>Where Do I Begin…

>

No.  I am not going to start singing the theme from a bad movie of the 70’s.

I met a nice guy recently.  He was ripe for the kill.  I got him in my clutches and BAM…I had him.  No.  I’m not talking about homosexuality, or fishing. This was an intelligent gentleman that made the mistake of telling me(after asking about my Palestinian flag) that he had seen all the Zeitgeist films…and they impressed hell out of him.  Bingo.  Now there is fertile ground.  Anyone willing to accept some of the pretty revolutionary re-writing of history that those films espouse, will be willing to try and understand what even these expose’s leave out.  The jewish factor.  As I have explained to others that are shocked yet intrigued by these films…there is something missing.  Most of them agree.  The only thing holding them back from…hell, I dunno…a  “storm the castle” reaction to these vids, is that there are pieces missing that lend an air of “just one man’s opinion of moonlight” quality to them.  That is to say that, all the dots don’t get connected in the director’s explanation of why things are the way they are.


But the films do have a charm about them.  And they are an adequate springboard to bigger and better things.  I felt after viewing them that to attain the following that they have, the director deliberately left out the missing piece.  Not wishing to be branded “anti-semitic” and hence the mother of all conspiracy theorists…he left that to his audience to deduce. I think that if I was to make such a film and truly wanted to reach the largest viewership, I might do this very same thing.  This is the way I would approach it.  Leave out the most central piece of the puzzle…to begin with.  The piece that answers all the questions left open.  I would follow up with the missing bit of the puzzle later, after I had tenderized and acclimated the mind of my viewer to such dizzying heights, however.   I haven’t seen such a follow-up from Zeitgeist…so perhaps I am wrong.  

But I didn’t want to rehash those films and my opinion of them here today.  What I did want to address, is the daunting task of encountering an open mind.  Without acting like an evangelist, how does one begin addressing the world’s problems to someone with the readiness to understand them as you do?  Someone with enough inquisitiveness that is required to at least listen to another, in an effort to fill in the blanks, so to speak.
I do sound like one of those people with the tracts and a clip-on tie.
Well this is a mission of sorts.  It isn’t faith-based however.  Perhaps faith-less based…so I am not going to ask anyone to pray with me.


So where do you start to educate?  If you are reading this, you probably have found yourself in a similar situation.  A sister-in-law that dreams of visiting Auschwitz…a cousin that believes all he sees on the “History Channel”.  Or someone else that is woefully short of facts and causal relationships of our history and indeed our modern world.  Well, I have found…that if your subject has the patience(and I doubt even I would)…it is best to begin at square one.
The most prodigious task is first to help them un-learn .  To show them how simple it is to deconstruct the fabrications that have been taught them over the course of their lives.  Only when this is accomplished, can you begin to fill in, with the use of an “Occam’s Razor” approach, the holes left after their myths have been discounted.  It isn’t easy.  It is rewarding.  And you can, through their awakening, learn a great deal from their questions.  Things that perhaps you (in your infinite knowledge) had yet to consider.  Points that can only be seen through a fresh examination of the information that you give.  This can be both humbling and testing of your views as you explain them.
I have found that it is best not to blurt out the “J” word too soon.  Without the proper understanding, even a person willing to listen to and consider your views…will have some very deeply embedded propaganda which you must address first .  To them, you run the risk of appearing like the “anti-semite nut-case” that their media warns them of.  They have to make these conclusions on their own.  I once took a woman through a lifetime of misinformation until she had no recourse but to conclude on her own who the perpetrators of such an errant education were…and why.  She herself deduced the only logical group to be at the bottom of the world’s ills, and her understanding of them.  Intelligent people WILL come to these conclusions, if left to their own resources, after removing the veil of a poor education and media-driven propaganda.
So as the director of Zeitgeist should have done, and perhaps did unwittingly… is to unveil the BS and expose it for what it is…then let the natural questions follow in the mind of the viewer.  Those questions that haunted you, before you began to connect all the dots.
In my “evangelism” to uncover the ruse of the judaic tribe, I find it best to ask questions.  To allow the novitiate to follow the logic themselves.  Why do they think they know that six million jews were killed in concentration camps during WWII…yet are unable to tell you how many Amerikan lives were lost?  Why do the jewish feel they have the right to claim an already-occupied land as theirs, based on something that supposedly happened thousands of years ago? Wouldn’t this give anyone in the world claim to their ancestral lands?  Is this indeed fair or even plausible in the real world? Do they understand that the ancestors of virtually all of today’s “jews” are actually from southern Russia, and not the “Holy Land”?  And that these ancestors were converted to the cult of judaism?
Questions like this are invaluable in the effort to lead your project person to the only logical conclusions.
This crusade that we are on lacks cohesion.  This quest to pull the veil of lies.  I entreat you to use this technique, as opposed to a more heavy-handed dogmatic approach. That approach is “their” domain.  When given facts, an intelligent mind can deduce and retain much more information than imaginable. It only requires a beginning.  That first question.  That’s where you begin.  That’s where I begin.