SPCR

The Obama Deception Film (01h:50m)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eAaQNACwaLw

Covers more than just Obama and is right up to date.

Watch it, critique it. This is not a rightwing film, nor is it leftist.

It's more to do with what is happening to your wallet and country.

A review: http://riseuprochester.org/2009/03/14/r ... lex-jones/

Post your thoughts if you watch it.

Gotta love the inventiveness of the simple minded conspiracy theorists

Aanea wrote:Gotta love the inventiveness of the simple minded conspiracy theorists

An odd response. I was hoping for critique, not name calling. This isn’t kindergarten.

The question is, who is robbing you, and why don’t you care?

You realise the rest of the world hated Bush, right? There's about 5 billion people on this planet who think Obama is a good thing for the US.

(I've lived/worked/paid taxes in the US and my partner is a US citizen).

Watched the first half hour but am off to work, downloading the rest to stick on my PMP.

First impressions: way too much logical overreaching, and whilst it may be non-partisan it clearly has an agenda. It also seems to say that what it prophecies is pretty much fait accompli. I think China for one might have something to say about that.

bgiddins wrote:You realise the rest of the world hated Bush, right? There's about 5 billion people on this planet who think Obama is a good thing for the US.

(I've lived/worked/paid taxes in the US and my partner is a US citizen).

I too am pleased America has repudiated Bush. The film makes this point very well.

blackworx wrote:Watched the first half hour but am off to work, downloading the rest to stick on my PMP.

First impressions: way too much logical overreaching, and whilst it may be non-partisan it clearly has an agenda. It also seems to say that what it prophecies is pretty much fait accompli. I think China for one might have something to say about that.

The film is aimed at reaching Obamanoids so yes, fair statement.

I think the agenda though is to destroy the left / right paradigm and peek behind the curtain. A good thing if you ask me.

http://www.mininova.org/tor/2368504

The torrent in DivX if people want HQ.

I'm a swede, bear with me but:

This is not a rightwing film, nor is it leftist.

It's American, it is by default right wing. Compared to our parties, when an American discuss left or right, a swede would think "more or less extreme" as the democrates are more right wing than our most right wing party:)

bgiddins wrote:You realise the rest of the world hated Bush, right? There's about 5 billion people on this planet who think Obama is a good thing for the US.

(I've lived/worked/paid taxes in the US and my partner is a US citizen).

that is because they expect the next US president to be a sit down bitch and smile like the rest of the presidents in the UN.

Tobias wrote:I'm a swede, bear with me but:

This is not a rightwing film, nor is it leftist.

It's American, it is by default right wing. Compared to our parties, when an American discuss left or right, a swede would think "more or less extreme" as the democrates are more right wing than our most right wing party:)

This is true.

~El~Jefe~ wrote:

bgiddins wrote:You realise the rest of the world hated Bush, right? There's about 5 billion people on this planet who think Obama is a good thing for the US.

(I've lived/worked/paid taxes in the US and my partner is a US citizen).

that is because they expect the next US president to be a sit down bitch and smile like the rest of the presidents in the UN.

LOL. I think every president since Kennedy has been a “sit down bitch or we'll blow your head offâ€

mr lahey wrote:

~El~Jefe~ wrote:

bgiddins wrote:You realise the rest of the world hated Bush, right? There's about 5 billion people on this planet who think Obama is a good thing for the US.

(I've lived/worked/paid taxes in the US and my partner is a US citizen).

that is because they expect the next US president to be a sit down bitch and smile like the rest of the presidents in the UN.

LOL. I think every president since Kennedy has been a “sit down bitch or we'll blow your head offâ€

I'd also add the usual "just because you haven't read anything written by the ruling classes doesn't mean there's a massive hidden conspiracy" caution. The globalisation agenda is way out in the open and has been for years.

Obama himself has said "...those with money, those with influence, those with control over how resources are allocated in our society, are very protective of their interests, and they can rationalize infinitely the reasons why they should have more money and power than anyone else, and why that’s somehow good for society as a whole." He basically acknowledges that the global elite are just as selfish as the rest of us - what a surprise!

I find the whole thing quite depressing, because on one hand a global cooperative society is absolutely what we need, but on the other there are so many different factors, not least of which is the way this global society is being engineered, providing the potential for massive conflict.

blackworx wrote:I find the whole thing quite depressing, because on one hand a global cooperative society is absolutely what we need, but on the other there are so many different factors, not least of which is the way this global society is being engineered, providing the potential for massive conflict.

Are you referring to the United Nations, when speaking of engineering the global society? I can think of no other globalization body where you get G.W. Bush able to speak about freedom and democracy on one day, and then Hugo Chavez and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad go up the next day to talk about how evil America is and that it should be destroyed. There was a special irony there, since the UN building is located in America.

But yeah, you look at the UN, the fact that there's even countries like North Korea with no human rights, or like Somalia with no meaningful government at all and everybody in the UN just says "Well that's too bad, huh?" and goes back to their Lexuses and penthouse suits to organize their tough evening of having a $1000 dinner with other diplomats to talk about how its too bad that the world isn't perfect.

I wasn't referring to the UN. In fact now that I think about it I didn't even have the UN close to my thoughts when I was writing, which only goes to show how effectively it has been sidelined. I was referring in the main to global finance and the unhindered rise of the corporation. Admittedly they're not really doing anything even as questionably (or should that be arguably?) altruistic as "engineering" a global cooperative society. My reference was more of a vehicle to get my point across about the difference between the kind of global society we should be aiming for and the one it seems we are actually going to get.

blackworx wrote: I was referring in the main to global finance and the unhindered rise of the corporation. Admittedly they're not really doing anything even as questionably (or should that be arguably?) altruistic as "engineering" a global cooperative society. My reference was more of a vehicle to get my point across about the difference between the kind of global society we should be aiming for and the one it seems we are actually going to get.

As you say, they can hardly be accused of "engineering" a global society, but rather the global society which is forming seems to be an unintended fall out of the day to day business. Look at us, for example, which has formed a global society due to the noise computers give rise to. I'm sure this was totally unintended when netburst was designed...

What specifically is this so-called deception?

NeilBlanchard wrote:What specifically is this so-called deception?

Specifically, the "deception" referred to is the promise that Obama can or will actually deliver anything different than any other president after Kennedy. The analogy used by KRS-One in one of the early interview set pieces in the film is that Obama is just a store manager, not the franchise owner, and therefore powerless to effect any real change.

Thanks for that synopsis!

From my perspective, President Obama has done a lot of things differently than Bush! An easier question to answer would be what has NOT changed.

Reality has not changed -- and what President Obama has changed is to fully acknowledge reality.

It took bush 6 years to bring the usa down, and ppl seem to expect obama to fix the economy in 6 weeks or so. wtf?

He's got 4 years. If you still don't like what he's done in 2012, you kick him out.


This all seems to come from ppl who just don't trust government period. After Clinton's sexual shenanigans and Bush's wayward war machine, I can't blame'm. Add to that the complete brakedown in trust of the financial sector and you have serious trust issues with any authority figure.
This all while many of these figures should know better, after what they went through in the 60s.

I wouldn't say it's an attack against Obama per se. Seems to me Obama's name just happens to be the buzzword used to try and capture an audience for the film, which is saying that federal govt is basically owned by Wall St, and Wall St is in turn owned by a shady global cartel which does the real string-pulling.

I would agree with the part about finance and corporations having too much sway over government with little responsibility or accountability, but the part about the shady puppeteering I can take or leave. It might be true it might not, parts of it might be true. What certainly is true is that if there IS such a thing going on then it is not in any way sustainable. It wouldn't take much outside influence from world events or countries such as China, or even betrayal from within (these are after all the nastiest, back-stabbingest, most self-serving evildoers ever to walk the earth remember) to cause the whole thing to fall to pieces.

Conspiracies of any kind can never hold up for a significant period of time. People are born, grow old and die, and are replaced in turn by new people with new agendas, and for the conspirators there will always be opportunities to reap some personal benefit, whether consciously or not, from going against the conspiracy. These opportunities will be taken, the conspiracy will fall, a period of reorganisation will ensue and a new conspiracy will rise.

Somebody correct me if I'm wrong, but has it not historically been the case that when power-sharing conspiracies (whether planned or coincidental, and regardless of scale) are strongest, stability has prevailed, whereas when they fall apart, conflict happens?

ACook wrote:This all seems to come from ppl who just don't trust government period.

These people are pathological liars which they’ve proven time and time again, and eventually those very lies will manifest themselves into this reality having an effect on peoples lives! and guess what, people will react. Look; I see plenty of reasons for not trusting them whereas I’m hard pressed to see any compelling reasons for trusting them; I call it as I see it, not as I’m being told, meaning; they say one thing, they then do the opposite, whilst afterwards proceeding to make excuses.

Give me a break already, enough is enough.


Note: should point out that this applies for any given government; we all observe these lies on a daily basis, do we not?

ACook wrote:It took bush 6 years to bring the usa down, and ppl seem to expect obama to fix the economy in 6 weeks or so. wtf?

Obama is continuing what was done or not done before. I don't think even he thinks these actions will fix the economy. He has said as much.

Politicians can however establish power for themselves and their party, and that is the only thing really be done--and they are taking every advantage to do so. Washington is controlled by a bunch of modern American fascists.

QuietOC wrote:Politicians can however establish power for themselves and their party, and that is the only thing really be done--and they are taking every advantage to do so.

With changes in party we typically see only changes in which corporations gain more favor than with the opposing party. But that is totally the people's own fault. A study showed that the majority of Americans wanted additional parties to be represented at the national debates, but when push came to shove they vote either tweedle-dumb or tweedle-dumber.

QuietOC wrote:Washington is controlled by a bunch of modern American fascists.

Is that a different way of saying we live in a corporate-ocracy?

aristide1 wrote:With changes in party we typically see only changes in which corporations gain more favor than with the opposing party. But that is totally the people's own fault.

People were and are decieved, not so much by the candidates but by the public educators--the news reporters. This is the real downfall of Western Civilization--allowing our grand feelings of progress to trump the vulgarness of the truth. People need less polished dreams and more dirt and scum.

Washington continues to send money to the worst corporations--our national debt is supporting a bunch of inept corporations "too big" to fail. And all the president can say is that the previous administator started it, so don't blame him?!!!

Hi,

We won't see big changes until all money is removed from politics.

Try this on for size: money is NOT speech (as the Supreme Court says it is). Money is action.

Voting is speech. Supporting a politician with money is action.

All legitimate politicians (as determined by petition signers) should be given and equal amount of broadcast time, for free -- we the citizens already own the airwaves, so why should we charge the politicians to use them? Especially since this is the most basic function of a democracy: communication with the people.

A democracy needs to serve all the people, not just the ones with the most money.

NeilBlanchard wrote:
A democracy needs to serve all the people, not just the ones with the most money.

Constitutional amendment material!

Our fore fathers depended on the ten commandments to keep greed in check rather than law, unfortunately it didn't work out so well.
Its unfortunate that we need government regulation to curb the profit raping of the public and the environment by our current corpacracy, but we need to end this unrelenting economic slavery somehow, and soon.

QuietOC wrote:People were and are decieved, not so much by the candidates but by the public educators--the news reporters. This is the real downfall of Western Civilization--allowing our grand feelings of progress to trump the vulgarness of the truth. People need less polished dreams and more dirt and scum.

I hope you're not suggesting the media is all liberal, because the amount of right wing propaganda equals the left.

aristide1 wrote:I hope you're not suggesting the media is all liberal, because the amount of right wing propaganda equals the left.

If only they were at all liberal. Liberal propaganda is an oxymoron. Many think they are liberal but are actually very conservative. Most of the real liberal thinkers are called conservatives these days.