swfchan: 2.swf (info)

Text

TIME HAS NO EMOTION
an attempted debunking of
Aquarius: The Age of Evil
By Anonymous
Version zero (there's always room for
improvement).

PART TWO

[William Cooper:]
"Here's the way they look at it. Here's their
metaphor. Adam and Eve were held
prisoner in the Garden of Eden by an
unjust, cruel and vindictive God until
Lucifer, through his agent Satan, set man
free from this garden by giving him the gift
of intellect. Through the use of intellect
man will conquer the earth, will conquer
nature and will himself become God. It's
taught in every Masonic temple in this
land. Every secret brotherhood, every
secret society, every mystical temple;
every occult organization teaches the
Luciferian philosophy."(3)

So satan tempted human beings into
accepting the gift of intellect (how is beyond
me since human intellectual ability at the
present stage of the story didn't exist) then
now being able to use their brains to think is a
bad thing? I can't ignore the message that
having knowledge is a bad thing. If accepting
the gift of intellect was evil, then isn't using the
brain to learn anything even more evil? The
implication that learning is a sin effectively
means even learning about the existence of
the holy bible is a sin.

Newborn babies are labeled as evildoers. The
phrase from Christianity is something like
"Man is born with sin". But a strange question
comes to mind; what about the conception of
the child? Isn't it a sin to create a fetus that
has already sinned (somehow)? Let me
guess, only as long as the child enters a
religion that makes him/her not a sinner
anymore. This would sound like scampering
to block up holes in the story.

I think it's impossible for humans to get to a
level where it is possible for them to change
the laws of nature. The laws of nature are to
be followed; you can't become the laws of
nature, you can't become time. How could you
ever achieve the ability to change the speed
of light at will? This debunks the argument
that TZM believes people can become gods in
this sense.

[Narration:]
To understand the new world order and
the New Age world view we must go back
into history and examine its origins. But
first we must define our terms. By "New
Age" I am speaking about a world view
that has many facets and components
such as Astrological and Zodiacal beliefs
in the New Age concept, channeling
higher powers to achieve knowledge,
meditation, the belief that all is one (or
forms of Monism), the belief that we can
attain god-hood, esotericism (or in other
words reinterpreting ancient texts to find
hidden meanings and unify all religious
belief into one), the belief that we need a
one-world system for the coming Age of
Aquarius.

So do I as a member of TZM believe that we
need a one world system for the coming Age
of Aquarius?

First of all time has no emotion. The
astrological signs of the zodiac to me is like
people got together and played join the dots
with the stars and they made what they
wanted to see appear in the sky, astrology is a
primitive form of astronomy, in astrology they
view planets as gods which influence daily life
on earth, in astronomy they view planets as
actual places. So to me it doesn't matter which
sign of the zodiac or age we are in at all. We
measure time, time simply flows without
concern. Our question is are the people of this
planet currently enabled to use their time in
the wisest way possible? TZM thinks not.

The reason we need a new social system
that's interconnected globally that's updated
to present day knowledge, modern methods,
including guidelines that correspond to the
laws of nature is because if we attempt to
disregard laws of nature like we are now we
will kill ourselves. Like how you'll die if you
don't eat, or if you take a leap of faith off a cliff
you'll fall to the ground. Which shows
god's/reality's major concern is to simply
maintain its laws of nature. Life isn't this
reality's major concern, but it's part of its
workings and it can be allowed to flourish.

The reason why it needs to be a one-world
system is because it's most productive to
work together than to cause conflict. Like the
teaching love thy neighbour - or am I
misinterpreting the teaching love thy
neighbour should I be interpreting it as hate
thy neighbour?

All religions eventually need to find common
ground, if keithtruth has no problem with part
3 of zeitgeist the movie doesn't he recognise
that disputes over who's right and who's
wrong ends up in heated battles that lead to
chaos?
Instead of pointing fingers at whose right and
whose wrong we need to find common ground
if we wish to continue living on this planet.
Every human needs clean air, healthy food,
clean water, shelter, continuous education to
improve prosperity, efficient transportation,
clean environment etc.
How exactly is encouraging such a direction
evil? That's what seems to be the
overshadowing message with the dark music
and the practice of distorting images.

By "new world order" I am talking about a
political agenda to create a one-world
system, one-world government, one-world
economy, unity of humanity into one
organism, control over humanity and
submission of the masses.
"They're going to make it sound wonderful
which is what like the Zeitgeist Addendum
particularly does in the second part.
Where they talk about oh, we're going to
like you know have free energy. We're
going to provide your needs. There's been
talk about erasing all debts. That's more…
The Venus Project is more… what is it
Jacque Vallee? Jacque Fresco. That's
more what he's into. Okay this is his
utopian approach to the new world order."

I can't say whether or not there is a
conspiracy to create a one-world government
and to totally enslave people (even though we
are already slaves to this money system,
when you're already a slave how much more
enslaved can you be?) Anyway if it's a
conspiracy meaning a secret plot to enslave
the people of the world which are already
enslaved by debt, why would you make a
movie about your secret plot and release it
online? The idea behind enslavement I
thought would be to make people unintelligent
as possible to enable them to be easily
controlled.

Giving people free knowledge makes people
more aware and free. The more people think
the freer they become (never 100% free
though that's impossible).

Not only that, but the apparent plan of the
N.W.O. is to have a world monetary system.
We want people to think for themselves and
to give people more time in their own lives to
pursue goals that are beneficial to them and
others for fulfillment. Not work as battery hens
for money. The way you enslave people is to
convince them that monetary debt is real,
when in fact its bits of plastic or to be more
accurate meaningless electronic numbers
where only faith gives it value.
Are you suggesting that the zeitgeist
movement is going to promote the idea and
method for creating a society that doesn't
require the use of money then we're going to
turn around and suddenly say "Now we've got
you! Now we're going to install an evil one
world currency! Ha! Ha! Ha!" Ahem no.
I must have missed a zeitgeist meeting
because that's not why I'm a member. I want
to see the source of corrupt behaviour
removed so more prosperous behaviour can
emerge, I don't wish to see perfect utopian
people because then there's no room for
improvement defeating the point to life.

To be perfectly honest I really don't like that
term new world order - it seems like it's a cool
term that's just thrown around and people who
inform other people about conspiracies
sometimes want to be seen as prophets.
Going down an endless staircase of
researching corruption doesn't give you a
solution to corruption. There's no end to how
bad it can get until you're dead.

To term the venus project or
sociocyberneering as utopia we must first
define the word utopia.
Utopia
1. Ideally perfect state; especially in its social
and political and moral aspects
2. An imaginary place considered to be perfect
or ideal
Related word - Zion

The idea of striving for perfection is insane;
we are not striving for perfection at all. We
want constant improvement in technologies
and for those improvements to be beneficial to
all otherwise there is no point to inventing
them. Constant improvement implies that we
don't believe in perfection.
We don't want to use political management;
politics is corrupt as money. A computer
system (being open source) that tells you -
how many aircraft are currently in the air, how
many ships are out at sea, the rate of growth
and quality of hydroponic farms all around the
world, resource reserves that are known, and
strong recommendations for how to effectively
manage those resources should now be in the
role of a cybernated government and no other
role than that. What determines whether or
not you breathe? The features of the body that
automatically enable breathing. Our argument
is an expansion of the fact that you don't
politically decide to breathe.

Certain politicians right now are glamorised
just like movie stars, yet what they know and
have actually done seems to be increasingly
irrelevant from interest. What they promise
and how they present that promise seems to
be most important. So TZM doesn't want to
be affiliated with politics. If TZM is such a
political movement how come I don't want to
be politically active at all? I don't like
business! Business immersed in corruption!

On another note the discoverer of the
idea/method of a resource based economy
Jacque Fresco says in the film zeitgeist
addendum "The system I advocate a resource
based global economy is not perfect, it's just a
lot better than what we have. We can never
achieve perfection." This existence of that
quote shows that certain quotes are chosen
while others are ignored to backup a biased
perspective that TZM is striving for a perfect
society/utopia. The idea of true research is to
be as minimally biased as possible.

G. Edward Griffin
"It is Communism without using the name
… The enemy of mankind is not profit. It is
a political system of big government. Yet,
this program is supportive of some of the
most notable big-government collectivist
on the planet. Marxist/Leninists may be
enemies of collectivists in Washington,
DC, but they are collectivists in their own
right. The Communist model is no better
than the Nazi model." (83)

So profit is not our "enemy" or is not
destructive and what is really destructive is a
big government correct?
Well consider in this example of profit to
determine whether money is our "enemy" or
not.
If you have corporations selling products what
they will want to do is sell it to you at the
lowest price they can to be competitive with
another corporation that's selling a similar
product (the competitive edge) and still make
a profit. They'll use materials and designs that
are cheap to do this so naturally the product
breaks down and you'll have to buy another.
They'll also use the best advertising
techniques they can devise to put into your
mind that you need this product regardless of
if you actually need it (like lipstick it's useless).
Then when they put their biggest competitors
out of business they have the ability to raise
the price of this product making them a
monopoly corporation of that product and also
advertise them as being the coolest and you're
not cool if you don't buy from them. When they
become a complete monopoly they can again
raise the pirce again further pursuing the short
sighted goal of profit and still call it a fair deal,
when competitors are out of business a
monopoly has the customers all to
themselves.
The process of lying to the customer involves
the customer believing what they say rather
than a customer being able to tell what a lie is.
Companies will always say that buying from
them is fair because they want to maintain
control over you.
Lie
A statement that deviates from or perverts the
truth.
So the question is
Is perverting truth destructive? YES!
Big governments go hand in hand with big
businesses, how? Well because people in
government are susceptible to bribery. If that
statement holds water then the needs of
people will always be in a queue compared to
the desires of big business. That's why this
system has got to change its goal to caring for
human needs and the environment that
maintains us rather than caring for the selfish
cancerous desires of business.

Narration
"...and they all speak against Christianity
and the bible. The people who took over
the truth movement and who are allowed
to live and teach the public such as
Jordan Maxwell, Michael Teserion (not sure
how to spell that last name), Peter Joseph,
David Icke, and others. All of these people
have one unifying factor they are all
strictly against Christianity and they are
all heavily associated with the new age
theosophy, and freemasonry.

Allowed to live?
Is this a hit list?

By deduction that PJ is apparently strictly
against Christianity and I am a member of
TZM then I must be strictly against
Christianity correct? Well to simply label me
being against Christianity is easy, and it
doesn't require anymore thought, it's designed
to demonise a person. What I am against is
the contradictions in the bible. Anything that
contradicts, corrupts, dissolves, or redefines
the teaching of love thy neighbour/love your
enemies causes the goal of a group to
change into a cancerous direction.

On another note a demonising tactic that's
being done here is that the people who want
to demonise these people draw them instead
of actually having a picture of them. What?
They're so evil they don't get a photo?

Communism Vs. The Venus Project or my
preferred name Sociocyberneering

When one does a comparison between
Zeitgeist Addendum and the communist
model it becomes clear that the Zeitgeist
movement is in fact promoting
communism. N. B. Ghodke, in the work
'Encyclopaedic Dictionary of Economics'
defines full communism based in the
ideals of Marx Engels and others as:

Where is the actual problem with the plan of
reducing scarcity to reduce negative
behaviour? It seems to be implied since
there's connections to degrees between
EVILLL communism and the venus project.
This is a fear mongering tactic to make you
afraid of the venus project. To encourage fear
is to encourage disease.

What people want is access to resources
freely to satisfy their needs. If they get that
why would they want show cancerous
disrespectful behaviour to other people? Also
how exactly do you control people in an
authoritarian one-world government system if
you're providing their prime human needs for
free? The idea behind submitting to a
government's rule is because their meant to
(they don't) care for a public in harsh times. If
the times aren't harsh or can be improved
significantly so then it's unnecessary to have a
government would their rule be valid or
manufactured? We trust the idea that we need
government, and this system doesn't work
without that trust. That's why we need a
system where common people doubt the
effectiveness of what we're doing to solve
problems so we can uncover new more
productive ways to solve problems so we don't
have sheep (this is assuming the people who
identify people as sheep don't want to look at
people as sheep). Trust in a government
doesn't produce that kind of progress, it's
simply trust the government's way of solving
problems period. Who in their right mind says
they want an authoritarian one-world cancer
government that's run by people relying on
their emotional biases and doesn't manage
what's important because it doesn't care about
the public. What needs to be governed is
agreement to human needs and the
environment being a requirement; if human
needs and maintenance of the environment
isn't met you are going to have problems.

The reason why you might think you need an
authoritarian government that seeks to control
people with police, law, surveillance etc, is
because that's been driven into you by fear
that's been passed down. People become
naturally desperate when their human needs
are not being satisfied and installing laws is a
prop that says we don't know how to fix that
problem. People become so confused from
the fear generated that society becomes a big
mess of opinions and the clear direction of
love thy neighbour is lost. The only soultions
to problems become temporary.

So what do people do? They act out, have
tantrums, and timeout is prison. Instead of
looking at the influences as the problem we
look at the people being the problem. If you
weren't getting what you needed to live would
you accept that and die or become angry and
complain? Masters don't want people to
complain because if they listened a balance
would materialise and then masters wouldn't
exist. Someone who's corrupted needs to find
balance so their role as master dissolves.
Government will always be there to protect the
rich from the poor's tantrums.

Society is programmed to insist in conflict but
TZM wants agreement in the basics of human
life. Not everyone needs to agree in
absolutely everything. For example how
people like to spend their recreational time,
yet we feel people should at least agree on
the requirements for a human to live. A
system that doesn't include care for everyone
is corrupt.

Communism:
(4) "It will be a moneyless economy."(91)
Zeitgeist:
(4)"The system uses no money."(92)

It's worthwhile here to point out the question
was communism ever actually practiced with
no money besides theory?

Watch part three for
continuation.

Library Items

Symbol 1 Font	Used by:3 42
Symbol 2 Font	Used by:8 9 10 13 14 15 16 17 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 28 29 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 41
Symbol 3 Text	Uses:1	Used by:Timeline
Symbol 4 Font	Used by:5
Symbol 5 Text	Uses:4	Used by:Timeline
Symbol 6 Font	Used by:7
Symbol 7 Text	Uses:6	Used by:Timeline
Symbol 8 Text	Uses:2	Used by:Timeline
Symbol 9 Text	Uses:2	Used by:Timeline
Symbol 10 Text	Uses:2	Used by:Timeline
Symbol 11 Font	Used by:12 18 27 29 30 34 35 40
Symbol 12 Text	Uses:11	Used by:Timeline
Symbol 13 Text	Uses:2	Used by:Timeline
Symbol 14 Text	Uses:2	Used by:Timeline
Symbol 15 Text	Uses:2	Used by:Timeline
Symbol 16 Text	Uses:2	Used by:Timeline
Symbol 17 Text	Uses:2	Used by:Timeline
Symbol 18 Text	Uses:11	Used by:Timeline
Symbol 19 Text	Uses:2	Used by:Timeline
Symbol 20 Text	Uses:2	Used by:Timeline
Symbol 21 Text	Uses:2	Used by:Timeline
Symbol 22 Text	Uses:2	Used by:Timeline
Symbol 23 Text	Uses:2	Used by:Timeline
Symbol 24 Text	Uses:2	Used by:Timeline
Symbol 25 Text	Uses:2	Used by:Timeline
Symbol 26 Text	Uses:2	Used by:Timeline
Symbol 27 Text	Uses:11	Used by:Timeline
Symbol 28 Text	Uses:2	Used by:Timeline
Symbol 29 Text	Uses:11 2	Used by:Timeline
Symbol 30 Text	Uses:11	Used by:Timeline
Symbol 31 Text	Uses:2	Used by:Timeline
Symbol 32 Text	Uses:2	Used by:Timeline
Symbol 33 Text	Uses:2	Used by:Timeline
Symbol 34 Text	Uses:11 2	Used by:Timeline
Symbol 35 Text	Uses:2 11	Used by:Timeline
Symbol 36 Text	Uses:2	Used by:Timeline
Symbol 37 Text	Uses:2	Used by:Timeline
Symbol 38 Text	Uses:2	Used by:Timeline
Symbol 39 Text	Uses:2	Used by:Timeline
Symbol 40 Text	Uses:11	Used by:Timeline
Symbol 41 Text	Uses:2	Used by:Timeline
Symbol 42 Text	Uses:1	Used by:Timeline
Streaming Sound 1	Used by:Timeline