TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Political Discussion / Debate
-- Zeitgeist: Addendum
Pages (8): [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 »

Zeitgeist: Addendum

Just released a few days ago...excellent information, especially on the monetary system (federal reserve).

Peter Joseph did it once again.I really enjoyed watching this film.Cant wait to see more from this guy.The part about the Venus project was really fun to watch I thought.

Phew, I was worried for a while. I heard someone yelling, and the voice had a distinct Tasmanian accent. I thought it could be a new neighbour, but now I know it must have been pkc clicking this thread.

I wonder if he's ok

Cue pkc posting his "conspiracy theory" copy n paste job for the 68th time this month..

in 5...4....3...

Well, you can't say it wouldn't be warranted. Thank God for pkc... pointing out intellectual dishonesty when nobody else has the patience to.

quote:

Originally posted by Lebezniatnikov Thank God for pkc... pointing out intellectual dishonesty when nobody else has the patience to.

+1. It's inspiring, really

quote:

Originally posted by hardcore trancer Peter Joseph did it once again.I really enjoyed watching this film.Cant wait to see more from this guy.The part about the Venus project was really fun to watch I thought.

you disappoint me are you really that gullible? or are you teasing? i cant tell :/

i wonder if this movie has as many lies in it as the first one? they always try to make sequels bigger and better after all!

quote:

Originally posted by Lebezniatnikov pointing out intellectual dishonesty when nobody else has the patience to.

to be honest im not sure why i DO bother. i just have this inner drive to fight with people that tell lies. it never ceases to amaze me how often people think a shitty internet video is a substitute for real, academic research. crazy.

quote:

Originally posted by Capitalizt Cue pkc posting his "conspiracy theory" copy n paste job for the 68th time this month.. in 5...4....3...

no, i normally wait for an actual comment from the CT boys before pointing out their irrational logic!

The problem is pk, you haven't been pointing out problems with logic or facts at all. I've watched your posts over the past month and 99% of are copy/pastes of your conspiracy theory article, or otherwise you saying "wrong"..or "you're an idiot" etc.. These posts don't contribute much. I'd rather see you directly address the issues being brought up (the fed, etc)...rather than just calling people names and pasting that tired old article.

quote:

Originally posted by Capitalizt The problem is pk, you haven't been pointing out problems with logic or facts at all. I've watched your posts over the past month and 99% of are copy/pastes of your conspiracy theory article, or otherwise you saying "wrong"..or "you're an idiot" etc.. These posts don't contribute much. I'd rather see you directly address the issues being brought up (the fed, etc)...rather than just calling people names and pasting that tired old article.

but why bother?

Our recent PM exchange is a perfect example. I provided you with irrefutable evidence and asked you a couple of questions that you (and your ilk) have no answer for. What did I get in return? More unsubstantiated bollocks.

As I pointed out at the time- arguing with conspiracy theorists is about as useful as arguing with creationists. The simple fact that they are a creationist illustrates that they are immune to rational discourse

Why should I spend the time and effort when it will only be ignored? All of you have the worst levels of confirmation bias I have ever seen, and no amount of logic or hardwork will ever be able to compete with that.

To properly and completely debunk zeitgeist: addendum I would have to watch (another!) 2 hours of nonsense. Seriously, why would i? the first movie was riddled with errors, so why would I waste even more of my time just so I could more accurately argue with people that are immune to logic in the first place?

No thanks. Ill just sit by and point and laugh.

If the CT boys stopped posting crap that fell nicely within the "10 characteristics of conspiracy theorists" then I wouldn't have anything to post then would i? But they keep on doing it...

Occrider, one of TA's keenest economic minds has pointed out (at great length) arguments regarding the fed and monetary policy. Did it do any good? Nope. The same people are repeating the same fallacies they always have. If he can't put a dent in the denialist idiocy then I sure as shit can't. id prefer to talk about computer games to be honest.

quote:

Originally posted by Lebezniatnikov Well, you can't say it wouldn't be warranted. Thank God for pkc... pointing out intellectual dishonesty when nobody else has the patience to.

"Intellectual dishonesty" there's that phrase again , coming from the typical crowd who can't even admit to simple facts and realities about US foreign policy, Zionism, elections, the media and other fairly mainstream issues. Sure means a lot, at least as far as entertainment value goes . But in the case of Zeitgeist, not astrotheology, astrology, and theology as a whole, the JREF posters that are plagiarized on a regular basis actually do have some fair points to make. Typically that's called a strawman argument though. It's not exactly hard to poke holes in poorly research films. And I'm not even a proponent of astrotheology or astrology .

quote:

Originally posted by shaolin_Z "Intellectual dishonesty" there's that phrase again , coming from the typical crowd who can't even admit to simple facts and realities about US foreign policy, Zionism, elections, the media and other fairly mainstream issues.

so are you saying that we must all agree to be considered "honest"? do you find people that disagree with you, dishonest? coz in my own experience in the PDD at least the only dishonest people ive encountered are the moonbats.

quote:

Originally posted by shaolin_Z the JREF posters that are plagiarized on a regular basis

who is plagiarising JREF?

PKC, you know just as well as I do that good old lefties like Chosmky could rip every poster here a new one, a million times over, yet do they agree with very elementary truths he's been pointing out for years now? So... I hope you can understand how claim of intellectual honesty or accusation of intellectual dishonesty are quite laughable .

quote:

i wonder if this movie has as many lies in it as the first one?

Well point out the lies then troll. What is the point of posting if you are not going to watch the film and just run your mouth on something you have not clue about?

Sorry...wait I already answered that in the my first sentence, (troll).

quote:

Originally posted by shaolin_Z PKC, you know just as well as I do that good old lefties like Chosmky could rip every poster here a new one, a million times over, yet do they agree with very elementary truths he's been pointing out for years now? So... I hope you can understand how claim of intellectual honesty or accusation of intellectual dishonesty are quite laughable .

Whilst I certainly kowtow to chomsky and all his well-written brilliance, a lot of political theory comes down to interpretation or a matter of priorities. I certainly don't think there's a single immutable body of thought that trumps every other body of thought in the wonderful world of isms.

In contrast, what I and lebez are talking about are demonstrable errors or lies. The fed doesn't profit from interest charged to government, gold really did worsen the great depression, christianity wasn't a hijacked theology based on sun worship, and a plane really did hit the pentagon.

That's completely different to arguing about the similarities and differences between say, socialism and anarchism imo.

quote:

Originally posted by Lira +1. It's inspiring, really

It certainly inspires a lot of insults and copy pastes .

quote:

Originally posted by culorut Well point out the lies then troll. What is the point of posting if you are not going to watch the film and just run your mouth on something you have not clue about? Sorry...wait I already answered that in the my first sentence, (troll).

youre right, im a troll when it comes to these topics. im not that concerned.

i would be more than happy to refute parts of the video if you would only be so nice as to present an argument for me to refute. im not watching 2 hours of shit just for you though.

so, if you want to present what you consider to be the biggest point of impact in the video, then im all ears. but asking people to watch a movie for two hours when the first movie was such a crock is a little much to ask, wouldn�t you agree?

Who owns the Federal Reserve Banks?


The Federal Reserve Banks of each region are owned by (issue their stock exclusively to) the member banks of that same region. The member banks are privately owned corporations. Thus the Federal Reserve Banks are privately owned. This is a matter of law and anyone may read the Federal Reserve Act of 1913 for themselves.


Why do some people deny that the Federal Reserve Banks are owned by private corporations?


Three groups of people deny this fact, for differing reasons

1. The first group consists of the private owners of the Federal Reserve Banks, and their shills. It is obviously not in their interest that the American people realize that private bankers own what most people regard as a part of the public treasury and government. The people would doubtless not like it if they knew that the stockholders of the Federal Reserve Banks receive 6% interest (raised higher in the past) per year on their stock ownership, risk free. The people would be legitimately concerned to know that the member bank stockholders elect six of the nine members (i.e., 2/3rds) of the Boards of the reserve banks of their regions. Rather than regulating or controlling the activities of private banks in their regions, the opposite is the case.

2. The second group consists of those persons who, in their ignorance, have believed the propaganda of the Federal Reserve Banks, which sometimes issue ambiguous, doublespeak statements attempting to obfuscate their private bank ownership. Here is a typical example from the NY Fed website, quite easily seen through: �Although they are set up like private corporations and member banks hold their stock, the Federal Reserve Banks owe their existence to an act of Congress and have a mandate to serve the public. Therefore, they are not really "private" companies, but rather are "owned" by the citizens of the United States�Member banks do, however, receive a fixed 6 percent dividend annually on their stock and elect six of the nine members of the Reserve Bank's of their region� the Reserve Banks issue shares of stock to member banks.�

3. The third group consists of those people who consider that because the Chairman of the Federal Reserve Board of Governors is appointed by the President and approved by the Senate that the Fed is firmly under government control and that this is sufficiently equivalent to ownership to put them at ease (never mind the outright private bank control of the 12 regional Federal Reserve Banks). Let�s hear how the Fed itself regards such indirect �government control� (again from the NY Fed website): The Federal Reserve System is not "owned" by anyone and is not a private, profit-making institution. Instead, it is an independent entity within the government, having both public purposes and private aspects.


http://www.themoneymasters.com/

PKC I just enjoy hearing about new things in this world.These types of movies are different and some of the ideas on these films did actully made me think about alot of things.

Bottom line I watched the movie for what it is and just for something to think about.

quote:

Originally posted by shaolin_Z It certainly inspires a lot of insults and copy pastes .

Ain't that also the truth?

quote:

youre right, im a troll when it comes to these topics.

Good for you, now I may ask what the fuk are you still doing in this thread then?

If you are not interested in the topic or watching the film leave those who are to continue on without interruption from your bullshit.

So this how long has this Venus project been going on for?I like the idea behind the whole thing.I just dont know how realistic it could be.

The Federal Reserve System is not "owned" by anyone and is not a private, profit-making institution. Instead, it is an independent entity within the government, having both public purposes and private aspects.

As the nation's central bank, the Federal Reserve derives its authority from the U.S. Congress. It is considered an independent central bank because its decisions do not have to be ratified by the President or anyone else in the executive or legislative branch of government, it does not receive funding appropriated by Congress, and the terms of the members of the Board of Governors span multiple presidential and congressional terms. However, the Federal Reserve is subject to oversight by Congress, which periodically reviews its activities and can alter its responsibilities by statute. Also, the Federal Reserve must work within the framework of the overall objectives of economic and financial policy established by the government. Therefore, the Federal Reserve can be more accurately described as "independent within the government."

The twelve regional Federal Reserve Banks, which were established by Congress as the operating arms of the nation's central banking system, are organized much like private corporations--possibly leading to some confusion about "ownership." For example, the Reserve Banks issue shares of stock to member banks. However, owning Reserve Bank stock is quite different from owning stock in a private company. The Reserve Banks are not operated for profit, and ownership of a certain amount of stock is, by law, a condition of membership in the System. The stock may not be sold, traded, or pledged as security for a loan; dividends are, by law, 6 percent per year.

http://www.federalreserve.gov/gener...aq/faqfrs.htm#5

quote:

Originally posted by Lira Ain't that also the truth?

Disgruntled Corporate Slave & Conspiracy Nut: "Check this out, the truth!"

Proud Corporate Slave & Sheep: "Check this out, the truth! Academia is flawless and the new Church biatch! Go swing on Alex Jones nuts!"

Conspiracy Nut: "Shut up you agent! We are all starts, the stars are Gods! Go swing on Cheney's nuts you sheep!"

Proud Corporate Slave & Sheep: "Fuck! I wish I was agent, so I could cornhole an intellectually dishonest fuck like you!"

Disgruntled Corporate Slave & Conspiracy Nut: "Watch your Culo inmate... we're quite fond of fluffy sheep rear ends around here, as are you masters!!!"

Proud Corporate Slave & Sheep: "Intellectually dishonest idot! Uneducated fuck! Quit blaspheming the Church of Academia and the State God! I love my cornholing!"

Disgruntled Corporate Slave & Conspiracy Nut: "Fucking sheep, punk ass troll bitch, shove that 9-11 commission report up your ass!"

Proud Corporate Slave & Sheep: "Fuck head!"

Disgruntled Corporate Slave & Conspiracy Nut: "Bitch!"

I think your imagination can fill in the gaps .

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN The twelve regional Federal Reserve Banks, which were established by Congress as the operating arms of the nation's central banking system, are organized much like private corporations--possibly leading to some confusion about "ownership." For example, the Reserve Banks issue shares of stock to member banks. However, owning Reserve Bank stock is quite different from owning stock in a private company. The Reserve Banks are not operated for profit, and ownership of a certain amount of stock is, by law, a condition of membership in the System. The stock may not be sold, traded, or pledged as security for a loan; dividends are, by law, 6 percent per year. http://www.federalreserve.gov/gener...aq/faqfrs.htm#5

to add to that, the depository institutions (or what some of you call - shareholders) that own stock in the regional banks own stock mostly to meet capital reserve requirements. Banks are required to post 3% of the banks capital with the federal reserve. Owning stock is simply a means by which banks are required to keep capital with the regional banks.

quote:

Originally posted by culorut Who owns the Federal Reserve Banks? The Federal Reserve Banks of each region are owned by (issue their stock exclusively to) the member banks of that same region. The member banks are privately owned corporations. Thus the Federal Reserve Banks are privately owned. This is a matter of law and anyone may read the Federal Reserve Act of 1913 for themselves. Why do some people deny that the Federal Reserve Banks are owned by private corporations? Three groups of people deny this fact, for differing reasons 1. The first group consists of the private owners of the Federal Reserve Banks, and their shills. It is obviously not in their interest that the American people realize that private bankers own what most people regard as a part of the public treasury and government. The people would doubtless not like it if they knew that the stockholders of the Federal Reserve Banks receive 6% interest (raised higher in the past) per year on their stock ownership, risk free. The people would be legitimately concerned to know that the member bank stockholders elect six of the nine members (i.e., 2/3rds) of the Boards of the reserve banks of their regions. Rather than regulating or controlling the activities of private banks in their regions, the opposite is the case. 2. The second group consists of those persons who, in their ignorance, have believed the propaganda of the Federal Reserve Banks, which sometimes issue ambiguous, doublespeak statements attempting to obfuscate their private bank ownership. Here is a typical example from the NY Fed website, quite easily seen through: �Although they are set up like private corporations and member banks hold their stock, the Federal Reserve Banks owe their existence to an act of Congress and have a mandate to serve the public. Therefore, they are not really "private" companies, but rather are "owned" by the citizens of the United States�Member banks do, however, receive a fixed 6 percent dividend annually on their stock and elect six of the nine members of the Reserve Bank's of their region� the Reserve Banks issue shares of stock to member banks.� 3. The third group consists of those people who consider that because the Chairman of the Federal Reserve Board of Governors is appointed by the President and approved by the Senate that the Fed is firmly under government control and that this is sufficiently equivalent to ownership to put them at ease (never mind the outright private bank control of the 12 regional Federal Reserve Banks). Let�s hear how the Fed itself regards such indirect �government control� (again from the NY Fed website): The Federal Reserve System is not "owned" by anyone and is not a private, profit-making institution. Instead, it is an independent entity within the government, having both public purposes and private aspects. http://www.themoneymasters.com/

if the fed is a private institution then why does the fed submit its excess profits to the treasury? Additionally, how many private corporations allow the president to select the board of directors of the corporation? What private institution gets 700 billion dollars from the government to go on a public spending spree?

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.