A “debunking” of the movie Zeitgeist
H/T to Dandelion Salad for the link to a supposed debunking of the entire movie Zeitgeist. Initially, I was going to post the following as a comment on that blog post, but it started to get a bit lengthy and I figured it would be both more appropriate and easier to format as a blog post, so here it is:
Thanks for the links. I’ll have to check out the debunks even though I doubt I’ll agree with a lot of it. Always good to see others’ perspectives, though. Peter Joseph (Zeitgeist’s creator) himself has written “It is my hope that people will not take what is said
in the film as the truth, but find out for themselves, for truth is not told, it is realized.”
Do I think everything in the movie is 100% accurate? No. Do I think that it is worth watching and researching? Absolutely. Do I think attempting a good faith debunk and/or critique is a worthwhile effort? Yes, while emphasizing “good faith”. Most debunks which I see seem to have an agenda which seems to translate roughly as follows- “it’s all BS, and you should take my word for it because I’ve obviously put a lot of effort into this website and nobody really follows all the endnotes on these things anyway- just link to this page in forums like a good sheep and repeat after me- “it’s all been debunked”".
(note to new readers of this blog- I’ve read and researched (both online and offline) on many of the topics covered by the movie since well before the movie was released and provide some links for some further recommended reading on some of the topics covered both below and in my most popular blog post- Peter Joseph’s movie Zeitgeist)
Having looked a little bit at the “debunk” I’ll provide a few links of interest for Parts 2 and 3. I’m not about to attempt a full on debunk, analysis or critique of the “debunk”. It’s just not worth the effort. If Dick Cheney had written it, I might think otherwise.
Since part 1 of the movie has a complete interactive transcript with sources and additional reading on the zeitgeistmovie.com site and Peter Joseph has addressed debunk attempts of it in his FAQs, I figure it stands or falls on its own merits or lack thereof at this point.
For exploring Part 2 of the “debunk” an indispensible reference will be The 9/11 Complete 9/11 Timeline- mainstream media sources used and linked to as sources. Example: point one- Mahmood Ahmed
The author of the debunk uses sentences such as
I can find no sources of such an event — that is sources that do not occur on conspiracy web sites themselves.
This seems disingenuous. How hard did the author actually look for those original sources? Also, many of the original source articles on 9/11 are no longer easily findable online except on “conspiracy theory sites”. Does this mean that the original source article never existed? No. One just has to dig around in the internet archives or at the public library to find those sources; but if one dismisses a resource such as the Complete Timeline as “conspiracy theory” one will indeed have a hard time finding those articles.
Shafig bin Laden was meeting with George H W Bush, and the Carlyle Group the morning of 9/11
The author uses Popular Mechanics as a reference source. Part II notes #33 and #34, for example. Readers can easily find online debunks of that article. He said, she said… so who does one believe?
in addition to the timeline, readers may be interested in learning about the all the architects, engineers, pilots, government officials, etc. who have been willing to publicly question the 9/11 report and other official explanations for the events of 9/11 and publish- to give an example- a peer reviewed article in a Civil Engineering journal (in the 2008 section-
Fourteen Points of Agreement with Official Government Reports on the World Trade Center Destruction Authors: Steven E. Jones, Frank M. Legge, Kevin R. Ryan, Anthony F. Szamboti, James R. Gourley )
On to part III-
“The real truth of the matter is that a financial element in the large centers has owned the government since the days of Andrew Jackson.”
- Franklin D Roosevelt, US President 1933
I found source of the quote. It is apparently a letter sent from Roosevelt to Colonel Edward M House, and apparently can be received from Sterling Library at Yale University or from Radio Liberty. After hours of searching, I could not find a single location on the Internet that references this letter that is not a conspiracy site or is from a post on a forum written by someone who is promoting a conspiracy theory. More so, searching Yale’s library database yielded nothing. I found plenty of letters, but not this one.
I found the quote elsewhere than on a “conspiracy theory site”- Webskeptic lists the quote as underdetermined. Webskeptic may or may not be more well researched or accurate than the “debunk” this post deals with, but at least it appears to be a bit more balanced in terms of a critique.
Looking a bit more for the source of the quote I found the following here:
LETTER TO COL. EDWARD MANDELL HOUSE from Franklin D. Roosevelt Nov. 21,
1933 - F.D.R.: His Personal Letters - Duell, Sloan and Pearce 1950, as cited in THE
SHADOWS OF POWER Id
whether one agrees with the POV of angelfire or Perloff, one could probably verify or refute the accuracy of the quote given that information, I think. See, the interesting thing about all of this is that not all books are currently searchable online. So if Peter Joseph has read The Shadows of Power (what do you know, he claims to have done! or at least cites it as a source) then he may well indeed be able to source all these underdetermined quotes which appear in the movie… whether debunkers will buy those sources or not is another question, of course.
Ah yes, good old books. What a concept! Further book reading (online) for part III of Zeitgeist is available with Jim Marr’s book Rule by Secrecy.
And I’ve spent enough energy writing this post for one night, I think. Where DO these “debunkers” find the time? Maybe some of them “secretly” get paid to do this type of stuff? Who knows, eh?
Tags: "debunk", 9/11, 9/11 Truth, banking, conspiracy theories, critique, debunking 9/11 debunking, Federal Reserve, further reading, Patriots Question 9/11, Peter Joseph, sources, Zeitgeist, Zeitgeist: The Movie
May 6, 2008 at 6:37 am
[...] and mention of another (webskeptic.wikidot.com/zeitgeist-federal-reserve) see the post A “debunking” of the movie Zeitgeist. Prior to this update, it looked like [...]
May 19, 2008 at 6:51 am
Here’s the thing, everyone, understandibly hates the government. Why? Because they’re not part of it. This is just like a person hating Unions, because they are overpaid lazy SOB’s that complain about everything, think they are the most important, and do the least amount of work. That’s all true, unless you happen to be in a Union. You don’t have to do anything and get paid well for it.
But humans are humans, the US gave Russia the knowledge to create nuclear weapons, we’re at a bullshit war where rich folks are getting richer, and JFK fucked Marilyn Monroe. What’s my point? Truth is money. If there is a buck to be made, I’ll sell the page, or someone else will. This goes both ways, but I’m tired of this conspiracy crap. Humans just aren’t capable of pulling off pranks on a large scale. Most can even get away with the small stuff.
Religion is given too much credit and becomes this huge scapegoat. Let it be, it’s done as much good as it’s done harm. We’re always pointing our finger at something, and often that something is ourselves. The real enemy is laziness. That’s how I think of it. How much money do I need to make so that I’ll never have to work again? That’s how most of us feel, otherwise their would be no such thing as investments are retirements, we’d just keep working.
As for 9-11, let it rest. It is a very important date in our history. The war came home. I never cared for New York, those arrogant bastards that think living in an overpopulated, overpriced concrete city is the best place in the world to be. But it got attacked. And to place that blame on the US is a slap in the face to all of the people that actually fought for it too exist. I know there are better places in the world to live, I hear about them all of the time, so migrate, go to your Atlantis, or have the guts to stake a claim and fight for how you think the US should be.
Lastly Hippies. Great movement, no substance. Why do we constantly complain about things that can be changed instead of changing them.
P.S.
“debunking” is to solely be used in reference to disproving the existence of paranormal activity as made popular be T.A.P.S.s.
May 19, 2008 at 7:03 am
can’t, sorry
June 16, 2008 at 5:42 am
Just a quick update on the FDR quote:
Since someone dropped by the site by searching the quote (I could only see this much of what they searched- the real truth of the matter is that a f) I searched it myself to see how well I perform in the engines. Which got me to wondering why the angelfire site didn’t perform well. Well, it appears that the full quote reads as follows:
“The real truth of the matter is, as you and I know, that a financial element in the large centers has owned the government ever since the days of Andrew Jackson…” so in Zeitgeist Peter Joseph left out the “as you and I know” portion.
And I now have a specific page number to refer you to in order to verify (or refute) that particular quote.
(FDR: His Personal Letters [New York: Duell, Sloan and Pearce, 1950], p. 373), according to Newswatch… http://www.newswatchmagazine.org/jan01/jan01.htm
June 16, 2008 at 6:18 am
The Disraeli quote at (which is also “underdetermined”
is apparently from his 1844 novel Coningsby. Further online research yields a reference to Chapter XV of Book III. Referenced in Forms of Hatred: The Troubled Imagination in Modern Philosophy and Literature by Leonidas Donskis (p.38). Searchable thanks to Google Books. Again, it should now be easy enough to verify or refute.
http://books.google.com/books?id=M7Tdl6vgbmUC&pg=PA38&lpg=PA38&dq=Coningsby+%22The+world+is+governed+by+very+different+personages+from+what+is+imagined%22&source=web&ots=cZSfBVVC7c&sig=JgqFZ-XZkwlGkQ9wytijuotlszc&hl=en&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=7&ct=result#PPP1,M1
The third quote, apparently by William Pitt, appears in Bartlett’s Familiar Quotations (10th ed. 1919) at least according to
http://classic.bonus.com/contour/bartlettqu/http@@/www.bartleby.com/100/248.2.html
June 19, 2008 at 9:04 pm
Has anyone heard of Zeitgeist Refuted? It’s done by the guys at Beit Shalom who made other good movies like 911 Birth of Treason. I saw it a while back and can’t remember all the points made but they mainly go after Part One, and showing that Zeitgeist sources in Part One were derived from Freemasons like Manly Hall.
Zeitgeist can still make the point that our understanding of Christianity has been distorted by Sun worship, without being accused of trying to rend the moral / spiritual fabric of society. What they say is true, and not shocking in the least if you’ve done prior reading and research into the subject. But for a lot of people this information is too surprising for them and they react by getting affronted and taking the movie wayyyy to seriously.
July 8, 2008 at 2:20 am
I do think this movie has several good points. As much as we don’t want to hear what is said in this movie, we need to listen. I absolutely agree with the whole “we are human beings. we have the right to know the truth, live freely, and be happy” concept. However, the public is not going to be so easily persuaded. It is truly a huge blow to hear that practically everything you have known has been a lie and you are ultimately being controlled. Its easier to dismiss everything in the movie.
People really should research this stuff and be encouraged to discover the truth themselves, whether or not the claims in Zeitgeist are real or false. That in and of itself is a good lesson. I’m sure not everything in this movie is 100% true (though i’m sure any mistakes were not intentional). But to all those religious “debunkers” out there, who are calling this movie “ridiculous” and such, take a look at your own beliefs. You believe in writings that have absolutely no proof of authenticity! THE only “proof” you possess is your undying faith in the tripe! It seems quite more pathetic to me to believe in some widespread book than the mere possibility of something different!
Religion makes absolutely no sense to me whatsoever! Do you honestly think a person will be condemned to a fiery pit for all of eternity for a single mistake in this lifetime, no matter how large? The response may come as something like: “You must pray to God to repent for your sins”. Praying to God and being “forgiven” at the snap of a finger, just gives one liscense to go out and “sin” more because they know that they will always be “forgiven”. Of course you need to recognize and perhaps apologize for mistakes you have made, but in no way can i believe that this “God”, who you claim loves us all so much, could ever condemn one for eternity. Just the same, i cannot fathom how a figure known as “Satan” could ever affect the people of Earth, much less exist. “Satan” or “The Devil” is, in my opinion, just a false idol that religious individuals use to blame all their problems on, instead of taking responsibility for their actions.
Do you realize you are living out of fear? Fear of being condemned to Hell. Fear of being rejected. Fear of change. Fear of being different.
Fear of THINKING FOR YOURSELF.