"They" is me, IIB. This is an ancient work of mine. Quite a few things in there arent in my work of recent years, however there's some choice bits
in there that I still dont see enough talk about after all these years.
Originally posted by LadyGreenEyes
reply to post by ADVISOR
1. They assume that most people trust the government, when the fact is, most people might, maybe, trust the ones they voted for, and almost never the
other side. Are people easily lead? Sadly, too many are, but not the way they lay it out.
Most people do trust the government... when it's 'their' guy in there. So half do half the time, and then when the hand changes the other half do
again. I just witnessed a vast sea change in all the Dem's that I agreed with for years, on many issues during the Bush years, do a 180 and now lick
Obama's boots as bad as the Bu#es ever could. At least they had 9/11 and the way the Right twists Christianity to control their mobs. You merge
"God", country, party, military and its the ultimate in sociological propaganda. But now the lib's are practicing exactly what I watched them
(rightfully) criticize the Bush worshippers for being such 'crazy' 'fools' etc all the other things I used to hear them say.
2. They take the position that large companies are a bad thing, when in fact, a properly-run company provides needed jobs. No, everyone
doesn't get rich, but whoever said everyone should be?
"Companies"? No. Multi-national mega-conglomerations, who dont even owe any national allegience, are the enemy. In particular, the sorts involved in
nefarious aims like those in international central banking and military industrial complex type activities, to name 2 kinds.
3. They take the position that the government hasn't had enough control of businesses. Gee, I though we wanted less government control, not
more. All this time, I must have been confused.....*insert eye roll here*
I'm not sure where you got that. Please do quote me.
4. They use that old standard anti-religious tactic of stating all religions are controlled by governments, to control the people. Simply not
true, and getting to be a rather old and moldy argument.
Not quite. Not sure what words you're applying this context to, but, the point I was trying to make (its hard being clear in a fast paced
visual-music-verbal matched video like that) is that they wield it to control the masses.
See my old thread here that focuses on my sociology propganda concept:
Nowadays ObamaCo. using the only one the NeoCon's didnt use openly: RACE.
5. A very obvious anti-Bush and anti-Conservative bias runs through the whole piece. They try to cover this by blaming Democrats (at least for
supposed inaction in failing to stop the "evil Republicans", but they never once mention the current administration. Oversight? Hardly; the bias
could not be more clear.
Anti Bush, Republican, Democrat, Military Industrial Complex, and many others to list. If I made it today Obama would be in there with Bush. Video is
quite out of date. Stop by my wordpress site and you'll see all of the above drug thru the mud in my own kind of way:
Obama is even on my radar like Bush never was in terms of the technological totalitarian portions of the video. I just did a new little summary with
Obama in another older ATS thread last night that someone brought up from the depths of ancient ATS threads:
In fact that thread is slightly older than that video, and its reflected some of the latter bits of the film.
6. The got one thing right; bias combined with ignorance can and will cause the fall of a nation. However, they failed to mention the most
obvious ways this is being carried out. They even got the fear tactic part right, but failed to see the actual culprits. Disinformation at its
lol. Please elaborate...
7. The flat out deny that Islamic terrorists are a threat to freedom. Gee, the terrorists state that they are such a threat. They don't want
freedom; they want all to agree with them or die. But, hey, why should facts get in the way at this point in the video?
To "freedom" huh. Who's freedom? If you're a large stakeholder in global imperialist, 'NWO' type agendas then your "freedom" would be at
stake. But that freedom isnt the kind of freedom most people envision whenever they hear the word. When Bush / whoever says it they're talking about
the Ruling Elite's 'freedom' to dominate, overrun, rob, cheat, overthrow elections, spy, steal, pillage, impoverish, destabilize, etc. You might
enjoy my old "Freedom = Imperialism: Its in the Language
8. They assume that FDR (a Democrat) knowing about Pearl Harbor beforehand (a fact I won't dispute) is somehow proof that Bush knew about 9/11
beforehand. They utterly fail at logical argument.
It wasn't a 9/11 film. It used 911 as the pretext to get the ball rolling on what follows. But it brought up the "New Pearl Harbor" phrase that the
Bush regime has used before and after 9/11 as the pretext to enact PNAC's techno-military global domination objectives.
9. The people they call "post 9/11 terrorists" were labeled as such by Obama and his people, but they somehow fail to mention his name at all
when discussing that issue. Another accidental omission?
The video is over 3 years old. Older than the first post in this thread, which is over 3 years old. This answers a few other of your bullet-points
10. They talk about the so-called "security/concentration camps", which no one seems to be able to prove, or get picture of, and which
people in the areas where they supposedly are seem unable to locate. Can't help but chuckle at this, after that recent post on one such
Back then I was basing it on the documents that had turned up before that time:
Now we do have pictures, last I heard:
12. They make statements that all the wars in the Middle East were "pre-planned", but offer zero evidence, and not even a reference, for
proof of such an outlandish claim.
Read up on the Project for a New American Century.
13. They talk about the government keeping a database of all calls, all internet posts, etc. Can we be serious here??? ALL calls, ALL
internet activity? There aren't enough people to keep track, and no one would waste the computer space for that. Something like Carnivore? Sure,
looking for key words and phrases, and recording those instances for review. That is feasible, but ALL the data? Someone isn't thinking.
Thats what the AI is for. Maybe they dont save every bit of data ever transmitted, but they DO monitor virtually
every bit. I wasnt as
well spoken in those days. For archiving you can bet they have compression algorithms that make 7zip look silly. 30 years ago they had underground
facilities the size of 2 football fields etc filled with massive in size while massively inefficient computers. Today they have they same filled with
computers and hard disk databanks millions of times in capacity. And they have outfits like Google and Yahoo as their minions with their own cloud
computing server farms that one could argue are modeled after what the NSA was doing decades ago. From there, for many years now, that we know about,
the NSA has main interceptor links tied into the main fiber optic communications hubs at virtually every major telecom station, not even getting into
their satellite monitoring ops.
[edit on 13-10-2009 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss]