Korean Job Discussion Forums

[justin moffatt]

I just finished watching an intriguing movie titled Zeitgeist. Would people be interested in starting a discussion regarding some of the theories posited in this film?

http://zeitgeistmovie.com

[reactionary]

reminds me of a comedian. "So...I just saw Heat."

[SMKOREA]

It was okay until about an hour into it, then i just lost interest.

[genezorm]

[crescent]

http://forums.eslcafe.com/korea/viewtopic.php?t=104678&highlight=zeitgeist

http://forums.eslcafe.com/korea/viewtopic.php?t=103192&highlight=zeitgeist

[mistermasan]

yep. it should have been a couple/three movies.

diluted the message.

[Donkey Beer]

The video itself wasn't bad- most of the lies were somewhat believable if you didn't look into them.

[Suwoner10]

This errr..."movie" was the single most silly thing ever put out into the media--doesn't speak much for the YouTube generation.

I'm left of the isle on most things political and Zeitgeist makes the "left" look like utter morons. Perhaps it a good "light up a doobie, drop some acid and watch it with your college dropout friends," video, but anything more than that insults the average person with a 4th grade education.

Every part of this film was utter buffoonery. The first part was just made-up nonsense. Post hoc ergo prompter hoc arguments that could be discredited with a 5-second google. Didn't the makers realize that the word "son" and "sun" aren't similar words in non-English languages, a key "oogie-boogie" premise of the first part? Not to mention any 6th grade Christian knows Jesus wasn't born on Dec. 25th, that it was specifically celebrated then simply to coincide with existing holidays.

The second part was just beyond ridiculous, not even meriting comment, and the third part was an absolute fiction. It's sad what people will believe about vast banking conspiracies, when in fact all they need to do is take a Business 101 course, or heck, wiki "Federal Reserve" to sort out it's function and reason for existing. No big mystery.

[bovinerebel]

[Suwoner10]

[gimmesome3k]

enh, its all neither here nor there, none of that crap is real anyways. Now the Easter Bunny....he's a hip guy.

[justin moffatt]

The first section had some interesting theories on comparative religions. Many religious scholars would agree that stories and parables from one religion are often filtered down in successive religions. For example, the Genesis story of Adam and Eve first originated in Zoroastrianism. In fact, the symbol of the snake was personified as the deity of the goddess oriented religion (previous religion), which became the evil snake in the Zoroastrianism tradition.

Furthermore, some archeologists and historians have proved the inauthenticity of some stories in the Old and New Testament. For example, the dining table (depicted in the common Victorian picture) of Jesus Christ at the Last Supper is not characteristic of the table often used during that time period (U shaped pattern to allow servants to serve each guest). In fact, the seating arrangement would be quite different than expressed in the New Testament. Secondly, some archeologists and historians have also claimed that Jesus Christ could not have been a carpenter (due to the absence of trees in the area) and most likely came from a well to do family (perhaps an educated architect with financial backing from his family).

Therefore, it is highly plausible that some stories from the Old and New Testament were remnants and reactions to previous religions. However, whether the claims of the writers of this film is true remains to be substantiated (Horus and Jesus similarities, Moses and Egyptian God comparisons). Debate within the academic communities DO EXIST on these issues. (I attended Graduate seminars at various universities in USA and Canada on these issues. Including prominent scholars from Emory University, Duke University, and Vanderbilt University).

Although the obvious agenda of the filmmakers to completely debunk all religions (and the absence of "God") is unsettling (see the comments on the movies website).

The second section on 911 seems more of a mystery. The theory that certain events were orchestrated by the US government (namely the CIA) to promote fear and propaganda in the general public seems possible but unlikely. Some evidence provided seems somewhat miscontrued. For example, the WTC Engineers and Construction Managers claimed that both Towers were designed to withstand the impact of SEVERAL Boeing 747 airplanes. According to my colleagues (a professor of Architecture and another in Engineering in Canada), the building was NOT designed to withstand the impact of a Boeing 747 HEAD ON. According to them, the building may have withstood a minor impact (on perhaps the side), but not a direct impact with the center steel column (in which the jet fuel if ignited COULD MELT the steel). Of course, this is all speculation and I would appreciate some hard evidence to support this. Some articles in Popular Mechanics also posit a similiar arguement.

As for the theory that additional charges were set in the basement, who knows . . .

The third section which suggests that an elite few control the American economy (and perhaps the future Global economy) also does not seem too far fetched. It is general knowledge that a very, very small percentage of Americans have exorborant wealth and power (and perhaps manipulate economics and politics). As for the historical "evidence" provided regarding American history and the Federal Reserve Bank, I cannot comment. Perhaps, someone who is a historian or historical buff could corroborate these claims.

Additional note: Is the allegation true that George Bush's grandfather was a Natzi collaborator and President of the bank charged with treason? How about the allegation that the Rockefellers provided weapons of mass destruction to Natzi Germany as well?

Nevertheless, I would be extremely interested in proving the authenticity of claims made in this movie, and further evidence to support some of the theories. Regardless, it does cause one to pause and think . . . .

[Ya-ta Boy]

None of the allegations made in the movie are new. These charges have been around for decades, even longer. Governments use religion to control the ignorant masses. The banks control the government.

The over-all thesis is DISTRUST government. However, it isn't the traditional skepticism toward government and those in power that is being touted--it's hate and fear of government because governments lie to us and plot against us. Welcome to the paranoid world-view of conspiracy theories.

The real question: Is the reason we don't have a YAWNING smilie because the banks in Tel Aviv control internet message boards?

[justin moffatt]

Regardless of the filmmakers various agendas (absence of God, don't trust government institutions), the main thesis is essential: Be proactive by questioning religious dogma and authoritarian regimes.

It is not by accident that this film was released before the current American election. Although, Michael Moore had a similar agenda with Farenheit 911, with all the good that film did in swaying the American public. Fear is a powerful motivator . . .