Skeptic Project

Muertos wrote: "Does the concept of "humor" exist on your planet, Diane?"

Of course humor exists. However, humor is based on shared background and shared assumptions. People with different backgrounds and/or different assumptions are likely not to appreciate each other's jokes.

Or, if they do understand the jokes, they might be annoyed by what seem to be the assumptions behind the jokes. You, for example, would probably be annoyed by the assumptions behind the following joke I came across once on another message board a while back: "Hey, there aren't any conspiracies? Maybe the FBI should shut down its RICO unit!"

I was annoyed by what appeared to me (correctly or not) to be the assumptions behind your joke.

I am certainly capable of appreciating humor -- see this thread, for example. However, humor is subjective, as Sil pointed out in that thread.

In a round-about way, he's asking a ton of questions about human nature.

"Now, I'm not going to go into all of the elements required to fully explain how sick our society is and how the religious systems and profit systems have twisted the general human mind into a perverse, selfish, divisive mentality.

However, what I will say is that to be 'Normal' in our world, actually means 'Screwed up'."

IMO this is the sketchiest part. It's difficult to tell what PJ values. I think he assumes things about human nature that have been debated in ethics and other fields for centuries. What I quoted is a conclusion without the necessary support structure. I'm only guessing that "them" to PJ is modern or Western culture in general.

Let's assume that Peter is at least partially right. Did society make us "sick", or did we make society that way? I'm of the school of thought that suggests society as we know it has developed as a way to cope with our animalistic instincts. It's not sick, it just 'is'. It's merely a way to organize and give some order to a population. We are taught, through society, not to act on some of our tendencies. We actually give some of those "sick" things up in order to participate and cooperate. Sometimes, we are rewarded for acting on our more basic instincts, albeit in a controlled way.

I swear, volumes could be written on this hypothetical society that TZM promotes. What would happen once the supposed incentives for divisiveness are eliminated? Does he think that we would change over night in a fundamental way?

>>I get a lot of emails as to why I do not bring up notions such as the "New World Order", "Illuminati", "Zionism", "Secret Societies" and other popular occult/conspiracy concepts which are very topical in this day and age. While I, of course, acknowledge the "men behind the curtain" and the various levels of manipulation and corruption of the ruling class,it must be understood that I do not differentiate between the high level, elitist criminal- and the commonplace, petty criminal.>>

So according to Merola some elitist shadowy curtain men exist though he doesn't call them the illuminati/nwo/zionists/secret societies even though thats what he means.

>>"So, no – we don't “support conspiracy theories”, for it is a truncated, contrived, false notion.To ask if “we support conspiracy theories” is really asking “do criminal conspiracies exist”. >>

But because he redefines what conspiracy theory/theorist means its not the right question to ask, you should ask does he support the idea that shadowey elitist behind the curtain criminals exist [the illuminati/nwo etc..] and are committing crimes.

>>Ed- since you obviously have no interest in discussing ANYTHING but your disapproval of the 911 info in Z1, coupled with your neurotic obsession with making sure everyone who comes in contact with you endures your narrow declaration that Z1 is some huge blight for the movement(when, in fact, it is the core generator of interest- still- to this day for the movement), I have come to the conclusion that your interest in the movement is more undermining than anything else. You are not really interested in what we are doing. You are interested in being right in regard to your assumption that you know everything about 911 and that is that- awaiting any debate you can latch onto...

...If you don't like the movement because it was inspired by my films and has a name in common - fine - you can go somewhere else.>>

The fact is, "exposing the criminal elite" along with things like 9/11 is only half the game.

So if you want to denounce that the shadowey elitist criminals [the illuminati/nwo etc..] didnt commit the 911 attacks then you are under the false assumption that you know all there is to know and you should leave his bandwidth and his movement alone.

Now if you were to go on and agree that the shadowey elitist criminals [the illuminati/nwo etc...] did conspire to do the 911 attacks this is different you are not asked to leave his bandwidth alone or the movement.

So whats the deal ?

He either denounces the shadowey elitist criminals [illiminati/nwo etc..] fully and prevents all discussion about them pro and against, and proves he wants no discussion of conspiracy theories [I mean conspiracy concepts..no I mean criminal conspiracies...or is it grand conspiracy ideology ! fuck knows its the same thing different label], or he continues as he has and projects the idea that conspiracy theories exist as do the ilumiati/nwo ahem elitist shadowey curtain men .

So in short he doesnt want to discuss or call them by their conspiracy theorist names but he does want to protect the idea they exist from being debunked. Because they are just criminals, although behind the curtains elitist types.

There is No "They"

It's time we grow out of the "us against them" mentality. This isn't to say we shouldn't be activists against the constant social corruption. We have to do that. But, we must stop this nonsense that we are "at war" with sometime. This is an illusion. Martin Luther King Jr. had it right. The most powerful weapon you can have is unconditional love.

ps: I have also been getting emails asking why I do not respond to Alex Jones's attacks on me and the films.

Very simply, Alex isn't worth the time. He is just another victim of culture...a damaged mentality who thinks we are at "war" with something. Sadly, he is very dogmatic in his beliefs, and while I think Alex is a decent person overall, his "us and them" worldview is more dangerous than helpful. I feel he perpetuates the same mentality of the people he claims to fight.

I guess all of this goes out the kitchen window when Peter Merola is talking about Edward, Conspiracy Science, me and my blog.
Because clearly we are the enemy he is at war with in his 'us vs them' mindset, oh yes and perpetuating the same mentality of the people he claims to fight.

Alex Jones, with his tons of followers and websites and videos isn't worth PJ's time... but Edward and Consci is? No slight against Edward and the other users of this site... but we're pretty small time.