Skeptic Project

Many months ago, I saw Peter post this on his forum:
http://i.imgur.com/AbNSw.jpg</p>

Now after reading that, one might reasonably come to the conclusion that Fresco believes that 9/11 was an inside job. I was surprised then when watching this video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mg2uDcY8_R4&feature=related#t=2m19s

This is Pt 4 of Jacque and Roxanne's recent interview in the UK. Link goes direct to the 2m19s point where he talks about 9/11.

Now I can see Peter Joseph being hard headed with all the 9/11 debunkers, but when his own idol Jacque Fresco says it, then what? If TZM is truly the activist arm of The Venus Project, and the head of the venus project says that 9/11 is NOT an inside job, then what? At the very least he should cut it out of Zeitgeist Addendum.

It's easier to claim I have a vendetta than addressing all the inaccuracies I've pointed out.

In other words, his post is "I'm never wrong, because ..."

Here is a comment about conspiracyscience.com that is more recent than the vendetta comment:

Question:

"I believe in your last broadcast you indirectly called someone an 11 year old and laughed at their question."

Peter Joseph:

"No, I used the 11 yr old to reference an anti-zeitgeist/anti-me website called conspiracyscience.com, which has been lying about various issues regarding my films, while distorting others.
The comments in question had to do with the deliberate debasing of common understandings, specifically in regard to the monetary system. It had nothing to do with the person who asked the question about the claims, but rather with a website that goes out of its way to insult and demean. Please listen again to understand the context. Sadly, you are right and I should have not even addressed the claims. There is only so much BS a person can take before irritation sets in. This is a sad reality for most of us, including myself. It is an issue of patience and I work on it as best I can."

http://thezeitgeistmovement.com/joomla/index.php?option=com_kunena&Itemid=99999&func=view&catid=232&id=222303&limit=10&limitstart=20#222520

I already knew Fresco was more sensible than Peter, I agree with a lot of things he says. I'm glad to hear him say it though.

So, let me get this straight. It's OK to lie in order to create fanciful stories that attract people, but when it gets out of hand we can just say "it's not associated with the movement, despite being on the web site and having the same name, oh and most members think it's associated!"

Talk about a total, steaming, pile of horse shit.

The exact quote from that lecture:

"the arab world didn't have the weapons we had, so they took over airplanes and hit the two towers." (12:11)

http://vimeo.com/7979712</p>

Jacque has seen the first film so he obviously understands what has been Peter's contention on 9/11, but at the same time they're happy to disagree on that.

So I guess the director's cut will be LIHOP with "Building 7 was blown up!", and maybe a little "Dick Cheney said to go as planned" and "NORAD stood down/jets flying from Maine" thrown in. Wow, I can see it already.

Start the betting pool now, ladies!

@Brenton,

"based on the contention that there's been dozens of false flag attacks to control people in history."

So in other words PJ maintains his lies rather than admitting error.

Well, at least you guys are consistent.

How can they call it a "directors cut" when the entire movie was made by two people without a movie studio or producers involved, and at the same time he directed nothing, editing together clips from other movies?

>> Doesn't your movement, Brenton, understand how it's soiling its own nest by being associated with this toxic shit?

Didn't you read what Peter Joseph said? The movies aren't the movement... meanwhile he's making another movie with the same name of the movement, to be watched by movement members, promoted by them, promoted on ZDay, etc. But it's not associated with the movement!

>> Didn't you read what Peter Joseph said? The movies aren't the movement... meanwhile he's making another movie with the same name of the movement, to be watched by movement members, promoted by them, promoted on ZDay, etc. But it's not associated with the movement! <<

The reason why it is not, is because every member is responsible for producing content. This is just Peter's content, and that's how in the long term (especially with others making films about The Venus Project) it will be seen.

>> This stuff isn't even a movement. Its a damn message board filled with self important young white males. <<

You can claim that as many times as you want but that doesn't make it so.

>> ...because the conspiracist shit is what draws people into this half-assed "movement" and denying that would be jettisoning their one selling point, but even if they did this falls in the "too little, too late" department. <<
Not really. Governments have once in a while points of view that produce a crippling effect, yet they regroup from those positions. The stronger contention that we're going to be using to draw people in is the reality of the socio-economic crises the world is facing.

>> Again I ask: why won't this movement cut itself loose from untenable, illogical and offensive conspiracy theories? Doesn't your movement, Brenton, understand how it's soiling its own nest by being associated with this toxic shit? <<
It depends who you approach with the conspiracy nonsense. I certainly advocate showing it to conspiracy theorists, because, if you show them ZI and then follow with ZII you have an opportunity to reorient then away from those views as far as possible. So despite the huge problem of the first film, it can be (and has been by me) used in that way to move people away from caring about that nonsense.

I have much more I want to say but I don't want to ramble on.

"I certainly advocate showing it to conspiracy theorists, because, if you show them ZI and then follow with ZII you have an opportunity to reorient then away from those views as far as possible. So despite the huge problem of the first film, it can be (and has been by me) used in that way to move people away from caring about that nonsense."

But that doesn't make much sense. If you disagree with their theories, why bait them with the conspiracy crap in the first place? If you want to "reorient them away from those views as far as possible," then what the Zeitgeist movement should be doing is debunking conspiracy theories, not promoting them.

Why does the ZM want conspiracy theorists to join it anyway? If it's such a problem to "reorient" them, why not avoid the problem by staying out of the conspiracist realm?

You seem to be grasping at straws to explain away the consiracist element of the ZM, yet you aren't willing to accept that conspiracy is the main selling point of this movement. It's crucial. None of us would even be here arguing about it if not for the conspiracism of the movies. Without the conspiracy allegations, the ZM/Venus Project would be just another utopian program who has to compete in the marketplace of ideas on the strength of its proposals--just like everybody else. But, you make a conspiracy movie that gets everybody's attention, and baits those who are notoriously gullible in the first place, suddenly you've got a leg up. This is why the ZM will never jettison the conspiracy stuff.

Don't you see this is what's happened? It's awkward to see you try to explain your way around this.

It's plainly obvious what's going on. Among those members of the ZM who don't believe in conspiracies themselves, they're perfectly happy to continue using conspiracy theories as a recruiting tool. Distancing themselves from them or outright denouncing them would alienate a large part of the movement, which is why they're going to keep right on endorsing them. The ZM members who do believe in conspiracy theories will continue to think that the movement promotes them--which, in fact, it does.

It's totally disingenuous to claim that the movies and their conspiracy theories aren't the movement. Once again, we wouldn't be here talking about any of this if that was true.

http://anticultist.wordpress.com/about/</p>

Everything you need to know about this potential cult, including its refusal for financial transparency with evidence of dialogues between a member and Roxanne Meadows. The identity of Peter Joseph, The legal dispute and failing of trademarking of RBE by the venus project with documents, and other important facets they dont like discussing on their official forums.

Ex members spill the beans on the inner workings and information not many know.

Its on your facebook group ? Which groups that then ? Dont believe I have ever been there.

Never have been a conspiracy theorist myself, but I look into matters that are considerd conspiracist to see what elements might be truthful. And put aside the ridiculous for another time.

I consider myself a questioner of everything ... period.

And if theres evidence even better.

Can not speak for the other members though.