008-10-12):
Review for Zeitgeist Addendum


63 Responses to “Movie Review: Zeitgeist – The Movie”


  1. 1 Jack Dec 2nd, 2007 at 8:12 pm

    Good one — you amaze me.

    You’re up in the AM.

  2. 2 Anna Keightley Dec 4th, 2007 at 10:10 am

    Excellent review and explanation, Cynapse. Now where would Gibbon’s “Rise and Fall of the Roman Empire” fit into this picture. You’d have to think about the Roman Empire engineering its own demise. Possible? Anything is.

  3. 3 Brandon Williams Dec 8th, 2007 at 3:14 am

    I am a strong follower of Christ, consider myself a Christian and really enjoyed the movie. Though I am a Christian I have 2 points of views about this movie and the reviews I have been reading. One (and I could guess why) the defenders of the Christian faith defense was not presented and taken out of context. This is already a long comment so I won’t go into detail. Two, though I do not agree with all of his points of views I think when ever some one believes in a conspiracy there just shrugged off but remember many of the greatest horrors of history was just conspiracy theories. Detailed sources would be nice. Thanks for listening.

  4. 4 Cynapse Dec 8th, 2007 at 9:12 am

    Brandon:

    The film producers have a list of sources for each section of the movie:

    http://www.zeitgeistmovie.com/sources.htm

  5. 5 Emilia Liz Dec 11th, 2007 at 11:13 pm

    If I can find a babysitter for my daughter, I might just watch this movie and review it for my church bulletin. So thank you for bringing it to my attention.

  6. 6 Me Dec 28th, 2007 at 7:53 am

    If you’re trying to say Christianity didn’t steal most of their stuff from pagan religions you fail miserably, since you failed to point out christmas has NOTHING to do with Jesus, or his birth.

  7. 7 Sir Dec 28th, 2007 at 11:57 am

    How can essential objective information be called a conspiracy except in an attempt to dismiss it completely? If only there was more objective info to support religion, there wouldn’t be any questioning it to begin with!

  8. 8 mi yu Jan 1st, 2008 at 5:41 pm

    As for the religion thing, I think it’s much more likely that Jesus was a real person (why would the Romans invent somebody that would encourage society to challenge war/imperialism?) but that many of the traditions and rituals were fused with already existing customs.

  9. 9 Not important Jan 8th, 2008 at 11:05 pm

    The whole point of the movie to not to make you believe what they are telling you because it is simply what they believe, that would be completely against what they are saying. What they want you to do is think about, RESEARCH FOR YOURSELF!, and believe what you want. Any of you can research a topic, any topic, and then make the decision for yourself after you see it with your own eyes. Unfortunately, for most of you, their plan worked, it made all of you think twice, even for a second.

  10. 10 Dan Jan 8th, 2008 at 11:53 pm

    I think the first section of the movie has a lot of questionable parts. Like the astronomy part seems like with the randomness of the astrology you can relate it to almost anything. But the ages part was pretty interesting how were going through monthly, seasonly, and a very long age all at once. The 2nd and 3rd section are awesome and totally hit key factors that make people believe 911 was an inside job. I do believe it was an inside job. The 3rd section is nuts too and basically sets the stage for the ideas of New World Order. This stuff is very interested id suggest watching “Loose Change” and reading the book “Behold a Pale Horse’ by William Cooper. I am a few chapters in and already its blowing my mind.

  11. 11 Terry Jan 9th, 2008 at 1:05 pm

    As for myself, after being around for 50 years the information I received over time about the universe, earth, dinosaurs, man, time, religion, power, control, destiny, had conceptual gaps, or inconclusive information. My dad always told us if you new only half of what is really going on it would scare you to death.
    Although I agree it is easier to believe in a simplified version of reality, or to be in a bias overtone toward it, I believe the movie has done a great justice in moving us forward to what our world needs which is critical thinking, and a promotion of peace. If any Christians deny this it proves the control theory in part one.
    Thou shall not kill! The no.1 point of the movie!

    Attack on Iraq:
    A man comes to your door and convinces you to
    give your life savings to a new annuity policy
    and you loose it all to junk bonds- forfeiting your
    children’s future.

    Attack on Iran:
    Now the man comes back and wants what you have
    left and inslave your grandchildren.

    Reach the senses of the people, restore hope.

    TR

  12. 12 Thinkaboutit Jan 12th, 2008 at 5:46 pm

    The conversation between Nicholas Rockafeller and Aaron Roseau outlined three main points:

    Invasion of Iraq (already happened)
    Invasion of Iran (already happened)
    Removal of Chavez from Venezuela..

    There are some recent issues going on regarding the prisoner/hostage-exchange between the Farcs and the Columbian government. Chavez was initially playing the role of mediator, but was removed from this position by Uribe (columbian pres), because he apprently shows too much compassion towards the Farcs.

    The Farcs are deemed terrorist groups by the US and Columbian government, but Chevez believes that they are a politically legitimate group.

    If this goes the way that was predicted, I would be rather surprised.

  13. 13 j0shi Jan 13th, 2008 at 12:50 pm

    Regarding the banker tycoons influence, I thinnk they wont be able to so far ahead as to have `one world` but they sure are going to have everyone debted.. :)

    Ever taken a bank loan and tried to pay it back before time? The bank levies penalty like charges because you are paying back early.

  14. 14 You and God Jan 17th, 2008 at 11:15 pm

    The movie is about YOU and what you deserve, your real importance and beauty, how strong and perfect we are and how we don’t know to enjoy all the nature, life around us. The conversation between an human being and God should be private, personal, individual, away from any intrusion, advice or orientation. Every single person has the right to connect with god by it’s own way.

  15. 15 Read this Jan 19th, 2008 at 10:20 pm
  16. 16 Chris Jan 24th, 2008 at 5:51 pm

    The purpose of this movie is not to make you believe what they are telling you. The purpose of it is to make you think for yourself. It is meant to spark an interest in what is going on in the society that we live in.

  17. 17 Nick Jan 28th, 2008 at 3:31 pm

    It’s really hard to find any info on the movie Zeitgeist other than it’s own website. However, all this review does is briefly outline the material, and passes it off. What I can’t understand is why people who get excited when the news tells them anything they haven’t heard before, but when they come across something like the movie Zeitgeist, which is full of very convincing material, and pass it off as a conspiracy and leisurely discuss it with their friends as if the topic was literature or dog breeding. The movie obviously designed to make one “mad.” It wants to stir up your emotions. You should feel very uncomfortable after watching this film, because although the film may not be completely factual, the possibility of truth should make you feel like complete shit. But who wants that? Discomfort in our own American living rooms?! No no no, the general public is much happier learning about the latest terrorists plots being foiled. They are much happier to discuss Zeitgeist with their friends, tossing the ideas back and forth like a hot potato, until its no longer hot. Perhaps we shouldn’t believe Zeitgeist, because if we do, we’d only be hypocrits right? However, I think that we need to take things a little more seriously.

  18. 18 Cynapse Feb 7th, 2008 at 1:02 am
  19. 19 Sir Feb 19th, 2008 at 12:58 pm

    Faith in “Exterior Power Sources”, relieves the mind of the burdens to acheiving more self-efficacy, which (self-efficacy) is the greatest enemy of falsehoods. The very things that the self has the most control over. The action of questioning everything is the first step of self-efficacy. Accept nothing into your belief system unless you fully understand the impact it has on your life and how it either makes you more or less aware. Believing can be most decieving! We must become our own best asset, and those whom have the greatest fears are those who adopt ‘ideas of truth based on beliefs’ as greater than honesty. Those that opt for faith, stop questioning and learning anything BEYOND what ‘that faith’ requires of itself to exist. Others will opt for Conscious Growth through HONESTY and questioning everything. It is time for man to take the next step, and rid himself of the ignorance that allows for the destuction of honest communication and critical thinking. We are on the edge of a new paradigm where faiths can be slain as the “darkness” and “ignorance pervaders” they in fact are! We must make our choice or continue to be fragmented and lose everything… the real End is near… which way will we choose…. life or death?

  20. 20 Eddy Feb 23rd, 2008 at 10:28 am

    Id just like 2 say sum parts of the movie feall very real like jesus being based on an older religion the romans making it in a new religon 2 controle peple very unlikely.but i do think that sum of it is true the calapse of building 7 on 9/11 never explaned by any degree by the goverment.I think the bank thing is definatley true basicaly a bank taking 35% of all amercans money and them not even being aware of it is frighting and all thay have 2 do is print money thats not worth any thing!But sum of it gets fare fetched.
    MAKE SURE YOU WATCH IT AND TELL YOUR FRIENDS TO!
    you can watch it at http://www.zeitgeistmovie.com/

  21. 21 No Name Feb 27th, 2008 at 10:13 pm

    Some of you people are incredible. Are you so blind that you can’t see what’s in front of you? The Zeitgeist movie doesn’t bring anything new…we all new all these fact for years now. You just need to open your eyes for one minute. This is no conspiracy,it’s the reality. And the sad fact is I do exactly the same thing. I preffer to ignore it and live on with my short,peaceful live. Hopefully someone will have the guts to stand up one day and say “Enough…”.

  22. 22 John Feb 28th, 2008 at 3:31 am

    i agree with a lot of u people…but its true most these things are real…tha northern american union with canada and mexico is real…go to youtube and search ron paul…they’ve actually asked him questions on debates…he knows about tha federal reserve…tha government keeps us dumb and doesn’t talk about tha evil they do so we don’t ask questions…time to wake up cus if not we’ll be nothing more then numbers in a database with a chip implanted in our bodies

  23. 23 Damian Mar 3rd, 2008 at 3:05 am

    Everyone needs to watch this and form their own opinions, religious or not. Research the claims yourself and prove them wrong. It would appear that this film has been made to inform, not to profit. If there is no truth to the majority of the film’s content why go to such an extent to promote it and have it screened in so many locations around the world simultaneously? Is the producer an eccentric millionaire with a hidden agenda? I don’t think so.
    The truth hurts, especially those with blind faith.

  24. 24 Next time Apr 6th, 2008 at 7:50 pm

    HA -HA -HA. Somebody gave this ling so I read this “…..The reason we celebrate December 25th is because a couple of centuries after the birth of Christ the church set that date deliberately to replace the Winter solstice celebrations, so of course there is a parallel to the winter solstice, but not for the reasons implied in the film…….”Then why they didn’t move it more precisely on 22 DEC And why exactly the chirch will do THAT?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!??!?!?!?!? Waw, people you are increidible!!!! To REJECT the truth when is INFRONT of YOU !!!!!!! Do you know how OSTRICH behaves when it sees some danger ?!?! You are behaving absolutely the same WAY!!! DING DING DING WAKE UP?!?!?! Or maybe JF Cenedy is still alive, or 50 000 000 people didn’t die during WWII !??! For HUMAN SAKE – THINK !!!

  25. 25 WOW May 8th, 2008 at 4:26 pm

    Christians are funny :P

  26. 26 boo didley May 28th, 2008 at 9:23 am

    ” a smart man is one who can take something in and than discard it”

    I stopped watching after the film maker said horus was born on december 25th…

    thats false as is alot more of the info presented in the first part of the film…

    he just didnt think anyone actually knew anything about what he’s trying to apss off as fact….

  27. 27 omar May 29th, 2008 at 10:12 pm

    i think the movie is trying to evade us from the pagan world and i personallly believe the movie was very good. howeverwith the astrology comming in to the picture the connection of previous gods and similar characteristics i thought it was a good connection point for the argument and therefore the conspiracy was proved to be true. however religeons like islam does disprove this type of mythology and it was stated though that we believe in christ we dont believe he is the sun and he was never ressurected. good but if ur disproving religeon u gotta consider all faiths.

    the international banks and military cartels was briliant because the actual logic was not subjective it was more logical and therefore i would give an a plus for that part. 9/11 we all know was a conspiracy.

    so when doi we get the movie turning against world government and marching for the freedom of man.

  28. 28 xam Jun 19th, 2008 at 11:57 am

    I firmly believe that the intention of this movie is to ignite an interest (within the viewer) in our world. So many of us are unaware of so many things that occur in our brief existence. If the bible were read more like a literary text, and not like an objective report we would be more enlightened and we would be beyond this. Read it and look for repetition, symbolism, motifs, and universal archetypes such as the widely accepted battle of good vs evil, and light vs dark as stated in the movie, the bible, and many other literary compositions (fiction). If one is thinking about entirely dismissing this movie, even knowing it’s flaws, you fall victim to social control devices also known as religion, debt, and the “American dream”. Consider this… just consider it… as stated in the movie, and widely accepted; the sun keeps us warm, gives us light, and helps our crops grow… now think about petroleum/all fossil fuels. Think about the energy crisis, the price of gas, the cost to warm or cool our houses, the inflation of food prices… all due to high fuel and energy prices… coincidence? And who controls those prices? Who reaps the benefits? And who is subjected (enslaved if you may) by these commodities? YOU ARE… wanna see true freedom? So do I. The beauty of using terror as a social control device is that anyone can be subjected to it. Think about a group of people, who believe they are going to combat the (elite) board members, presidents and vice presidents of the most important, influential, and powerful companies… to make a “difference” and better the world. That rebel or revolutionary group will be vaporized under the assertion that “they’re terrorists, and they want to destroy our democrazy!! GET THEM!!” I may have gone off on a cracy rant, but hopefully something here will inspire some people to begin their search for the “truth”, whatever it may be. We need not be lazy. I have a lot of great ideas, however, I lack the organization to present my information in a proper way (notice the lack of direction of this comment turned essay). I will someday soon write something worth reading, with proper citations and references… but I am currently submerged in my online quest to fulfill my CALL OF DUTY with modern warfare ;) I’m no different, I know.

  29. 29 neo Jun 19th, 2008 at 12:09 pm

    Kinda reminds me of the “MATRIX”… what pill do you want? Red? or Blue? Even some of our movies explore and probe the idea of reality. Sad thing is, most of us prefer to ignore the thought. It’s easier, and comfy… not to mention, the truth hurts… it hurts a lot.

  30. 30 John MatX Jun 21st, 2008 at 8:50 pm

    ZeitGeist point is to make people open there mind. I use to be a bible hugger. Did the whole walk. The moment you start asking questions thats the moment that will make you wake up. Use your common sense to find out the truth. I for one do not have to defend the movie. For truth doesn’t need to be defended. If you find your self getting mad at the movie for its insight on religion. You failed to realize the whole point of the teachings of your religion. God’s mind is open so keep it open. For God’s love is truely unconditional. There for God lets people have free will to believe what they choose. Let me just throw this at you. If god judges you when you die. does that sound like unconditional love or conditioned love. The god i know is the god of all that is. The god of all religions. Once you refuse the will of another. you are not walking the path of gods love. Alot of people who follow religion are close minded and judge others, yet they say they know god. Like i said before Truth never has to be defended or fought over. For truth is simple. just as nature is simple so is god’s unconditional love for both evil and good. Once you transend the Whole I AM Right and they are wrong in thiers ways. You will truely be on the right path. Truth is always stranger then fiction. The more you do searches about the skull and bones illuminati free masons cfr etc. The more your desire to know the truth. the sooner it will be shown to you.

    Sites i look for uplifting info on is:
    lightworkers.org
    this site is the most uplifting one on what is going on in the world.
    Ask people there questions and get the whole truth about the power in you and I.
    For we are powerfull beings for we are truely Children of gods light. Anything less is false teachings. ASK and you shall recieve. Question and walk your path, may you find what you heart is truely longing for.

    In love and Light :D

  31. 31 Dale Evans Jun 23rd, 2008 at 1:32 pm

    Hurray! Another anti-conspiracy theory nut goes on a successful rampage, tirelessly working to convince the masses that all authority figures are obviously working in our best interests, 100% of the time.

    Good job!

  32. 32 Kazozie Jul 21st, 2008 at 8:51 pm

    In my opinion….This video was not made to disprove christianity or anything like that. I think it was here to point out all the things we DIDN’T know so that we COULD figure out that we only know half of the truth, half of everything thats going on and we dont think critically enough. Other than that, the ‘tube’ was completely true when it said (I don’t remember it exactly, they may have said it in different words) ‘Everything you know you hear from that tube!They can make you believe almost anything, just that tube!’

    I’m only 12 and this video made me think much more critically. I observe everything in more detail, and think about things more. So yeah, you probably do to. But you just don’t realize it.

  33. 33 Parabellum Jul 23rd, 2008 at 5:10 pm

    By this so called “review” – you are the part of the system, who is still connected to the matrix…

    It was hard to believe, that Earth is round shaped and turns around, that man could fly in space, about 400 years ago world doesn’t even knew about existence of America as a continent, phones without a wire? – come on!!.., TV – bullshit – impossible, internet – what is it???…
    System uses peoples’ stupidity for their purposes: that man, who stated about the Earth was killed by the citizens of the town he lived in … Imagine someone saying about phones, TV at those times – he would have the same fate – killed. Because people were not ready for such statements that change their common understandings so hard, that it leads them to go crazy and to prevent any tryings of such interventions in their minds, because they simply cannot understand! Not even trying to understand. Not even thinking about trying to understand. And not even believing that they could try to think in order to understand…

    Here, with the Zeitgeist – people would search for any possible reason… any small part of this possibility to find something, which could give them feeling of self confidence to say that all that is shown here is bullshit… Because it is easier, not to turn things upside down and leave them untouched, rather than sacrifice with such “stability” and start from a blank sheet of paper…

    I’m not a fan of this movie, I’m not saying that it is great in all aspects… I’m just scared by peoples stupidity… that we’ll always be in the comparison like 1 to 100, where 1 can think, analyze and the other 100 – make a decision as a mass, crowd – above mentioned example about Earth… Said that, I’m more concerned about the chance that it is possible (and we already have such examples), that if this 1 man, which can think has authority to make decisions and wants to use it for his own purposes – we have a Zeitgeist…

    So – THINK! And if we make it 50/50 instead of 1/100… we will have more or less equal chances to make correct decision, instead of leading someone, which is “known” as being “the correctness itself”… We will have chance to survive, and remain our freedom… freedom of our minds… freedom of our souls…freedom to have the right to be on this Earth, without anyone’s judgment regarding the necessity of me having the human right to have My place, My mind, My point of view, My personality and originality… I’m not a solder, not a slave…


    Digitally yours,
    Parabellum

    ¤ Democracy – is a right of a slaves to choose slave owners…

  34. 34 SuperSizeCongress Jul 28th, 2008 at 2:21 am

    After viewing the Zeitgeist movie, the Bob Barr for President looks like the best choice as the incentive to take more, more money, more control is limited.
    About half of the current income tax, say around 25%, goes to banks to pay the US debt and the other half roughly goes to the military. Social security and the rest are incidentals.
    Another go-along film with this is Oil & War a stage show by Robert Newman. funny & informative
    http://brasschecktv.com/page/32.html

  35. 35 a Jul 30th, 2008 at 5:27 pm

    People with power have cotrolled the masses throughout history. This movie illustrates that point. Christianity was a way to control and make money, 9/11 was too and now this is our future.

  36. 36 Your God here... Aug 7th, 2008 at 8:14 pm

    Are you still with us… Okay, as you read I want you to think about a fun thing you did as a child. Now, think about how much fun it was. As you think more you will become more or less in a dreamy state of thought. You are becoming sleepy… Slowly, your eyes will close. Now, you will reach out and open up a new email. Type the sender as bladen911@yahoo.com and in the body of the email give the information of one of your major credit cards. And hit send. Okay, now you will not remember the last few instructions or that this every occurred. Now I will snap my fingers on 3… 2… 1…, you will awake and feel blissful and ignorant as you were before this all began.

    Forget about reading the rest of the comments below. I did and was nearly cast into a deep sleep.

    ~ Bonk! Kerplunk! SLAP!!!
    ;)

  37. 37 KJ Sep 4th, 2008 at 12:57 am

    I really liked this vid too. I am a bit suspect of the agenda they are trying to promote however. They offer some great facts but yet gloss over huge amounts of contributing information. It’s kind of a case where the devil is in the details – they leave out, the facts they use are twisted in a way by the facts – they leave out. I really am big on giving people all the facts and truths of a matter and letting them come to their own conclusions, but there seems to be a purposeful way of leaving out ALL the facts in this vid, while giving important tid-bits to sway an opinion in one direction. This kind of irks me a bit when they are willing to offer so much in one way.

  38. 38 Sam Sep 30th, 2008 at 8:39 pm

    Hey, there is a common misconception about religion, that when people exposed to the fact that religion is just a tool to dominate/manipulate them, they will certainly feel “stupid” enough to dislike the whole idea, well the misconception is: religion is NOT invented to manipulate people, simply, people invent religions just as natural as inventing any social system, but the elite powered-group of people are the ones blamed to USE religion as a manipulation tool, they simply – the elite – serve protecting the religion and reinforcing it with time, note that even in this time we are living now a huge new re-religion phase is taking place, especially in the Islamic world, simply: when people turn away from god, push’em back, as they might be smart enough to ask and question.
    I really like the movie, and I don’t – by any means – think the movie is introducing a conspiracy theory, rather than it really is introducing questions that you – as a person – have to find answers.
    Thank you

  39. 39 zz Nov 15th, 2008 at 3:29 pm

    Why should one want to “find the answers” to a collection of stupid and trivial ideas that contain no redeeming value from a historical or factual point of view.

    I view this movie clip as a wildly ignorant and unimportant collection of intellectual trash.

    The other night I listened to the comments of Peter Joseph, the producer of this waste of video space, as George Noory allowed him to rant on until it was sickening.

    Why waste time with something that has negative value. Therefore, let us resolve the complete erasure of this movement by pressing CTRL-ALT-DEL and it will go away.

  40. 40 Brit Nov 28th, 2008 at 11:27 pm

    Having grown up in the uk i am well aware of the power of propaganda. The BBC (believe or not) were the only news broadcasting company for 80 of the last 100 years. Having travelled the World you realize how dumb people are,we all listen to Fox news etc whether it be in the US or South Africa.It’s very difficult to form your own ideas when we are fed propaganda all day… THEN CAME THE INTERNET! I find it so refreshing to find movies like zeitgeist, movies that actually allow you to think & discuss.It is possible to get away from prpaganda…just get off your lazy ass & research!
    I like many non US citizens welcome Obama to office,but we all worry too that he will be removed like all people that try to change things.I believe many of the things mentioned in the movie, many things are not accurate,but again we are her discussing it! now that’s healthy!!

  41. 41 gonzo Jan 18th, 2009 at 7:04 am

    For more interesting thoughts on religion and the human condition I recommend the book ‘Straw Dogs’ by John Gray
    I think you have to be on guard when presented with conspiracy theories, generally the larger and more complex the conspiracy the more unlikely it becomes. Whatever your point of view I think you have to accept that 911 was a feat of organization whoever was involved. The fact that such a plan was kept hidden from view right up until its execution was just as amazing as the event itself. If 911 doesn’t point to a conspiracy by the US security forces then it surely points to a massive failure by them. Personally I am not keen on the conspiracy idea in this case, it seems to me that it would have to involve both sides since Al-Qaeda have always claimed responsibility.
    But this is a fun movie to watch if you like detective stories and mysteries, and who doesn’t?
    It is understandable that deeper investigation of 911 is uncomfortable for the authorities, they might uncover basic flaws in the system and incompetence which could look like, or even amount to, complicity. Full blown conspiracy just seems to go too far though.

  42. 42 Lizzy Jan 24th, 2009 at 11:45 am

    I like your last paragraph. :) And your review is amazing.

    As to what I think of the movie, it actually amused me. It didn’t really rouse in me any anger towards the movie maker nor the subjects the movie tackled. (Although, I disliked the ending part of Zeitgeist Addendum where they posted a link to their website. It seemed like a propaganda and I don’t like propagandas of any kind that much.) However, it awakened me to actually think and be inspired to live not to avoid doing things but to actually do something to contribute to the world.

    It’s a waste to be skeptical about just the surface or the face value of the movie. Fact or fiction it doesn’t matter because I think the movie was made for the viewers to think, to make our brains work, not to be angered by what is presented in the video as well as not to be radical or suddenly have a change of heart or of what you believe in but to be open-minded.

    My stand in this movie, I don’t like the propaganda (if it ever is) but I have to agree with some of what it has presented.

  43. 43 Laz Apr 3rd, 2009 at 4:37 pm

    I don’t think there is any question about the 911 implosion at all with anybody. you can hide your head in the sand.like half the world did,the biggest question is what else will it take for us human beings to say enough .slavery or unity and Technology. we are not the owners of this planet we are guest in this time period of evaluation if we don’t evolve we will be extinct like all other extinct species. At which we are the only species that is capable of self extinction. change is immanent how we go about it is another question.I guess the poetic justice is when it does happen the ones holding control will go with us too.the facts are there. as far as I’m concerned about religion is that it has to be man made.only man would have the audacity to compare himself to something so great. in theory.and then turn it around use it to his advantage. the idea that the information in the movie provides is very useful to form an opinion. it saddens my heart, that my grand children are going to inherit this legacy of chasing a shadow of failure. It’s time to act .the next move is to organize with all and act in non destructive manner so those that oppose it can’t call you a terrorists. and remove you from power of unity. divide we fall.the power of free will.humm thank you

  44. 44 Laz Apr 3rd, 2009 at 10:04 pm

    I do believe in God. I believe his love in our hearts is what makes us human.sperating us from animal instincts.

  45. 45 Florin Andrei Jun 2nd, 2009 at 1:35 am

    Here’s my review:

    http://florin-other-blog.blogspot.com/2009/05/zeitgeist-movie-debunked-part-1.html

    Summary: The movie has numerous and grave issues with the sources and the references it uses.

  46. 46 FatalTruth Jun 7th, 2009 at 6:23 am

    Conspiracy Theory is the first thing launched at a movie such as Zeitgeist. I have read many reviews “claiming” to refute Part 1,2, or 3 of the movie. Yet many, if not all offer no information proving the claims made by Zeitgeist to be false. I agree the sources given are not very clear, but this is the 21st century where a world of knowledge is at our fingertips. All we have to do is be willing to search for it. The intentions of this film were to wake us up. Regardless if you think this film to be full of conspiracy theories, propaganda or just plain BS, you owe it to yourself to do a little research on your own to find the truth between the lines. Now on to my personal feelings of the film, Part 1 did nothing for me because I have always been spiritual and have never considered myself tied to one religion. Part 2 only added to the skepticism I already had surrounding the tragedies of 9/11. Part 3, the rich get rich, the poor get poorer (Am I wrong?). Zeitgeist the Addendum was dead on accurate in my opinion when it comes to finances, globalization and the need for a new social structure. I have studied Economics in depth and know the financial information to be undisputable FACT. Jacque Fresco’s ideas on technology are correct as well. If money did not exist we would still have all the resources needed to make homes, cars, computers, shoes etc. So what is its purpose except to perpetuate the “Monetary System”.

  47. 47 FatalTruth Jun 7th, 2009 at 7:24 am

    To elaborate further on my opinion of Zeitgeist Part 1 let me say this. Religion is built on a belief structure. I said in my first post that I am a spiritual person. I believe in a Divine Power. There is nothing that can shake or waver my belief in this. Whether you consider yourself to be Christian, Jewish, Muslim, Hindu, Rastafari … the list goes on.. You too believe in a Divine Power. That being said if Zeitgeist affected your beliefs in anyway, you should first ask the question “How strong was my belief for it to be so easily shaken?”

    Concerning Zeitgeist the Addendum and Jacque Fresco’s ideas about a new society I must agree. Money no longer holds any value except the value we place on it. Our money is Fiat money, meaning it holds no intrinsic value only that which is determined by legal means. The dollar is no longer a commodity-backed money. If we were to have another Depression our money would not be worth the commodity (paper) on which it is printed. When it comes to his statement that Politicians cannot solve our problems I could not agree anymore. Citigroup, Merrill Lynch, Goldman Sachs are just 3 of the biggest campaign contributors who are tied directly to this economic crisis we are facing and each contributed funds to McCain and Obama. We are gonna have to realize sooner than later that our social and economic structures are designed to profit a select few.

    One last note, paying taxes and filing taxes are two separate things. We all must PAY taxes, federal, state, property and so on. Failing to pay taxes or to report income is tax evasion. Not filing a return is not tax evasion. You have already paid your taxes before you even get your pay check. If anyone can refute this please do. I have tried and tried to find a LAW that states we must ‘FILE a TAX RETURN’ each year. Representatives from the IRS have not been able to clearly tell where this is stated either. The most common answer is “its a federal offense not to PAY taxes.” (keyword PAY, not FILE)

  48. 48 Francisco d'Anconia Jun 19th, 2009 at 11:36 pm

    “So you think that money is the root of all evil?” said Francisco d’Aconia. “Have you ever asked what is the root of money? Money is a tool of exchange, which can’t exist unless there are goods produced and men able to produce them. Money is the material shape of the principle that men who wish to deal with one another must deal by trade and give value for value. Money is not the tool of the moochers, who claim your product by tears, or of the looters, who take it from you by force. Money is made possible only by the men who produce. Is this what you consider evil?

    “When you accept money in payment for your effort, you do so only on the conviction that you will exchange it for the product of the effort of others. It is not the moochers or the looters who give value to money. Not an ocean of tears nor all the guns in the world can transform those pieces of paper in your wallet into the bread you will need to survive tomorrow. Those pieces of paper, which should have been gold, are a token of honor – your claim upon the energy of the men who produce. Your wallet is your statement of hope that somewhere in the world around you there are men who will not default on that moral principle which is the root of money. Is this what you consider evil?

    “Have you ever looked for the root of production? Take a look at an electric generator and dare tell yourself that it was created by the muscular effort of unthinking brutes. Try to grow a seed of wheat without the knowledge left to you by men who had to discover it for the first time. Try to obtain your food by means of nothing but physical motions – and you’ll learn that man’s mind is the root of all the goods produced and of all the wealth that has ever existed on earth.

    “But you say that money is made by the strong at the expense of the weak? What strength do you mean? It is not the strength of guns or muscles. Wealth is the product of man’s capacity to think. Then is money made by the man who invents a motor at the expense of those who did not invent it? Is money made by the intelligent at the expense of the fools? By the able at the expense of the incompetent? By the ambitious at the expense of the lazy? Money is made – before it can be looted or mooched – made by the effort of every honest man, each to the extent of his ability. An honest man is one who knows that he can’t consume more than he has produced.

    “To trade by means of money is the code of the men of good will. Money rests on the axiom that every man is the owner of his mind and his effort. Money allows no power to prescribe the value of your effort except by the voluntary choice of the man who is willing to trade you his effort in return. Money permits you to obtain for your goods and your labor that which they are worth to the men who buy them, but no more. Money permits no deals except those to mutual benefit by the unforced judgment of the traders. Money demands of you the recognition that men must work for their own benefit, not for their own injury, for their gain, not their loss – the recognition that they are not beasts of burden, born to carry the weight of your misery – that you must offer them values, not wounds – that the common bond among men is not the exchange of suffering, but the exchange of goods. Money demands that you sell, not your weakness to men’s stupidity, but your talent to their reason; it demands that you buy, not the shoddiest they offer, but the best your money can find. And when men live by trade – with reason, not force, as their final arbiter – it is the best product that wins, the best performance, then man of best judgment and highest ability – and the degree of a man’s productiveness is the degree of his reward. This is the code of existence whose tool and symbol is money. Is this what you consider evil?

    “But money is only a tool. It will take you wherever you wish, but it will not replace you as the driver. It will give you the means for the satisfaction of your desires, but it will not provide you with desires. Money is the scourge of the men who attempt to reverse the law of causality – the men who seek to replace the mind by seizing the products of the mind.

    “Money will not purchase happiness for the man who has no concept of what he wants; money will not give him a code of values, if he’s evaded the knowledge of what to value, and it will not provide him with a purpose, if he’s evaded the choice of what to seek. Money will not buy intelligence for the fool, or admiration for the coward, or respect for the incompetent. The man who attempts to purchase the brains of his superiors to serve him, with his money replacing his judgment, ends up by becoming the victim of his inferiors. The men of intelligence desert him, but the cheats and the frauds come flocking to him, drawn by a law which he has not discovered: that no man may be smaller than his money. Is this the reason why you call it evil?

    “Only the man who does not need it, is fit to inherit wealth – the man who would make his own fortune no matter where he started. If an heir is equal to his money, it serves him; if not, it destroys him. But you look on and you cry that money corrupted him. Did it? Or did he corrupt his money? Do not envy a worthless heir; his wealth is not yours and you would have done no better with it. Do not think that it should have been distributed among you; loading the world with fifty parasites instead of one would not bring back the dead virtue which was the fortune. Money is a living power that dies without its root. Money will not serve that mind that cannot match it. Is this the reason why you call it evil?

    “Money is your means of survival. The verdict which you pronounce upon the source of your livelihood is the verdict you pronounce upon your life. If the source is corrupt, you have damned your own existence. Did you get your money by fraud? By pandering to men’s vices or men’s stupidity? By catering to fools, in the hope of getting more than your ability deserves? By lowering your standards? By doing work you despise for purchasers you scorn? If so, then your money will not give you a moment’s or a penny’s worth of joy. Then all the things you buy will become, not a tribute to you, but a reproach; not an achievement, but a reminder of shame. Then you’ll scream that money is evil. Evil, because it would not pinch-hit for your self-respect? Evil, because it would not let you enjoy your depravity? Is this the root of your hatred of money?

    “Money will always remain an effect and refuse to replace you as the cause. Money is the product of virtue, but it will not give you virtue and it will not redeem your vices. Money will not give you the unearned, neither in matter nor in spirit. Is this the root of your hatred of money?

    “Or did you say it’s the love of money that’s the root of all evil? To love a thing is to know and love its nature. To love money is to know and love the fact that money is the creation of the best power within you, and your passkey to trade your effort for the effort of the best among men. It’s the person who would sell his soul for a nickel, who is the loudest in proclaiming his hatred of money – and he has good reason to hate it. The lovers of money are willing to work for it. They know they are able to deserve it.

    “Let me give you a tip on a clue to men’s characters: the man who damns money has obtained it dishonorably; the man who respects it has earned it.

    “Run for your life from any man who tells you that money is evil. That sentence is the leper’s bell of an approaching looter. So long as men live together on earth and need means to deal with one another – their only substitute, if they abandon money, is the muzzle of a gun.

    “But money demands of you the highest virtues, if you wish to make it or to keep it. Men who have no courage, pride, or self-esteem, men who have no moral sense of their right to their money and are not willing to defend it as they defend their life, men who apologize for being rich – will not remain rich for long. They are the natural bait for the swarms of looters that stay under rocks for centuries, but come crawling out at the first smell of a man who begs to be forgiven for the guilt of owning wealth. They will hasten to relieve him of the guilt – and of his life, as he deserves.

    “Then you will see the rise of the double standard – the men who live by force, yet count on those who live by trade to create the value of their looted money – the men who are the hitchhikers of virtue. In a moral society, these are the criminals, and the statutes are written to protect you against them. But when a society establishes criminals-by-right and looters-by-law – men who use force to seize the wealth of disarmed victims – then money becomes its creators’ avenger. Such looters believe it safe to rob defenseless men, once they’ve passed a law to disarm them. But their loot becomes the magnet for other looters, who get it from them as they got it. Then the race goes, not to the ablest at production, but to those most ruthless at brutality. When force is the standard, the murderer wins over the pickpocket. And then that society vanishes, in a spread of ruins and slaughter.

    “Do you wish to know whether that day is coming? Watch money. Money is the barometer of a society’s virtue. When you see that trading is done, not by consent, but by compulsion – when you see that in order to produce, you need to obtain permission from men who produce nothing – when you see that money is flowing to those who deal, not in goods, but in favors – when you see that men get richer by graft and by pull than by work, and your laws don’t protect you against them, but protect them against you – when you see corruption being rewarded and honesty becoming a self-sacrifice – you may know that your society is doomed. Money is so noble a medium that it does not compete with guns and it does not make terms with brutality. It will not permit a country to survive as half-property, half-loot.

    “Whenever destroyers appear among men, they start by destroying money, for money is men’s protection and the base of a moral existence. Destroyers seize gold and leave to its owners a counterfeit pile of paper. This kills all objective standards and delivers men into the arbitrary power of an arbitrary setter of values. Gold was an objective value, an equivalent of wealth produced. Paper is a mortgage on wealth that does not exist, backed by a gun aimed at those who are expected to produce it. Paper is a check drawn by legal looters upon an account which is not theirs: upon the virtue of the victims. Watch for the day when it becomes, marked: ‘Account overdrawn.’

    “When you have made evil the means of survival, do not expect men to remain good. Do not expect them to stay moral and lose their lives for the purpose of becoming the fodder of the immoral. Do not expect them to produce, when production is punished and looting rewarded. Do not ask, ‘Who is destroying the world?’ You are.

    “You stand in the midst of the greatest achievements of the greatest productive civilization and you wonder why it’s crumbling around you, while you’re damning its life-blood – money. You look upon money as the savages did before you, and you wonder why the jungle is creeping back to the edge of your cities. Throughout men’s history, money was always seized by looters of one brand or another, but whose method remained the same: to seize wealth by force and to keep the producers bound, demeaned, defamed, deprived of honor. That phrase about the evil of money, which you mouth with such righteous recklessness, comes from a time when wealth was produced by the labor of slaves – slaves who repeated the motions once discovered by somebody’s mind and left unimproved for centuries. So long as production was ruled by force, and wealth was obtained by conquest, there was little to conquer. Yet through all the centuries of stagnation and starvation, men exalted the looters, as aristocrats of the sword, as aristocrats of birth, as aristocrats of the bureau, and despised the producers, as slaves, as traders, as shopkeepers – as industrialists.

    “To the glory of mankind, there was, for the first and only time in history, a country of money – and I have no higher, more reverent tribute to pay to America, for this means: a country of reason, justice, freedom, production, achievement. For the first time, man’s mind and money were set free, and there were no fortunes-by-conquest, but only fortunes-by-work, and instead of swordsmen and slaves, there appeared the real maker of wealth, the greatest worker, the highest type of human being – the self-made man – the American industrialist.

    “If you ask me to name the proudest distinction of Americans, I would choose – because it contains all the others – the fact that they were the people who created the phrase ‘to make money’. No other language or nation had ever used these words before; men had always thought of wealth as a static quantity – to be seized, begged, inherited, shared, looted, or obtained as a favor. Americans were the first to understand that wealth has to be created. The words ‘to make money’ hold the essence of human morality.

    “Yet these were the words for which Americans were denounced by the rotted cultures of the looters’ continents. Now the looters’ credo has brought you to regard your proudest achievements as a hallmark of shame, your prosperity as guilt, your greatest men, the industrialists, as blackguards, and your magnificent factories as the product and property of muscular labor, the labor of whip-driven slaves, like the pyramids of Egypt. The rotter who simpers that he sees no difference between the power of the dollar and the power of the whip, ought to learn the difference on his own hide – as, I think, he will.

    “Until and unless you discover that money is the root of all good, you ask for your own destruction. When money ceases to be the tool by which men deal with one another, then men become the tools of men. Blood, whips and guns – or dollars. Take your choice – there is no other – and your time is running out.”

  49. 49 FatalTruth Jun 20th, 2009 at 1:53 am

    Francisco your reply was very long, elegant but long. Yet I believe there is something about the phrase “money is the root of all evil” that you are just not understanding. Money corrupts people to the very core. And not everyone who thinks money is the root of evil has obtained it dishonorably. Most if not all crimes are committed because of a lack of money. Take away the common denominator, money, and a lot of problems start becoming obsolete. Because as I said previously without money all the resources we need to produce cars, food, homes, clothing etc, etc, still exist. Money is just a means of creating social classes. To think that the hardest workers are always rewarded for their efforts is naive. The hardest workers in America work for some of the lowest wages; military personnel, teachers, fire fighters, policemen, factory workers the list goes on and on. They are the backbone of this great country yet are not afforded the same luxuries. It is these types of workers that are losing their homes and their jobs during this recession here in America. These are problems that money can fix but it is money, or the lack there of, that has created the problem. I must agree with you on your statement that men corrupt money. Yes I did say “money corrupts people to the very core” and yes this is also true. Let me explain…..

    Money corrupts people and people corrupt money. Take R. Allen Stanford and Bernard Madoff for example. To say they corrupted their money is a long shot. It was their relentless pursuit of more and more MONEY that corrupted them. The approximate some of the Ponzi schemes is over $20 billion dollars. $20 billion dollars has the power to corrupt many people. When I say men corrupt money I think of examples such as the war on drugs. Billions of dollars are allocated each year to fight a war that is impossible to win. The budget for the war on drugs is larger than that for education. This is a tragic allocation of funds that happens every year. Education and prevention will be more successful in the end than prosecution and punishment. And to address all of the drug manufacturer’s in the world their ultimate goal is MONEY. They are not producing tons of cocaine, heroin, opium, ecstasy (need I keep going) for the sake of production. These products are a means to an end, money. Plain and simple.

    Now just think for a moment a world where if you need medicine you can go to the pharmacy to get it without worrying about how you will now buy groceries. Imagine every high school senior being able to go to an institute of higher learning because this is the best way to better the world’s future not because they can afford to. What about all the potential doctors, scientists, engineers, professors, biologists (to name a few) that never realize the potential because they simply cant afford it. Imagine not having to see the elderly still working (unless they want to of course) but not working because they have to at 65. Imagine diseases actually being cured again. We no longer cure diseases we just slow death with medication.. Medication that has a side effect of course so you have to take another pill for the side effects, then another pill for the side effects of the side effects, and so on and so on.

    You know I could go on and at this point but I will not. I will not go on because I am a realist. I “call it how I see it”, “tell it how it is”, “I do not sugar coat”, “I do not pull punches” hence the name FatalTruth. That being said I will not go any further because as a society we are no where near ready for life changing events such as a society that operates as whole to better our existence as one world instead of individual nations. The sooner we realize we are a community of nations that need to work together to ensure the future of this world we will finally realize that money has held us back for centuries.

    It’s been a pleasure reading your post Francisco look forward to reading more from you in the future.

  50. 50 Radu Aug 28th, 2009 at 2:03 pm

    My suspicion arises when I see too long a list of unrelated quotes brought in support of an alternative theory. I have to check the quotes because only their quality would make a valid argument.

    The movie has three parts. The first one, regarding pagan origins of the Judeo-Christian tradition, I will waste little time on because I view both religion and astrology as bullocks, creations of primitive (fearful) minds who had access to a lot less scientific knowledge than we have today (“science squeezed God pretty much out of everywhere organized religion tried to place him at one time or another”). Looking at Zeitgeist the Movie in Wikipedia you’d notice that criticism of Part I points primarily at its being “the DaVinci Code on stereoids”.

    It saddens me more (though it does not surprise me) that people are less incensed about part II (9/11 as a US Government plot) and part III (the financial system as the root of evil). Many “open-minded” folks are still reluctant to see religion for the farce it is, yet jump instantly on any notion that they are persecuted by some secret secular group, primarily the government. Without the financial system most of us would still hitchhike to work in oxen-driven carts and there would be no NetFlix for us to browse for ideas and entertainment through. Capital was essential for mass production, for making more things available to more people. Before going to Part II, let me state that I do agree that people could and should be better educated and that we’re spending too much time consuming mind-numbing entertainment provided by the media. However, that is human nature and our individual choice and it has nothing to do with some nefarious organization (so many of those products exist because we are a great market for them).

    Now, let’s REFUTE Part II! I am focusing on this because I was living in Manhattan at the time of the attacks and I still harbor strong resentment against the perpetrators (IMO, the fanatic Islamic Arabs and Pakistanis who planned and carried this out as Al-Quaeda members).
    It took me several hours to FIND the wiki site about ‘World Trade Center controlled demolition conspiracy’ theories and the ‘conspiracyscience’ site, as well as some background on the quotations and on those who perform them in the melodrama.

    Here is what I base my rebuttal on:

    1. It is impossible that such a complex operation that would have involved politicians, military personnel, experts in demolition who somehow cut and mined steel pillars (while thousands of future victims were working there every day), and then waited for the right moment to [remotely, as there were no visible wires] detonate those explosives, would leave not a single person “from the inside” willing and able to confess to what they did. In other words, the weakest point of this and other conspiracy theories is that in order to commit something of magnitude you need so many people that it is impossible to keep the facts hidden (nota bene: none of those in the movie describe themselves as members of the conspiracy). A friend of mine who arrived late that day (9:25) and saw fire in the tower his office was in (and “decided not to go to work that day”) uses “the Nixon analogy”, i.e. if in a conspiracy of less than ten people at least two of them could not keep their mouths shut…

    2. The “facts” presented in Part II are quotes mostly from people of dubious credentials (people with credentials usually avoid being dragged in debates with conspiracy nuts, so that they don’t enhance those nuts’ stature – I am not someone with credentials). I understand the logical fallacy of ad hominem attacks and I am sure I am not committing it. Peter Joseph though appeals to “the authority” of those he parades in his movie and the fallacy of logic would be to believe what they say because they are called ‘Doctor’ or ‘Professor’.
    Here are the main “characters”:
    David Ray Griffin (the ‘voice’), theologian, philosophy of religion, retired, and now suddenly focusing on politics and 9/11;
    Michael Ruppert, described as “A 53 yr old Nostradamus or an Israeli disinformation agent ?”;
    Dr. Steven Jones, whose research on explosives’ traces was not confirmed by any other scientist and who omits facts about Building 7, as I’ll mention bellow; David Von Kleist of whose credentials I found only other media stints;
    Webster Tarpley, historian, associated with Lyndon LaRouche ;
    Jordan Maxwell , whose own web site describes him as “..Preeminent researcher and speaker in the fields of secret societies, occult philosophies, and ufology since 1959. His work is not only fascinating to explore, but too important to ignore.”;
    Ted Gunderson, former FBI chief, who “suggests that some Satanic cults engage in widespread child kidnapping for the purpose of child sexual abuse and ritual murder, and that these activities involve high-ranking government officials and/or the Illuminati He credits William Guy Carr’s Pawns in the Game with opening his eyes to the plans of the Illuminati.”

    It is really sad that so many choose to ignore the views of scientists with stature among their peers but prefer to follow the voice of conspiracy lunatics (just because they’re devil’s advocates?).

    3. There are also several quotes taken out of context.
    Les Robertson contradicts himself – aside from the quote in the movie there are many others where he maintains his building would not fall down from an airplane’s impact, but many others though where he thinks it is possible. The constructor Frank Demartini died on 9/11 and we can not have his opinion after the attack. In an [archived] CNN interview WTC architect Aaron Swirsky said “The towers were designed to survive a hit by a plane, but the aircraft that struck the towers Tuesday were much bigger and carried more fuel than airliners in use when they were built”. “It was something completely unforeseen, so far as the design criteria was (concerned),” Swirsky said. “The criterion was that if a plane hits, it would go right through it… the towers were protected in such away that the damage would be limited to one story, but it wouldn’t travel to the other stories.”
    From each of these “Peter Joseph” quoted selectively.

    4. It is even more relevant to look at the quoting [in the movie] of Charles Linbergh, from a time when he was doing Nazi Germany’s bidding to keep the US from entering WWII:
    “We cannot blame them for looking out for what they believe to be their own interests, but we also must look out for ours. We cannot allow the natural passions and prejudices of other peoples to lead our country to destruction.”

    Here is what came right before that quote: “In a speech at an America First rally in Des Moines on September 11, 1941, “Who Are the War Agitators?” Lindbergh claimed the three groups, “pressing this country toward war [are] the British, the Jewish and the Roosevelt Administration” and said of Jewish groups,
    “Instead of agitating for war, the Jewish groups in this country should be opposing it in every possible way for they will be among the first to feel its consequences. Tolerance is a virtue that depends upon peace and strength. History shows that it cannot survive war and devastation.”[64]
    In the speech, he warned of the Jewish People’s “large ownership and influence in our motion pictures, our press, our radio and our government”, and went on to say of Germany’s antisemitism, “No person with a sense of the dignity of mankind can condone the persecution of the Jewish race in Germany.” Lindbergh declared,
    “I am not attacking either the Jewish or the British people. Both races, I admire. But I am saying that the leaders of both the British and the Jewish races, for reasons which are as understandable from their viewpoint as they are inadvisable from ours, for reasons which are not American, wish to involve us in the war.”

    After the war he felt justified that “he had warned the Jews what would happen to them”. Maybe had he not blocked the US entry in the war, maybe had we not waited for others to attack us (we did not want to strike first, it is not that we entrapped the Japanese at Pearl Harbor, as Zeitgeist implies), maybe then a lot from the Holocaust would not have happened. Why not look at _that_ alternative?

    5. The sulfuric substance could have been anything, from anywhere. Do you know all the chemicals that are in the materials your house is built of?

    6. Lastly, BUILDING 7 – that’s were my wife worked and I know its story well. It was built on top of a church which the builder was not allowed to demolish. Solomon Smith Barney decided they actually wanted their own backup generators in the building and the presence of the church did not allow for the fuel tanks to be buried. The fuel tanks were in the middle of the building. Once the building caught on fire (like several others around the burning Twin Towers), the fuel in the tanks burned creating plenty of heat for the steel structure to melt. That is what the firefighters were talking about (strictly about building 7). The makers of Zeitgeist obviously knew or could have found this information had they only searched for the truth, indeed…

    Once again, let me reiterate that this is a good strategy to gain visibility and the movie does raise valid questions about human life which we should indeed think about. However, the conspiracy theories are just that and I’m sure the author knows that but will continue to milk this notoriety for several years to come, pursuing an agenda that will probably become more and more extremist.

    Bush was right to go after the Al-Quaeda camps in Afghanistan, but he was wrong to use 9/11 as a pretext for invading Iraq (this was a vanity gesture he probably felt he owed his father, coupled with some conservatives’ thinking there might be something to gain from occupying a major oil producing country). Saddam had enough sins to be removed for power (gassing shias, developing a nuclear bomb program – destroyed by Israel in 1981, then restarted – and paying off Palestinians who sent their youngsters to blow themselves up in civilian areas in Israel. That however was not worth a single US life and definitely not the hundreds of billions we spent on the army and on rebuilding what Arabs keep on blowing up (‘cause gas from Iraq we’re seeing less than how much the Russians and the Iranians do and it ain’t gonna change).

  51. 51 ESTELAWHITFIELD32 Mar 26th, 2010 at 8:41 pm

    I didn’t see such kind of fantastic knowledge just about this topic earlier . Was that your 1st descriptive essay topics? I guess that just only you and a writing service can perform such piece of perfect stuff!

  52. 52 J Apr 19th, 2010 at 4:13 pm

    Regarding Post #36, ‘Your God is here’… Love it! Humor is a great enjoyment of life.

    Regarding Zeitgeist the movie, I am most fascinated with the Religious debate. I believe that Religion was created so that we, as humans, can understand the meaning of life. Trying to understand our origins and what happens after death is a difficult process, especially if you are afraid of dying. Thus, Religion answers those questions.

    A recent study suggests that 80% of the United States believes in God. I believe that many of these people actually have no idea, but WANT to believe in God so they can be ‘saved’ when they die.

    I am amazed by how many people I encounter that have a rigid belief system and discredit anything that they have no experience with. It truly angers me and I think that those people need to be educated. Although, I have found it difficult to educate people that are closed minded.

    Who is right? Who is wrong? Why are we here? Did God create the Big Bang? Or did matter appear from nothing?

    If there is anything positive that I can take from Religion now, it is to be good to one another and one’s environment. Do not harbor feelings of resentment and hate. Understand those feelings, and work on becoming a better human being.

  53. 53 Ba?lama Büyüsü May 31st, 2010 at 11:03 am

    If there is anything positive that I can take from Religion now, it is to be good to one another and one’s environment. Do not harbor feelings of resentment and hate. Understand those feelings, and work on becoming a better human being.

  54. 54 tree Jul 8th, 2010 at 11:48 pm

    The Zeitgeist and Achary cult followers will tell you that the sources listed in the movie and the book are genuine and credible. The ones who can be considered Egyptologists are close friends with Achary,the movie producer or had a stake in the movie.Some are believers of space alien conspiracies. There is little doubt that conspiracies happen. They also happen among mythologists and theologians who claim that Egyptian texts from 3,000 bc contained words and phrases like Dec 25th and baptism, which are not even in the Bible. There is a conspiracy aimed at people who have no knowledge of ancient history and are not familiar with the use of key words. The sources from the book and the movie are almost impossible to trace down. The actual original texts that concern the birth of Horus can be found on the internet. Tales of Isis and Osirus can also be found on the internet. The interpretations that Achary used in Her book, which is the basis for the first part of the movie, are taken from rewritten texts from the Christian era in Egypt. Most of those texts do not have the things that the producers claim. They have been misinterpreted.

    One does not have to read the entire book or see the entire movie unless they are criticizing the author or the producer. The issues that are being discussed can be read from Achary’s web site. One does not have to eat an entire meal to know if the wine is bad. Criticizing the connection between Jesus and Horus does not require reading about a Persian, Greek or Roman god. If you wish to criticize the cook, eat the entire meal, otherwise, you can criticize the wine maker by tasting the wine offered by the waiter.

  55. 55 telson Aug 25th, 2010 at 12:44 am

    This article refutes and disproves claims of Zeitgeist movie, from the part of Christianity:

    http://koti.phnet.fi/petripaavola/zeitgeist_movie.html

    I suggest to read the article!

  56. 56 chipoltespice Dec 25th, 2010 at 5:55 pm

    I’ve watch the Zeitgeist movie when it came out. The problem is, it mixes truth with lies with historical inaccuracies but people are having their eyes opened….to what? Into another black hole. Everything is a conspiracy? You fart, it’s a conspiracy.
    Christianity seems to be singled out and is a motive for controlling the masses? To love, not lie and be faithful to your spouse? Question???? What message in Christianity has people so pissed off they are willing to say it controls people? It tells us to do good and share with people or the fact there is retribution and doing evil is not fro free.
    Maybe Hitler or Stalin should have tried this tactic on their people, to love….oh, he didn’t. He didn’t need religion to convince the Germans that the Jews and other ethnic groups should be exterminated and the world sat by and watched.
    Today, society is transformed to look at the religious as “unwilling to accept the new thought.” It’s apparent that those that do not embrace the Zeitgeist information as being factual are frowned upon by those that have a distain if not passionate hatred for those that believe in a higher power. I would say a jealously. Suddenly, to hold onto beliefs that ones holds true, stays loyal and faithful is mocked by those who change their religion and beliefs as often as they change underwear or dating partners. After all, we live in a society today that trades in cars, cell phones and computers considered old after 2 or 3 years.

    Many people say you will have your eyes opened. This echoes a chilling tale.
    Genesis 3:5-7 “For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil. And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat. And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves aprons.”
    The serpent says to Eve, “Your eyes shall be opened.” Indeed, Eve’s eyes were opened but it was not opened to truth. After Eve’s eyes were opened to truth, she bought the lie she gained more truth by rejecting God. Once you tell someone not to think about a pink elephant, they think about it. Eve’s information that she was turned onto put her at odds with God. Eve doubted God and doubted His Words.
    There is no crime in examining any information and rethink but think upon it and consider any information being introduced; it still can be pure rubbish.

    I point out Christianity here because this is what is singled out.
    Any Christian who believes in Christianity had better know what they believe in and why. A friend of mine who watched Zeitgeist came to me alarmed, ready to abandoned faith in God, yada, yada. I said, if you watched 116 min of film put in another 116min to examine every part of it. The Bible tells us to test all things. Now, parts 2 and 3 can be hard to confirm but the first portion of the film sadly, is easy to dispel if one had knowledge of Egyptian and Persian mythology and religion. Most Christians and people who oppose the Christian faith do not know much about the Bible so I would also doubt understanding in Middle Eastern religion.

    Resurrection of Jesus was based on Attis a Roman deity according toe Zeitgeist. This account in Zeitgeist is simply untrue in the story of Attis. He became popular in the late fourth century. Attis was raised by a he-goat because his mother abandoned him. He went made, removed his own genitals. Attis was reborn in the evergreen and his rebirth is celebrated March 25. This story is more similar to Babylonian story with Simeramus and the Christmas tree which is an Evergreen Tree. After Nimrod’s death it is said that his body was divided over various parts of his kingdom. His mother and wife Semiramis was missing his reproductive organ (like Attia) and claimed she needed all the parts to bring him back to life. Since she believed his spirit would live on, his eternal life would be symbolized by a tree stump bringing forth an Evergreen tree, Evergreen trees that are used today. Each anniversary of Nimrods birth, Semiramis claimed that Nimrod would visit the tree and leave gifts, just like Santa Claus. Nimrod like Santa lives forever and never dies.
    There is no account in Greek mythology of Attia being resurrected after 3 days.

    The claim that the Three Kings was stolen? Nothing in the Bible says they were kings. More than likely they were Parthian and Wise Men/Magi. Nothing in the Bible makes the claim they showed up for Jesus birth. Matter of fact they showed up years after when he was a young child. It is not noted there were only “3.” They were crossing over territories and would have had a caravan of people, closer to 30 than just 3. Zeitgeist failed to review the account in the Bible but went on mainstream ideas of the Nativity Scene.

    December 25 was stolen? Again, no claim in the Bible Jesus was born Dec 25. Dec 25 in Pagan Rome was the Feast of Saturnalia. The Early Roman Church wanted to replace this pagan religion to false gods with the mainstream religion which was Christianity, there is no conspiracy here, and the Church was open about this.
    His birth connected to the astrological cycle is utterly ridiculous if you objectively review the material to actual fact. Peter Joseph makes the claim that in 1 AD, a “new age” began after the age of Ram. Jesus was born between 2-6 BC. According to the Bible, when Jesus was born, King Herod was reigning, this is historical fact. Herod died about 2 BC, Jesus had to be born before then. People used Kings as markers for history in explaining what part in time something occurred. I put more faith in this than Mr. Joseph’s wild claims. Jesus birth occurs before Mr. Joseph’s “turn of the ages” in 1 AD. His birth did not usher in Pisces nor the fish. The fish symbol comes from the gematric value of the
    Greek word ICHTHUS each letter has a meaing Insous, Christos, theos, uios and soter–Jesus Christ, God’s Son, Savior. We can see from this Mr. Joseph did not get his astrology or symbols to work.

    IThe life of Jesus was taken by the NT writers from Mithraism?
    To the viewer would take these claims at face value because Mr. Joseph knows the average viewer will not do the research. These claims cannot even be possible.
    Mithra was a Persian deity for those who don’t know and pre-Zoroastrian. Mithra was known in Rome the 2nd and 3rd centuries and no mention of this deity is mentioned prior to this time. It died out after the 4th century. It gained momentum again in 136 AD.
    The gospels were written well before the close of the 1st century.

    There is a lot but I’ll end with this because I do like to read Egyptian mythology, Jesus and Horus are similar? There may be some things but reading deeper on Horus and Jesus does not persuade scholars to suggest Jesus was plagiarized. No way near the truth and quite humorous. Horus being born on Dec 25 to a virgin, star in the east and worshiped by 3 kings and was a teacher to 12 disciples. A myth from 3000 BC according to Peter Joseph. We have no Egyptian text or papyrus to take us back that far.
    We have two versions of Horus’s birth, neither are virgin births as Joseph claims.
    1, Hathor (mother of the milky way) conceived with Ra (Egyptian sun god). By the will of her husband, she gave birth to Horus. 2. His mother being Isis is not a virgin but a widow of Osiris. Isis does magic to bring Osiris back from the dead so she could have a son to avenge the death of Osiris. She becomes pregnant from the sperm of her deceased husband.
    Horus in mythology was never crucified and is pure fantasy with regard to Egyptology.

    Unfortunately, I don’t have the time to break everything down but folks, research this material for yourself. Joseph is another “Pagan Copycat Theorist” and these people can be shut down if people do their own research.
    I truly believe that people want to discredit Christianity so much that they are willing to deceive themselves at no cost.

    This person wrote:
    “I am amazed by how many people I encounter that have a rigid belief system and discredit anything that they have no experience with. It truly angers me and I think that those people need to be educated. Although, I have found it difficult to educate people that are closed minded.”

    Oh really, you’re amazed. Are you amazed when an 18 year old is still a virgin as well? That not all people want to compromise their beliefs to your “free though movement?” Rigid? You find it odd that people stand firm in a belief and don’t waffle? Don’t compromise. The only ones that are not rigid toss to an from on every wind of doctrine.
    The rumor mill, the heresies? I say to the rigid, to hold tight, and steadfast…..that is where the loyal and the just stand.

  57. 57 Luke Jan 27th, 2011 at 6:54 am

    Like you say – your enjoyment comes from pointing out where they go wrong. A closed mind.

    “Conspiracy theorists” is a negatively-loaded term, given that implication the same way “terror” and “terrorist” has become the new boogieman, used whenever a government wishes to put something into action, but needs justfication. Homeland Security Act, anyone?

    Perhaps you could reconsider your cynicism, and change to skepticism. I’m all for it. We should all ask questions, especially of ourselves, but being biased one way is surely just as being biased the other way, isn’t it? What ever happened to critical thinking?

    I am a journalist by trade, working for a large national newspaper, I won’t reveal which. I find many of my colleagues increasingly questioning the media model, the monetary system, their values and what we are giving to our fellow humans when we publish a story.

    I guess I should expect this from a site called cynicsunlimited. I’m glad you found something to enjoy, who am I to take that away? Enjoy life where you can. Avoid questioning too deeply. Ignorance truly is bliss.

  58. 58 Dane Dahl (Author and lay historian) Jan 10th, 2012 at 11:24 pm

    The movie titled Zeitgeist is like a stopped clock: its assertions are correct two times out of every twenty-four hours. The rest of the time it is wrong! Legitimate scholars disagree with its conclusions and one even called it: “fringe nonsense.”
    As a lay historian with a university degree in history, I can best summarize my low opinion of the long list of claims made in this movie by limiting my comments to three topics. All of them pertain to the opening part of the movie. The astonishing and absurd nature of the claims made by Zeitgeist concerning these three topics causes me to conclude the entire movie may have no validity.
    1. Horus: A precursor of Christ?
    Zeitgeist says: Born on Dec 25 of a virgin mother, crucified, buried and resurrected These ideas originated with a 19th century writer named Gerald Massey who was self-taught and had no formal training in Egyptian history.
    An example of the stopped clock: the ancient Egyptians worshiped a god named Horus; everything after that is WRONG! According to Wikipedia: twenty leading Egyptologists, including Professor Emeritus of Egyptology at the University of Liverpool Kenneth Kitchen, and Professor of Egyptology at the University of Toronto Ron Leprohan. The scholars were unanimous in dismissing any similarities (born on Dec 25 of a virgin mother, crucified, buried and resurrected) suggested by Massey, and one Egyptologist criticized the comparison as “fringe nonsense.” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus_Christ_in_comparative_mythology
    2. Mithra of Persia: Prototype of Christ?
    Another example of a stopped clock: the ancient Persians worshiped a god named Mithra. Everything after that is WRONG! Regarding Zeitgist’s claims: 12 disciples, died, buried three days , resurrected, Wikipedia says: “No written narratives or theology from the religion survive, with limited information to be derived from the inscriptions, and only brief or passing references in Greek and Latin literature. Interpretation of the physical evidence remains problematic and contested.”[10] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mithraic_mysteries
    More fringe nonsense?
    3. Attis: Prototype of Christ?
    Yet another example of the stopped clock: the ancient Greeks worshiped a god named Attis; everything after that is WRONG! Regarding Zeitgrist claims: Born of a virgin on Dec 25, crucified, dead 3 days, resurrected. Wikipedia says: Nana who was a daughter of the river-god Sangarius picked an almond and laid it in her bosom. The almond disappeared, and she became pregnant. Nana abandoned the baby (Attis). The infant was tended by a he-goat. As Attis grew, his long-haired beauty was godlike, and Agdistis as (an ancient Anatolian goddess also called) Cybele, then fell in love with him. But the foster parents of Attis sent him to Pessinos, where he was to wed the king’s daughter. According to some versions the King of Pessinos was Midas. Just as the marriage-song was being sung, Agdistis/Cybele appeared in her transcendent power, and Attis went mad and cut off his genitals. (His self-inflicted wound was fatal). Attis’ father-in-law-to-be, the king who was giving his daughter in marriage, followed suit, prefiguring the self-castrating corybantes who devoted themselves to Cybele. But Agdistis (Cybele) repented and saw to it that the body of Attis should neither rot at all nor decay.[4] Born of a virgin on Dec 25, crucified (???), dead 3 days(???), resurrected(???) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attis
    More fringe nonsense?

  1. 1 Jack’s Newswatch Pingback on Dec 3rd, 2007 at 8:49 am
  2. 2 Movie Review: Zeitgeist - The Movie Pingback on Dec 3rd, 2007 at 10:04 pm
  3. 3 Cynics Unlimited » Movie Review: Loose Change - Final Cut Pingback on Feb 7th, 2008 at 1:00 am
  4. 4 Are you a thinkin' man? - Nebraska Fish and Game Association Pingback on Apr 15th, 2008 at 4:46 pm
  5. 5 zeitgeist movie text Pingback on Jul 23rd, 2008 at 5:33 am

Leave a Reply

You must login to post a comment.




Further Research

Twitter

Archives

Categories