Documentary: The Obama Deception -- AWESOME!
DriftingByTheStorm
Posts: 8,684
Yeah,
my buddy & roomate made the mistake of watching this with me.
he doesn't really understand the deeper level of politics and lives in the fantasy where Obama is our shining knight come to save us.
Needless to say this movie both left him with his mouth broken at times, and then alternately left him spewing things like, "this is such crap. i can't believe you fall for this propaganda half-truth crap. This is all half truths."
The problem was, everytime he was saying, "this is all half truths", the movie was spouting off mainstream FACTS about how big of a crock of shit this administration is -- nothing misleading about it, just the truth ... truth HE DIDN'T WANT TO HEAR.
So, DO YOU?
The Obama Deception [google video]
url=http://www.mininova.org/tor/2368134]torrent at mininova[/url
my buddy & roomate made the mistake of watching this with me.
he doesn't really understand the deeper level of politics and lives in the fantasy where Obama is our shining knight come to save us.
Needless to say this movie both left him with his mouth broken at times, and then alternately left him spewing things like, "this is such crap. i can't believe you fall for this propaganda half-truth crap. This is all half truths."
The problem was, everytime he was saying, "this is all half truths", the movie was spouting off mainstream FACTS about how big of a crock of shit this administration is -- nothing misleading about it, just the truth ... truth HE DIDN'T WANT TO HEAR.
So, DO YOU?
The Obama Deception [google video]
url=http://www.mininova.org/tor/2368134]torrent at mininova[/url
If I was to smile and I held out my hand
If I opened it now would you not understand?
If I opened it now would you not understand?
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
Comments
I thought it was pretty good. Alex really seemed to be holding back his "over-the-top" personality in this one. It's definitely worth a watch.
i've been alternating between either too busy or too drunk for a bit now.
finally got to watch this at 4am today with a heavy buzz on.
definately not "over the top Alex" like we have seen on some other films,
and most all of the information here should be public domain for fact checking.
Of course, i still am of the opinion that those who do not WANT to believe, STILL WON'T.
No fault of Mr. Jones. This film "summarizes" (its LONG, folks) the problems with Obama's "hope & change" campaign well. It also does a great deal to clarify some elite agendas and show how Obama is indeed simply pushing for these very same elite banker agendas.
And yet,
many will still refuse to accept this as anything other than a hoax put out by a "hater".
Obama is establishment. Establishment is not change. Not change you want or need, anyhow.
:(
If I opened it now would you not understand?
ain't it fun pulling people out of their comfort zone? if the person is at least open to discussing this stuff, it makes for interesting conversation. I've noticed it can get you alienated if the person is 'comfortable' enough...hopefully some of the film stuck with your friend.
noticed that too. I'm always kinda torn between wanting him to go more mainstream with his investigative reporting, and continuing with the megaphone grassroots stuff.....should we commend someone for not holding back, or for trying NOT to alienate people?
the Bilderberg megaphone protest footage early in this doc will still turn some people off....thing is, if you believe what he claims to, you SHOULD be angry and ranting....but...because he is probably the most visible/vocal person covering the 'elite agenda', I sometimes think he should try for a more mainstream audience as it's an important topic that gets no coverage in the msm. I cringed a bit when he plugged Endgame. The Obama Deception has potential to be huge as Obama loses favour; toning down the rants can only help it's reach...but in general I think people are not prepared to accept Endgames' big-picture eugenics master plan. The scope of that theory is huge, and an easy excuse to write AJ off as a nut.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0309/20010.html
The Bilderberg Group exposed in mainstream media today.
The paranoia is laughable.
A client of a family member has been invited to the Bilderberg meetings. He has been to two of them, once during the Clinton admin and once during the Bush admin. People who think there is "master of the universe" shit going on at these meetings are quite mistaken.
Would you care to shed some light on what does go on then?
And if there was 'master of the universe shit' happening at this thing, would it even be in the best interest of your thrid cousin's boss' client to let the cat out of the bag?
What other purpose would there be to have meetings like this once a year? It's not like it's on a golf course, they stay behind closed doors all day. Many of them travel halfway around the world to attend. If it isn't fun, or productive for them, then what's the point? They are obviously fat cats-- a "who's who" of business and politics, maybe they just whip their cocks out all day and compare whos is the biggest? My money's on Hillary.
Many of these people are public officials, so it should be televised. These are the some of the same people that brought us the Patriot Act, and warrantless wiretapping, they ask it of us-- "if you've got nothing to hide, it shouldn't bother you!" The same rules should apply for them, or it shouldn't be allowed to happen.
And also, it's very easy to hate on Alex Jones. Even his biggest fans do it all the time. I have a hard time believing much of what he says, but the man does get some very reputable guests on his show, who confirm a lot of what he says is true. Alex loses people when he tries to connect the dots to why these very powerful people do what they do in secret. He should focus more on the fact that they simply operate in secret, and that it doesn't bode well for any of us that they do.
I'd say the most likely is the Bilderberg is a who's who in world politics. It's just a place that they gather, listen to lectures and mingle among themselves. Kinda like professional conventions, where players within the same field gather to meet and discuss. That they meet is not a conspiracy in itself.
2. Why the "secrecy"?
The entire point seems to be to have a semi-informal arena where these people just meet. You dont relax or act anything like informal with a camera-lens fixed on you the whole time. Apart from that, they may just want to have an open discussion among themselves, which they can't really do before the TV audience. Then they have to wear their public face mask through the entire thing, and it would be just like any other meeting.
Another reason to control information, is that the press very easily gets things very wrong even when you tell them stuff flat out. If what you say isnt "exciting" they interpret it as "interesting" as they can to make a better headline. I have myself a little experience with it from talking/delivering stats to the local press about local labour market etc. And it is actually really hard to get the message to play the way you had intended according to facts. They read it wrong, or jump to wrong conclusions, or just focus on the wrong angle. Even if there are angles that actually would be a lot more interesting for them to pursue in the name of public interest.
I can well understand the idea of an informal meeting place, and I also understand that they won't want cameras around. Neither proves anything conspiratorial. Besides, it's not like it is a secret that they meet, anyway. I hear about it every year more or less, also through mainstream channels.
3. The "problem" that people in power meet
I also dont get the incrimination of people in power, representing millions of people, meeting to discuss issues of common concern. It is definitely a lot more preferable that they meet once in a while, than them sitting put in their respective capitals worrying about what the others are thinking in their capitals. It's great that they meet, and they should. Also informally, so that noone have to play before the camera.
As for why this meeting is so much worse than others, I dont understand either. They have WTO summits, G7, G5, G20 Gwhatever meetings, NATO, UN, you name it. And that is the formal arenas. If they really want to conspire, they could well do so privately by picking up a phone. The sheer numbers of invitees discourage anything really conspiratorial going on, and makes my scenario of "who's who in politics cocktail party" more plausible.
4. Why go so far to attend?
It really isn't that much of a trip for any world leader today to sit some hours on a plane to attend whatever. Maybe they enjoy this, or just look forward to be among colleagues. I go to meetings and conventions for my profession both internally in my organization and outside. I go, because interesting stuff is debated/lectured on, and I get to meet the other people that work within my field or related ones. It's nice to go outside your own play pen once in a while and see the people that play your part in other pens.
Unlikely as i find the super conspiracy stuff, I find it even less likely that if there is such a thing, that anything happens on large arrangements such as this, where really everybody attends. The likelihood of a conspiracy drops for each additional person involved. Or rather, the likelyhood of a conspiracy to remain secret and potent decreases for each additional member. A conspiracy needs that everyone benefits from the same scenario. Not in an abstract theoretical way, but in real material terms. All historical confirmed or likely conspiracies are recognized by their limited goals (usually head of state assasination or something like that) and also a very limited number of people "in the know". Even then, they often failed.
Anyway, I'd look at reigning hegemonical ideas, official stated policies and connections of real, limited material interest to explain the world. Standardized behavioural patterns in organizations, group-think and so on, are much more likely to be factors in this. Similar behaviour and thought patterns (standardized through schooling. No not "they're brainwashing my kid", but the purpose of any school of any discipline is to teach axioms and premises that are thought to be valid.) does not imply a single will behind the actions.
Peace
Dan
"Every judgment teeters on the brink of error. To claim absolute knowledge is to become monstrous. Knowledge is an unending adventure at the edge of uncertainty." - Frank Herbert, Dune, 1965
excellent point.
Conspiracy: a secret plan or agreement between two or more people to commit an illegal or subversive act.
The fact that it is illegal for many of the members to be there means that yes, the fact that they meet IS a conspiracy in itself, by definition.
Can you clarify your definition of ‘reigning hegemonical ideas’? Sounds like conspiracy to me…
Who's implying a single will? My guess would be that the bolded part above is EXACTLY what is goin on...setting policies, reviewing behaviour patterns etc, and discussing the next steps in continuing the hegemony they enjoy... Do any of you 'conspiracy' detractors honestly think that we are so naive as to believe that David Rockefeller takes a pulpit with a powerpoint presentation on how to dominate the world, then hands out homework? This is akin to the belief of conspiracy theorists (implied by detractors) that, for 9/11 to be an inside job, they would have needed a thousand people huddled around a black board taking notes on the whole plan...I don't see anyone implying that it's so black and white…
It's no different than any other industry – when industry heads and insiders meet to discuss business, THEY benefit...and most everyone involved in the industry that does NOT meet gets fucked over by the decisions made at the meeting (collusion). If the meetings involve the heads of finance, politics, military, intelligence and other industries that have massive impacts on the public....Why make excuses for them? I don’t’ think it’s a reach to assume that since we (public or media) are not there, we are getting fucked over by the decisions made…They are overstepping their authority, and in many cases committing an illegal act just by attending.
Solarworld – care to dispute anything, or are you just takin pot shots? Let us know which facts in the film are incredible….shooting the messenger doesn’t kill the word…
Good explanation, but this is truly a best-case scenario of what Bilderberg actually is, and still as speculative as any 'conspiracy theory,' no? None of us have ever been there. There are several perspectives from "moles" that have claimed to attend these meetings, and they're all over the charts. Who's to say Henry Kissinger and George Soros aren't on one side of the room talking about one thing, and the Queen of the Netherlands and Bill Gates aren't working something out on the other side?
Bilderberg probably is somewhere between what you think it to be and what Alex Jones thinks it to be.
Alex Jones is a nimrod and has no credibility. I don't have to shoot the messenger, the moron shoots himself in the foot every time he opens his mouth.
Hey Vinny, I assure you the family member I speak of is a sole business owner and is much closer to me than a third cousin. The client I spoke of is a wealthy business owner in silicon valley. They come to my family member for money management. He's no master of the universe, just a regular Joe with a lot of money.
You people believe what you want. I'm not going to change your minds anyways. Just think twice about believing some lunatic that runs around screaming in a megaphone telling you are about to be enslaved. It's a big fat joke and makes me laugh that people give him any attention.
AND BTW I think the whole 9/11 story we have been told is a bunch of bullshit but I don't think it was part of the master plan to take over the world.
Do you Alex Jones sheep realize if any super secret group that has control over the planet and wanted to "make their move" they would have done it last October when the electronic run on the banks happened. If the government didn't step in then the whole system would have imploded. Since this groups has the all powerful masters of the universe in it, surely they would have stopped the government from taking action. Wouldn't THAT have been the best time to take over and declare a single currency and enslave us all? Please...
Have you seen Zeitgeist yet? Is this where your screen name comes from?
I have seen Zeitgeist, but my name is not inspired from the movie.
My best case is to counter to hysterical worst case that some portray it as.
I'm guessing the reality is a way lot further towards my end, than his end. My speculation is based on how I know arenas similar to that one to work. As opposed to "they meet, ergo they are plotting something, and since they are plotting they are out to enslave humanity with their devilish schemes". I envision it as an informal cocktail party for the rich and influential.
As for people "working stuff out", as I said, they could also do so with a phone call easily or at any other meeting they could choose. And with a lot less people around to catch them saying it than at the Bilderberg.
Peace
Dan
"Every judgment teeters on the brink of error. To claim absolute knowledge is to become monstrous. Knowledge is an unending adventure at the edge of uncertainty." - Frank Herbert, Dune, 1965
that's what I thought...have you watched the movie? If I can see past the bs on cnn to get SOME facts, surely you can do the same with AJ...don't assume that just because we are open to opinions presented by this raving lunatic that we lack the ability to filter information. I would hope you don't accept everything on cnn at face either.
as for the last paragraph...what did the govt do to step in and stop the system from imploding last October? Most people that follow this line of thought think that the 'masters of the universe' are the bankers.....why exactly would the bankers step in and stop the govt from giving them trillions of dollars? It's not like they can say, 'oops, DOW is down 400 pts, you guys want a new currency?' It won't happen overnight, might as well get paid in the meantime. You are doing what you accuse theorists of - oversimplifying.
Well, for instance, we have had for a long time the idea that markets work best when there is no regulation, and that markets always by definition are more efficient than public systems. It's in a bit of trouble these days. What I mean is widely held beliefs and ideas in the population or within certain professions/parts of society that shapes the said society. That's not a conspiracy unless you will label every political party or activist organization as conspiracies too.
You just implied single will in what you wrote here. In that you assume they are working together towards the common goal, and that the gathering is there to do that. When I say behavioural patterns, I am NOT talking about "planning patterns" or anything like it. I'm talking of using what we know from social psychology, sociology and organizational studies and applying it to the meeting.
They CAN, of course, if there are few actors that know eachother well and see eye to eye on everything. Also remember that for industries, they are not all in on it together in that setting. They are also competitors. They CAN form monopolies and cartels certainly. Bu the larger the group, the less potent it becomes. Look at OPEC, a real cartel. Even they struggle to act uniformly unless really forced to by conditions, since some of them can weasel out of cutting as much as they should, selling more and benefitting for instance.
I find this cartellization much less likely among a diverse crowd from all walks of politics and business.
The media cant be everywhere, nor would it be right for them to be. "You aren't there" in congress either, and much of what goes on never gets your attention (even if it actually is recorded). That's not necesarily a problem. Besides, for anything that they "decide" there to go through, they all have to go home and get it through the parliament or congress, and thus be subject to scrutinization if needed.
And, no, I dont think it is right to assume that they are "fucking us" (nevermind the problem who "us" would be in this context, anyway) just because it isn't televised. The flipside is that just because it's televised, doesn't mean you arent being fucked over either. And it is really up to individual perspective what "fucking us over" really entails.
The rich and wealthy have power and influence. Always have, always will. To do something means to take political actions to make real changes. Not worry about just who of them attended what meeting. You dont need a conspiratorial worldview to acknowledge privilege, wealth and power as problems for those not posessing the aforementioned. That they are problematic doesnt mean there's conspiracies behind. For instance, many seems to favour minimal public sector and redistribution through taxes. The flipside is that it provides more power to the privileged and wealthy, since when there's nothing else to stop it, money rules. Those having the most, decides the most. That's one example of something that's not really a conspiracy.
There are conspiracies, certainly, but the grand unifed one seems highly unlikely.
Peace
Dan
"Every judgment teeters on the brink of error. To claim absolute knowledge is to become monstrous. Knowledge is an unending adventure at the edge of uncertainty." - Frank Herbert, Dune, 1965
I find it laughable that you are telling me to educate myself and you know nothing of the electronic run that happened, the trillions that were being pulled out on the day the market crashed. The fact that you have no idea what happened on THAT day further proves my point about Alex Jones followers.
Care to explain what happened THAT day, then? I asked questions...you replied with no answers and insults...again. Get off your fucking horse and try debating if you want to sound as informed as you seem to think you are.... the insults are proving nothing but ignorance.
You told me to "get some facts". I'm not here to debate you. I'm not insulting you, get off your highly defensive horse. Watch the Frontline link I posted. If the "whoever is going to take us over" REALLY was going to do such a thing, last October would have been the time to do it.
I have no issues with what you've written above...it's kind of stupid to debate the details when we're all speculating based on beliefs...one thing I would like to clarify is that the 'single will' or 'common good' I was implying was the continuation of hegemony...which probably more a basic capitalist instinct than a diabolical plot.
" The flipside is that just because it's televised, doesn't mean you arent being fucked over either." that cracked me up
edit: I believe it's illegal for an elected American official to meet 'off the record' with government from other nations...or sumptin like that
I never told you to get facts. I asked you to tell me which facts you disagreed with in the film. How is that telling you to educate yourself? :roll: edit: I see the post you're talking about now. I was saying that it is possible to obtain info from a source you don't trust....still not telling you to educate yourself.
My point about last October, regarless of my naivety regarding whateverthefuck you're talking about, is that these people don't need an opportunity to take over the world, they already run it. Why would they push thru currency change or whatever you're suggesting when they're the ones profiting from all the chaos already?
I can't watch video at work, but I'll check out your Rockefeller-funded op-ed later tonight....but probably won't reply to the thread, lest I be ignored
You know, don't watch the video. If you think PBS is part of some Rockefeller conspiracy then your mind has already been warped. Again if you have no knowledge whatsoever of the trillions being pulled out of the market last October you don't have a basic understanding of the banking "bailout". Unplug from Mr. Jones for a moment.
Glad to be of service
In that case, aren't they breaking the law at every meeting and summit with foreign officials? You know, when they go behind the closed doors, after waving to the press? I dont think any leadership or cooperation can happen unless they are allowed to speak "off the record" now and then. I'm thinking treason is illegal, but you've gotta be very sticklish on details to extend that to speaking "off record".
Peace
Dan
"Every judgment teeters on the brink of error. To claim absolute knowledge is to become monstrous. Knowledge is an unending adventure at the edge of uncertainty." - Frank Herbert, Dune, 1965
Explain it to me since you are so in tune....put your version up for scrutiny and stop talking in circles.
Also, stop putting words in my mouth. I never said the word conspiracy. I mentioned who funded the video you're referencing as 'truth' about the bailouts.
From that link:
Funding for FRONTLINE is provided through the support of PBS viewers. Major funding for FRONTLINE is provided by The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation. Additional funding is provided by the Park Foundation
From wiki, re: John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation:
Over its history the Foundation has been in close collaboration with the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, the Carnegie Corporation and the Rockefeller Foundation; one case in point being the joint establishment in 2000 of The Partnership for Higher Education in Africa, to assist higher education institutions in 6 African countries. Another connection is that President Jonathan F. Fanton serves as an Advisory Trustee of the Rockefeller Brothers Fund.
If I told you to watch a Haliburton-funded documentary on the war in Iraq, would you be suspicious of the content?
but AJ says that the last real president was JFK, all since have been puppets... thus this has been going on for decades, why then throw Obama under the bus?
Because Obama moved people, cuz he is smarter then most the rest, cuz he comes off as genuine and preached change and hope?
It does not take a person with above intelligence to realize that a politician is still a politician
that said even KRS-1, who apparently AJ wants to make man love with, admits that the election of Obama is one the greatest moments of his lifetime even though he thinks he is a pawn in a larger scheme for rich white guys to rule the world
For AJ to diminish that is just ignorant bigotry IMO
It should not be called the Obama Deception, it should be called the Political Deception or something. All politicians preach change and hope, Obama was just better at it.
People give these rich white guys too much credit
I believe too much in the human spirit and collective unconscious to think that they could win even if they were planning to rule the world and dominate everything.
Let them have their money, I do not really care and if we all end up homeless eating garbage and twigs, people will come together and beat the tyrants and oppressors.
It is a simple belief and we may not see the end result in our life time but I suspect that in most scenarios good will triumph over evil
and I don't really see AJ trying to bring people together, I see him running around like a crazy version of the host from cheaters
and even if they are meeting behind closed doors, with an agenda for world dominance, who is to say that they can put that agenda into action... most are government officials and they do not have a great reputation for getting things done. Most of us have been in task force type meetings where little gets done cuz no one can agree.
I will get off my utopian soapbox now