My Mind's Ink

Zeitgeist Movie

A review of the film

Zeitgeist was created as a nonprofit project to inspire people to start looking at the world from a more critical perspective. The film is split into three parts. The parts are unified by the central idea that very often things are not what the population at large think they are. The film is engaging and thought provoking and if nothing else promotes a little critical thought.

Part One – The greatest story ever told

This was the section I enjoyed the least. Quite simply it demonstrates that the bible is a fictional piece of work. That it is a text that is largely an amalgamation of previous mythology, religions, astrology, and pagan beliefs. I have been living with the knowledge that the bible is a nonsensical fictional work since I was old enough to think for myself, which is probably why I did not really like this part; it offered me no new ideas.

Although if you are not familiar with the any of the craziness associated with the religious texts of the Western World this is worth a viewing.

Part Two – All the World’s a Stage

An argument is put forth that 9/11 was planned and executed by the US government to drag the population into supporting the intended agenda. This provided a number of interesting points but also provides some sketchy evidence to support pretty wild theories. Just from first viewing I can pull out a few items that provide a decent basis to ask a few questions, but mostly arguments against. Unlike Part One, the sources for this part have not been posted yet on the website so it is more difficult to assess.

I am not a fan of Conspiracy Theories. Like most of these theories this one has some inherent problems. There are some interesting questions raised but overall the arguments raised are poorly thought out and can be debunked with a little thought and research.

I do agree with some of the notions in the film out of hand however. The events following 911 unfolded as they were intended. The U.S. had designs on Iraq and the War on Terror is an excuse to carry out those designs. There appears to be no credible evidence that actions were undertaken to precipitate the events that led to the excuse, but regardless, once 911 occurred it was a predetermined path to invasion.

Interesting questions raised

Did you know that there was a third building that collapsed in the World Trade Center attack? I sure as hell did not. I was shocked by that. In the video footage the building is shown smoking slightly and then it just falls down. There seems to be no rational explanation for it based on what you can see. The 911 commission report does not even mention let alone explain the collapse. That being said, there is not much that can be gleaned from watching the video footage.

The entire concept that terrorists linked to Osama Bin Ladan coordinated and carried out the attacks on 9/11 has been so poorly investigated and such minimal proof given that it is tough not to believe in a conspiracy. If any of the War on Terror had any basis in reality you would think some effort would be put into at least making a case and tracking the guy down.

Was a terrorist seriously identified by his passport found in the wreckage of the Towers!? That is as unbelievable as it sounds. This is one of the things I need to do some further checking into because it seems too ludicrous to take a face value. The film also says that some of the terrorists that are said to be on the high jacked planes are still alive. Again, this seems too unbelievable to possibly be true. In the event of it being true I think it is more likely indicative of incompetent investigation rather than a government conspiracy. If it was a government conspiracy it seems unimaginably stupid to actually leave a guy alive you say was on a crashed plane.

There are dozens and dozens of different view points of the planes crashing into the Trade Center. I have not seen a single one of the plane crashing into the Pentagon. That video footage no doubt exists. Where is it? The movie claims the FBI is with holding it. I don’t know if that is true, but the lack of video is certainly interesting.

I had wondered about this but then forgot about it as the events unfolded. I wondered how a commercial airliner veers so far off course, and several of them coordinated all at the same time, without anyone raising alarm bells. There are procedures for these kinds of things. High jacking is not a new idea. The film raises some interesting questions about this as well. Again, I’d like to check on the sources, but this part of the film is very intriguing.

Problems with the argument

The film implies that the Pentagon and the “plane crash” that did not reach its target (Flight 93) did not actually involve airplanes. This also is a logic problem. Clearly two planes crashed into the Towers. There are video footage of every conceivable angle of that. If this was a preconceived plot at deception why would you bother faking plane crashes in two other locations. If you already crashed two planes why skimp out all of a sudden on the other two. Plus you have the logistical nightmare of faking passenger records, cell phone calls, not to mention “disappearing” two commercial airliners. None of this makes any sense. It would be far simpler to simply crash the planes.

The film implies that the Trade Center buildings were wired with explosives and that that was the reason for their collapse and not the fires started by the jet collisions. This is a major sticking point of logic for me. If the idea was to collapse the towers as a terrorist plot why bother with the planes at all? If you were going to wire the buildings with explosives to destroy the towers why not simply do that and blame it on a terrorist group. Then the story fits with the physical evidence. Adding the airplanes simply complicates the plan without affecting the eventual outcome.

Another major problem arises when considering any kind of controlled demolition of such huge structures. The film implies that the buildings fell so fast that a controlled demolition is the only explanation. This theory does not stand up at all if you simply consider the logistical implications of an operation like that. The towers were massive structures. Knocking them down would be no simple matter. You can’t just back a wheel barrow full of dynamite up to an elevator and hope for the best. Placing charges designed to destroy the structure of the towers would require hundreds of people who would have to place explosives and all of the wiring and control structures throughout both buildings. A demolition contractor would take months to do the work and it would involve major construction equipment doing extremely intrusive work like exposing the massive steel columns. The idea that anything resembling that could take place in an occupied office building and remain a secret is a bit ridiculous.

Finally, the theories put forth in the film are incomplete, inconsistent and contradictory. For instance the film proposes that the towers were destroyed by a controlled demolition and that melted steel was found in the wreckage that indicate thermite was used to melt the structure. I’ve talked a little above about how the demolition theory is incomplete, but the two ideas do not represent a consistent argument either. At first it is suggested the structure was destroyed with explosives, then it is suggested the structure was melted with thermite. The two ideas are contradictory. If explosives designed to destroy the structure in a controlled manner were in place there was no reason to introduce an exotic material like thermite, a substance that would simply melt the steel and would result in an anything but controlled collapse of the towers. To put it in simpler terms if you were planning on burning your house down for the insurance money it makes no sense for you to set up an elaborate scheme to start an electrical fire in the kitchen and also throw a Molotov cocktail through the window. The two ideas don’t work together. If it was a controlled demolition thermite does not belong. If thermite was used there is nothing controlled about the plan. You have to pick a horse and let it run.

In general this section is rife with the typical problems of Conspiracy Theories. It would involve hundreds of people from all different walks of life all stepping exactly in tune to cover up a secret so huge that it would topple governments and change the course of history. To say it is far fetched would be an understatement.

Others have done a far more thorough job of debunking these theories. Check out the Skeptic’s Dictionary for an example.

Part Three – Don’t Mind the Men Behind the Curtain

The essence of this part is that groups of powerful and wealthy people control major events in the world. The movie focuses on the Central Banking principles that most of the world operates on, and specifically on the Federal Reserve in the United States.

The basic premise of this part I concede. Small and specific groups of people control much of the worlds wealth and the systems that regulate and distribute it. Control of the money brings monumental power over the big picture. However, I do not agree with the implication in the film that the Central Banking system precipitated that concept. When powerful people or groups set up systems or institutions, which they are often in a position to do, it seems a given that they would weight the outcome heavily in their favor. This strikes me as an old concept. In every social, political, religious, or economic system ever invented the little guy is stuck with the short straw.

National and global financial system controls are complex and involve thousands of socioeconomic variables. The financial systems in general seem oversimplified to me in the film. The implication is that creating a given outcome is a simple matter for those in power. While I do not debate that there is an opportunity for many people to pull on many different levers in an effort to steer the system in a direction advantageous for them, the film implies a level of simplicity and control to the overall system which I find hard to swallow. A large number of people, with differing objectives and conflicting interests, are pulling on the controls of the world financial system. Even assuming a very small group with enough power could agree on a general direction it would be a major undertaking to get things to move along those lines. There is undoubtedly elements of chaos theory and randomness that are discounted in the film.

Several examples in the film do not seem to fit with the overall message. For instance, it is implied that powerful people helped cause the depression in the 1930′s. While I don’t doubt that that is correct to an extent it would seem to contradict the overall point being made in this section: that the powerful enslave the poor with the banking systems. If you enslave a people it makes no sense to create events in which you put much of your slave labour out of work.

That being said this part is very interesting, and I had done some reading previously about the Federal Reserve system and the facts in the film line up with my previous readings.

Film Conclusion

The last thing the men behind the curtain want is a conscious informed public capable of critical thinking.

I would agree with the statement, however, its a fundamental question about where you place the blame. Do you blame the rich men who tell the people “Buy this. Fear them. There is your enemy. Fight them. Vote for me. Pay your taxes.” or do you place the blame on all of us who buy, and wave flags, and fear, and fight the enemy we never met. You can point your finger all you want at people in power, but they are the minority. We are the source of their wealth, we are their army, we are their consumers and customers. At any time we could alter the course of human endeavors, but we don’t. While not a palatable idea, we create the world we live in and it therefore follows that the way the world is, is exactly what we have decided it should be.

If you need further proof of that read about the Stanley Milgram experiments or the Asch Conformity experiments

Find similar posts in: