All Zombies are innocent until proven guilty, Lets start with '28 days later' 28 days later first scene, monkey attacks a woman then she throws up and seems to attack some guy. But what does she actually do? Some time later, a priest comes at him looking like he's going to attack the star. Well if a priest came at me like that sure I'd defend myself, but what is actually happening here? A bit later the star is with some 'people' and some Zombies jump threw the window. next they jump him and seem to be trying to reach him. Then the zombies are killed. But one of the two 'people' that killed the zombies had a slash in his arm, and for that, one 'lady' killed him. Okay, in the next couple of 'attacks' the zombies run at them, but no real damage is done. Now at almost halfway into the movie, the star goes into some place to get some more food. And a little kid, runs at him and tries to 'attack' him. And because the star has some kind of justification in his mind that the kid will 'infect' him and by that meaning the kid will kill him. He thinks himself just in murdering this little child. This is very important, because they didn't need to have the star murder some five year old. So why was it in the movie? I mean did you go to the movies to see some little kid killed by the so called 'good guy'? Maybe you went to have a good time, but I don't really think that if you knew that the star was going to murder some kid that you would have gone to the picture. Why did they need to put that in the picture? Now a little later in the film, the father character gets mad and completely loses control of himself. He walks under a dead person and some blood falls into his eye. So this father gets infected, and doesn't want his daughter to get it to. Then he gets shot by some soldiers. So why did they remove this character, personally I think he was way more interesting than the star. Next the military base is 'attacked' by zombies who in effect do nothing, but run at you 'look' scary and let themselves be killed. Now the 'Hero' of the picture tries to defend the women from some soldiers. The soldiers have a zombie captive, and on the 'heroes' return he faces the zombie. The zombie runs at him, but when 'our' 'hero' sets him free by shooting the zombies chain, the zombie looks at the 'hero' then runs at the soldiers instead of running at the 'hero'. This seems much more like he has a brain and a purpose. Now this zombie proceeds to jump a soldier. and although it looks horrific all he does in effect is to throw up on him. then the soldier is now a zombie. The zombie in effect proceeds to take the soldiers into the union, and reform them. You see they were evil men, but they reformed and became zombies. :) You see the idea of zombies is not rage, if it were they would attack each other. When zombies reach humans you get more zombies. But when humans get to zombies they kill them! Look maybe I missed something, but I didn't actually see any zombie bit or eat anyone in this picture. In other pictures yes. But in this one they seem to have a weird sense of humor. They throw up on you and that's it. And for that our 'hero' kills of kid. They work the audience up into a furry till they will accept anything. Here's the thing, even if zombies are cannibals in some movies. Or some are bad in some movies, while some are not well that is like normal humans. you can find any kind of human. some will do the worst kind of evil while others wont. But just because some are totally evil, does not give the star the right to kill some kid. Now 28 weeks later Now in this movie, at least some of the zombies are bad. Very early in the film 1 zombie actually bits someone. Okay so that's 1 Now we find that there is a woman who is infected. But can control herself (to a point). The movie says that she is a carrier, but that she herself is not 'dead' as they claim the others are. They claim that she is 'immune'. She couldn't possibly just be different than the others. What difference could there be? Well we'll keep this for later. In 28 weeks later the character that is so called 'immune'. What if that is just an excuse for the fact that the zombie condition may be half bio and half mind control. But what if there was a christian who walked in the spirit of the lord. But who had the man made virus to look like a zombie. But who had overcome the flesh. Just as normal people have evil thoughts but repress them. this person takes those evil thoughts and gives them over to the lord. So that they are gone. So while the non christian have this terrible impulse to act creepy, but not necessarily do anything harmful to others. But what if a true christian is not subject to mind control. And therefore they need another excuse to kill the christians. So they say that the christians (without calling them that) have 'immunity' but are carriers therefore they must be killed. Now I'm not saying that the character in the movie is a true christian, but it is like something real for the programming of your mind. See just the part where she is reunited with 1 of her kids. And her face looks not only a bit creepy, but her hands start to tighten a little to much around one of her kids. This is hard for her to control. What's the next part? Her husband and her. Two totally different people. He ran out on them when he thought they would be killed! She stayed when she could have escaped to save a child! Now lets see what happeneds. When she is infected she doesn't harm anyone. Whereas when he is infected he kills his wife. Now she isn't a christian (at the moment anyway) but she isn't as selfish. Which is the difference. But He is very sellfish, therefore he kills. He doesn't just throw up on people like some of the zombies, he kills. I am legend Well in this one you have a series of things. The star claims that the Zombies are cannibals, but whether or not he actually saw it is debatable. And even if he did, that merely means that those particular zombies were evil. So the star is trying to 'fix' the zombies. But when his dog dies he goes nuts. He attacks the Zombies with his car. Here the Zombies seem to have a mind & a purpose! One of them moved to avoid his gun shots. One thing about Zombies is that its like this: Have you ever seen the real way 'they' live? Rome painted enemy peoples as evil, are zombies really evil? Its like us and them! It seems to me that its like a village of people who he doesn't know. Has he seen them do anything wrong? Sure maybe someone told him so. They do seem to howl at night and make scary noises. But isn't this like 2 cultures meeting. But he 'believes' that they are 'dead'. And for this reason, he goes about (trying to cure them) taking them captive, and in his failure he kills them. So they find him and kill the man who killed so many of them. In the movie 'I am legend' he "fixed" one zombie. His wall was covered with the pictures of the Zombies that he killed experimenting on. And it can't be excused with the claim that they were already dead, because he cured the disease that one had and she was fine. & near the end of the film he even tries to talk them out of killing him with the claim that he could cure them. Now if they are alive, then by what right does he experiment on them and kill them. But by the right that he is actually helping them. Perhaps their life wasn't worth living unless he lifted them into a higher state of civilization. Or perhaps every angle of the whole Zombie theme is to give one group an excuse for doing anything to the other. At this point you might stop me and say that you've read about 'Zombie ants' or something. And that this 'is' something like the movies version of Zombies. And to that I'd say yes, but what do they really do? (If it be true about these ants). Zombie Ants Controlled by Fungus http://www.livescience.com/animals/090812-ant-fungus.html "In a bizarre parasitic death sentence, a fungus turns carpenter ants into the walking dead and gets them to die in a spot that's perfect for the fungus to grow and reproduce. Once infected by the fungus, an ant is compelled to climb down from the canopy to the low leaves, where it clamps down with its mandibles just before it dies. "The fungus accurately manipulates the infected ants into dying where the parasite prefers to be, by making the ants travel a long way during the last hours of their lives," said study leader David P. Hughes of Harvard University." what harm did this Ant do? This ant merely acts under mind control to 'set' itself up for death. ??"Zombie" Ants Controlled, Decapitated by Flies http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2009/05/photogalleries/zomb... Controlled "May 14, 2009--In South America, female phorid flies have developed a bizarre reproductive strategy: They hover over fire ants (pictured in a file photo), then inject their eggs into the ants with a needle-like appendage. The egg grows and the resulting larva generally migrates to the ant's head. The larva lives there for weeks--slurping up the brain and turning the ant into a "zombie," in some cases compelling the ant to march 55 yards (50 meters) away from its colony to avoid attack by other fire ants. Finally, the baby fly decapitates its host and hatches, exiting through the ant's head, U.S. scientists regularly release several species of phorid flies to control alien fire ants, which have spread across the southern U.S. during the past half century and outcompeted many native ant species." This is what I mean! People can see the truth and then be led to think something totally contrary to that truth. You can see that this has nothing to do with the idea of some evil being. But rather it look like a mind controlled creature that is made to die. "Zombie" Roaches Lose Free Will Due to Wasp Venom http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/12/071206-roach-zombie... "The parasitic jewel wasp uses a venom injected directly into a cockroach's brain to inhibit its victim's free will, The venom blocks a chemical substance called octopamine in the cockroach's brain that controls its motivation to walk, Unable to fight back, the "zombie" cockroach can be pulled into the wasp's underground lair, where an egg is laid in its abdomen. The larva later hatches and eats the still living but incapacitated cockroach from the inside out. Zombie Science The team of researchers at Ben-Gurion University believe that the octopamine discovery is an important piece of the puzzle of how the tropical wasp's venom turns its victims into the living dead. Octopamine is a brain substance that places insects in an alert state, inspires them to move, and allows them to perform demanding physical tasks. "It serves the same functions as noradrenaline, which is involved in the fight-or-flight reaction ... in the vertebrate brain," Libersat said. The researchers then reversed the process: they injected an octopamine-like substance directly into the protocerebrum of cockroaches that had already been turned into zombies by wasp stings. The result was significant recovery and restoration of the cockroach's free will." I must interject here. This shows that the 'cockroach' not only 'did no harm' but they were not dead. And could be fixed! Not Dead! "other parasites also control the behavior of their hosts, said David Richman, curator of the Arthropod Museum at New Mexico State University in Las Cruces, who was not involved in the new study. "This is not uncommon. There are a tremendous number of parasites, and they all have different strategies for survival and for propagation of their species," Richman said. The behaviors of land snails, grasshoppers, and types of ants, for example, can all be affected by parasites" The other thing is that normal ants attack many different animals. But these ants seem to be peaceful, and when they are under their 'Zombie' program they 'do no harm. And if you look up "Zombie snails" you'll see a official video that says that the parasite makes the snails go up into the tree where the birds will see them. and they can get eaten. Its suicide programming. There is another video this time about ants. And it says that they get 'infected' and when cows come near, they go up on the plants to get eaten. Again I see no violence. In the twilight zone episode "its a good life" The central theme of the plot is about this little boy being responsible for all the evils of the world. It is as if this child destroyed most of the world. & with some supernatural power he has killed many of the towns people. & your made to feel that this child is so powerful & that he terrifies all the towns people. The central thought of the towns people is how to kill the child. & near the end one of the men calls out to the others to kill the child while his attention is on him. & perhaps as you watch this episode you may even feel your own hand being drawn against this child. & perhaps you plot how they could kill this child. But do you ever stop yourself & say, how unnatural am I? how twisted can I be? How could I be made against this child? if anyone walked up to you, when you were awake & tried to convince you that there was a legitimate reason to kill a child. How would you have answered them? Wouldn't you think that there was something totally evil about this man. But if they present the idea with fiction. So that it is all just make believe. Then you have no guard against it. & yet this reasoning is placed in your mind. & within this fiction are ideas, lies to twist you. The idea of someone walking & running & yet they are said to be dead so you can butcher them. But most importantly they are all supposed to be satanically evil. Isn't it strange how we are twisted against men woman & children & yet we are made to accept vampires. But this is backed up with more than fiction because it becomes real to us. Also; Even if we allow our minds to adopt the idea, that this child destroyed most of the world with his mind. Lets consider you going to the movies, and a wizard tells you, that by the end of the film, you will be wanting a chid to be killled. This will be your desire. Would you put your guard down while watching a show, if you knew that its aim was to get you to want to murder a child. If you were told, that your desires will be changed by this film. In Omen 1 & 2 the plot has a few basic points. First, is that this movie tries to portray this child as evil enough to kill. second, is that the priests in the film want the father or step father to kill the child. And 3 is that there are people around the child traumatizing him getting him to act the way he does. In the first movie a woman goes in front of the child and tells him its all for him & then kills herself. Lets just admit that from watching these 2 movies, if this happened to us at this age we would be so totally traumatized and could appear to be anything they wanted us to look like. So in the first 2 film the so called "good guys" (priests) want someone to kill their child. But in the 3'd movie the anti-christ (Sam Neil) somehow bewitches/mind controls a woman to see her own child as an object of evil worthy to kill. Isn't it strange how movies goers can be so twisted. the so called righteous priests convince people to kill their children, And yet in the 3'd movie the same thing is shown for what it is. She sees her child as something so terrible and ugly. This same thing can be seen in a number of zombie movies. You are made to see a child as so satanic that the child should be killed. But who has bewitched you? And if you were moved to kill these Zombies who would be the killer and who would be the innocent. What is going on, shoud be simple for us to understand. First when all the children are playing, a woman comes right out and tell the child that its all for him, or rather it's his fault. And after some study, the reaction of all the children becomes rather obvious. Its not just the "star" child that has a blank stare, but almost all of the children have it. And when you see Dameon wave his hand at the dog right after the lady kills herself, remember that this film is all surrounding the mind of the father and the child. We'll go more into that later. Remember, this is being done to the child, and not the other way around. In another scene they try to give an impression that the child doesn't want to go to the "church" because of its holiness. But if we remember for just a minute, the vast amount of child abuse, that has gone on in vatican temples. This reaction in a child would not seem so strange. Watch our eyes and hearts being moved to destroy the victims Twice in this series, every voice tries to convince a father character to murder his son. The goal of the film, to sacrifice a child on the altar of a vatican temple And to make us "ready" by justifying it in our hearts. And whenever the Father decides not to kill the child, he is traumatized till he will. If Damien is so satanic, then why does he react like this, and say why me. And what does that sound like. Is he merely playing a part? Please understand, I'm not justifying the adult Damien character. I think he was a different actor anyway. But this movie is not against what it claims. During the first and second film, people are convinced (by the so called heroes) that some infant or child is so evil. And must be killed. But in the third movie, the evil character of the film hypnotizes a lady that her child is some freaky Zombie like thing to be killed. And this is condemned as it should be. But isn't it so strange, that in the same series the heroes and the villains do the same evil act. Of trying to condemn a helpless child to death. One is condemned and the other glorified, and did anyone even notice?
Day of the Dead (1985 film) I think this one is something to look at. Most of the characters are many different things. But there are 2 characters that are what we will be talking about. The military leader sees that there are only a few of them left. And he is always distressed and in fear. And of course he has an idea that all zombies are dead and cannibalistic. But the lead doctor, claims that he is working on a solution. And this doctor is training some of the zombies. And at one point the doctor shows the captain that he is training an especially obedient zombie. And then he gives the zombie a gun, and the zombie aims it at the captain, and he tells the captain that its not loaded. Then the zombie pulls the trigger. and the captain realizes that he could have just died. The zombie goes on to selute the captain and then the captain refuses to salute what he thinks is a dead man. And the doctor salutes the zombie. And besides all the other confusion going on in the film, the captain finds that the doctor had been feeding the zombie with human flesh. And when the doctor tries to explain his way out of this, the soldier kills him. And leaves the other doctors to the zombies. Some time after this, the same zombie that had been trained and fed human flesh by the doctor, found the doctor dead and showed grief over him. And this zombie that is supoosed to be dead, after showing grief, he took the gun and went on to kill the captain. But there are 2 deaths that are very important in this film. The death of the captain and that of the female doctor. When the captain opened a door to escape, he was greeted by a multitude of hands and he was totally terrified. And when the female doctor was about to escape, she opened the door to the helicopter, and hands reached around her neck. she screamed and woke up. I think the movie may have been a dream of sorts. but what happened in this film? I know that they thought all zombies were dead and cannibals. But people have had opinions a little like that about foreign barbarians nations. So lets deal with what we have here. Within their underground chamber, what was the reality? They thought that the zombies, men woman and children were all dead. and thoughfore could be shot down without regret. And that they were all cannibals, hence giving them reason to do so. But what does the captain find? He finds that the doctor said that this was an especially obidient zombie. and later that the doctor was feeding this zombie with human flesh. But we see even more than the captain sees. We see that this "zombie" grieved over the death of his master. And I know that this is a movie, but if it was real, who would be the enemy hidden behind the scenes? and who would really be in control? In "Day of the Dead" 2008 Our star hero Corporal Sarah Cross sees that privates Bud Crain has become a zombie, but she keeps him alive. This will also be important later. And in the mean time she runs over other "Zombies/humans" Indiscriminately with her car while she heads back into town. Her brother Trevor (who is in a radio station) sees their mother outside and he tries to go out and rescue her. But our hero arrives just in time to run her own mother over with a car. And right after, she has just so traumatized her brother, she walks out of the car to say that it wasn't their mother anymore. All the time she still has a Zombie in the car that she saves. But you see this Zombie in the car ends up saving her life twice. So while she has a Zombie body guard, she kills her mother in a perfectly timed ritual. So what really happened in this movie. was it happenstance, or did she carry out a perfectly performed traumatization on her brother? Remember Mel Gibson in 'Conspiracy Theory' (1997) Classic "Zombie" of sorts. Ambushed, The beginings of hallucinogenic torture. While trying to get him to turn in other people. Mel Gibson bits the torturers nose, and at this point people would kill him, thinking he's a cannibalistic Zombie. And after this, he tries to escape, and goes down the hall with blood on his mouth and shirt while looking really nuts. You should watch it, perhaps the best comedy drama of the 90s. Anyway. The next scene where he's got a gun and deranged. I don't know, but you be the judge of whether he could be mistaken for an EVIL Zombie. When he was biting Jonases nose. Classic mistaken identity. Sure he was a mind controlled "Zombie" of sorts, but not a cannibal. Also remember, the next scene where he is running down the hall
Vincent price in "The last man on earth" calls them freaks even after he officially knows their human. That their not vampires. And he doesn't even have the civilized excuse that they didn't enjoy their life and that they had nothing to live for. Because the movie shows that yes their infected but it only makes them a little sensitive to light. So they slept during the day and are awake at night. And their exactly the same as any normal human being. So whats his excuse? Hes not even sorry. not even after he finds out that they weren't vampires that he killed. He looks down on them as a nazi doctor would look down on the Jews. Earlier, you could claim that he thought they were vampires that he killed. We don't have time to go into the lack of evidence for that. But what happened? During the night he is terrified by vampires, and during the day he goes out and kills anyone he finds sleeping. And although you could possibly claim that this is a mistake. But it would be a tragic mistake. But what happens when he finds that hes been killing people not vampires? Is he sorry, does his heart sink because he murdered so many innocent people. No, instead he calls them freaks. He doesn't consider them human. And so he can kill them without pity. And they even try to make him look good, because in the end he uses none deadly weapons against them. But that doesn't change a thing. All he could do when he finds that he has killed so many is call them freaks.
In the 1987 Dawn of the Dead, one of the characters says that he'll try not to come back as a Zombie. And when he does, he looks so sad. And like he doesn't want to hurt anybody. But just the same, one of the stars shot him. I really don't think he would have harmeed anyone.
Night of the Living Dead (1990) Judy Rose: [Barbara aims a gun at a zombie] Don't shoot, it's Mr. McGruder from the legion hall! [he is shot] Judy Rose: You shot Mr. McGruder! You shot him! Barbara: Look at his back! I didn't do that! Judy Rose breaks down and cries, after that someone else comes to the window and Barbara starts shooting him while shouting "is he dead" She is trying to prove that they are dead because they can take a lot of bullets and still walk around. And when one of the characters says "you are losing it", she says "You think so, whatever I've lost I lost a long time ago, and I do not plan to lose anything else," Barbara is one of the 2 characters in this movie that seem to have the ability to really look down on everyone else. As if they are Wrong or worse than her. This next situation that were going to talk about, is near the end of the film. it includes the so called heroes Barbara and Ben. And the arch enemy Harry Cooper and Sarah Cooper his daughter. Now in an earlier scene they showed Sarah biting her mother. But please lets take this from what the characters could see. Because they saw none of this. Please remember, this is a question of if it were real. So lets go to the scene, to what the characters saw, and what supposedly influenced their actions. Harry Cooper is by a door in the house, and his daughter Sarah walks (like a Zombie) into the room. She walks right up to him and almost past him, looks at him walks towards him. Then Ben says, "shoot it" and in supposedly nice voice he says "shoot it Cooper" The girl walks toward Ben. And ben repeats his demonic request. Harry Cooper says "But its my daughter" Ben aims his gun at Sarah, and the father says "no" And shoots Ben before Ben can shoot his daughter. They end up shooting each other. And the other hero Barbara kills Sarah, because she's a Zombie' because this little girl was growling at her and looking scary. Or any reason you like. She shot the little girl. Sarah Cooper Remember that if a girl were hypnotized, how easy would it be to get her to growl and maybe even bit someone? Please stop for a minute and remember, how many times do children bite each other? Do little boys and girls bite each other and usally its not to serious. But here, the price of a child growling and biting is death. Back to the movie, Barbara leaves the house avoids killing Zombies, she merely aims the gun at them and backs away. But then she sees her mother is a Zombie, and decides to kill her rather than the other Zombies. She of course supposedly has some kind of regret over this. later She sees the other people playing with the Zombies. Fighting 1 in a ring. And hanging others and shooting them for fun. And with this the movie gives her the right to look down on them. But which is worse, playing fights with zombies and murdering them, or when you weren't killing any Zombies you decide to murder your own mother. Any reasons in the world can be given, but lets go to the following situation. Barbara is back in the house with these other people, and they find Ben is a Zombie. They look at each other, and she looks less willing to kill him than her own mother. somebody else shots him. She then finds the father in their, and he isn't a Zombie. She shoots him. Of course the movie paints him bad. But what are we allowing to be justified in our hearts? The villains do this or that, but it is the heroes that kill the children. And anyone else that the Zombie excuse allows them to. I know that the father character is made to look bad, like when he said that he'd be proven right. I myself think more about the so called "sincere" but truly deceiving voice of Ben when he tried to convince the father character to murder his own daughter. Was it her creepy shaking walk that justified the hero in killing the little girl? Was it that in horror movies when you see someone act a certain way, that is the trigger for horror in your mind. But that makes all the actors in the world worthy of death. Because certainly you could get an actor to act.
Village of the Damned (1960 film) The entire town falls asleep. Of course this is blamed on the children, but I think that this is a PRIME cannidate for mind control. Something or someone had the power to do this. We are then told that the fourth brigade are doing exercises all around the town. And there is something to remember about modern soldiers. Even the very honorable are trained to be a machine. In other words, they can be told to surround this are that area, and then told to keep it a secret. Even if they see nothing they can be used to keep secrets they don't even see. Already, before the first half hour is even over, we hear one of the mothers referring to her unborn child in the terms of a monster. And before any of these children are born, one of the men of the town says, "i hope that none of them lives". later on the star George Sanders sees that his child seems to be very smart for his age. But nothing unnatural. His child just wrote the name David. But the only thing they have so far on the kids is that they have pretty weird eyes. But that's no more than actors have. Then some other kids are mean to some of these children, and then some of these stare at them. Then one of them says "no nancy leave them alone". But in fact it was these blond children that were being picked on. And many of the adults are treating them horribly as well. singling them out. How do we suppose children would react if they were treated like this from birth? Then a military officer tries to convince George Sanders that "these children are bad". The military returns again, from having been quiet since the incident. When the woman became pregnant and they surrounded the town. To say that the children should be locked up. A car almost hits one of these children, a man gets out and after a few words drives into a wall and dies. At the court they are about to rule it accedental death. A man at the courtroom shouts that the children killed the man. "just ask them" he says. (But at this point I would like to say that anyone under hypnosis can be made to say that they killed someone. And many people who would actually feel guilt over this fiction would want to turn themselves in to be executed.) Later on, the brother of the dead man tries to kill the children with a rifle, but someone stops him. A bit later the man shoots himself. But the question begs an answer. If these children could place the adults under hypnosis to they stand by. And they themselves merely stand in a kind've daze. Then it stands to reason, that someone else could have placed these children under hypnosis and in the harsh environment of this unfriendly town this would be easy. And had them stand by just as the adults. Then in the Russian city where some of these children were born, the government nuked the entire city. Doesn't anyone notice that the children in this seem to be so totally sad? And in the end, its the same as the omen. One of the fathers kills the kids.
"The propagandist's purpose is to make one set of people forget that certain other sets of people are human." Aldous Huxley:
Lord of the rings In the first film, you are introduced to the fun of slaughtering inhuman orcs. But by the time of the third movie, the stars are having a great time killing African elephant drivers and middle eastern archers. And in the second movie, Gimli is playing with body parts. I'm sorry, but that sounds to me like a nazi officer. But my question is, how far can a star go before we refuse to justify his action? I'm not saying that it is racist, because all the stars are white. Its because of the things that the white stars do to the other races that I say its racist. And even if a someone from another race was a star, that realy wouldn't make a difference to me. All that would mean, is that someone else is also doing some of the crimes. But look at it, these are humans. Even if you don't think the goblins are human, what about the other armies that are totaly human. Mostly in the third movie. If your fighting an enemy, is it right to give no mercy? The movie clearly shows that they took no prisoners. In 'lord of the rings, you can have a great deal of fun killing Africans, but when they reach Saruman they decide to spare him. And with all the wrong that Grima Wormtongue did, they stopped the king from killing him. But when Grima Wormtongue did perhaps the only nice thing he'd done (in a long time). And killed Saruman, they killed him for it. Why??? I'll tell you what it reminds me of. I'n some 17th century European armies, both sides could slaughter each others pawns/infantry. But when it was all over, the rulers, generals, and nobles could meet and talk over' a friendly dinner. And in many parts of Medieval Europe, it was illegal for peasants to kill a noble in battle. In fact, the peasants were supposed to capture the nobles alive even if a lot of them died trying. I'll tell you what it looks like to me. It's like you can kill a common soldier, but your never allowed to kill those truly responsible. So, when both sides have killed each others peasants/innocents, the ones responsible can have dinner together. But you'll say "Aragorn and sauron never had dinner together" But wait just a second, Aragorn and Gandalf were offering Grima Wormtongue and Saruman to basically come to dinner. So in essence the principle is the same. So after many of the inhabitants of rohan have been killed, and a great deal of infantry from both sides have died, the wizards and nobles can get together and talk over dinner.
I am trying to say that the books and movies are psychopathic! were told that the orcs are bad, but Gimli plays with body parts. What kind of nazi would that make him. If? we didn't have the movies excuses,what would we think if we saw a man sitting on a body with an axe in it, playing, joking and shaking the body? The films an enchantment to murder.
"But were they even people? Ammianus had his doubts. "They are cer- tainly in the shape of men," he hedged, though they might easily be con- fused for a "low-legged beast." Other Roman propagandists would claim . . . . So where in al this propaganda is the truth? We shouldn't take Ammi- anus too literally, . . . The point of the exaggeration, as with all propaganda, is to emphasize the differences, to depict the Huns as "the Other" against which the Romans defined themselves." The Night Attila Died Solving the Murder of Attila the Hun Michael A. Babcock page 49 Sun Tzu, (circa 544 – 496 BC) “All war is deception" The Roman "prejudice against barbarians also contributed to Attila's bad reputation. Historians believe that Attila's neg- ative image was influenced by the Romans' belief that the Huns were sub- human beings whose lifestyle and cus- toms were uncivilized. Even before Attila's birth, Roman chroniclers had written about the Huns' savage lifestyle. One Roman historian said they lived the life of animals. Jordanes wrote that they were "a race almost of man." Attila the Hun Marilyn Tower Oliver "The propagandist's purpose is to make one set of people forget that certain other sets of people are human." Aldous Huxley:
Sun Tzu, (circa 544 – 496 BC) “All war is deception" "Grossman was a Military Psychology professor at West Point, as well as having a long list of other military credentials. His superb book On Killing gives numerous reasons (proofs and evidences) that numerous soldiers have typically only pretended to try to kill the enemy. Many fired over the heads or only pretended to fire their weapons, if even that. During W.W. II, Brig. Gen. S.L.A. Marshall discovered that only 15 to 20 % of men on the front line would actually use their weapons against the Germans even during action over several days. 75% of the American soldiers would not even fire at the enemy to save their own lives. He made some suggestions on how to improve this dismal firing rate. By operant conditioning the U.S. military took those dismal firing rates to 55% in the Korean War and to a 95% firing rate in the Vietnam War. When military units lose 50% or more, the men often lose the will to continue killing, because the group dynamic fizzles out. The Americans called the communist Vietnamese "gooks", and they in turn called Americans "monkeys". Because the mind-controlled assassin will not see the face of their victim due to hypnotic programming, they are also limited in seeing the humanness of their victims. Most of the missions for Delta slaves allow them to kill without the threat of being killed. Warriors and soldiers have traditionally done cleansing rituals when they finish a war. An example of a cleansing ritual would be a parade at the end of the war, where the country turns out to tell the soldiers what a great job they did. A programmed assassin in many cases can not receive a parade, but he can be given lots of praise for having done a great job for humanity, or his country, or whatever ideal the Programmer uses as a rationale." From Deeper insights into The Illuminati Formula by Fritz Springmeier and Cisco Wheeler Lt. Col. Dave Grossman is a military expert on how to condition people so that they will kill. He writes in his superb book On Killing (Boston, MS: Little Brown & Co., 1996) that the same process that the government has used to condition soldiers to kill, is being used by the entertainment industry. The only major difference is that in the military, men are taught to kill only on command, while our children are being taught to kill whenever they want to via TV’s "entertainment." Grossman states on page 308, that the conditioning to kill begins with cartoons. "It begins innocently with cartoons and then goes on to the countless acts of violence depicted on TV as the child grows up... .Then the parents, through neglect or conscious decision, begin to permit the child to watch movies rated R due to vivid depictions of knives penetrating and protruding from bodies, long shots of blood spurting from severed limbs, and bullets ripping into bodies and exploding out the back in showers of blood and brains." While children see horrible deaths on T.V., they learn to associate this suffering with entertainment, pleasure and their favorite soft drink, their favorite candybar, and close intimate contact with their date. (See On Killing, p. 302)
If the ancient romans had movies they would have shown the natives or barbarians as cannibalistic Zombies. But there's something about a lie. It needs to have some truth in one way or another. You see, if every single zombie in every film was commiting cannibalism, then if you didn't see them do that in real life that would strike you as strange. And you wouldn't react the way they'd want. That's always been one of the questions. If this was their plot, why would they show so much truth in decietful movies. I think its so they can numb you to the truth. So no matter how much truth you see, you never figure it out.
Warfare against the "barbarians" Referring to the year 1706 he says: "The state of affairs still looking with a melancholy aspect, it was resolved for a more vigorous prosecution of the war, to grant the following encouragement, viz.: To regular forces under pay £10 To volunteers in service 20 per To volunteers without pay 50 scalp To any troop or company that go to the relief of any town or garrison 30 "Over and above was granted the benefit of plunder, and captives of women and children under twelve years of age, which at first seemed a great encouragement, but it did not answer what we expected." The bounty was later raised to £100 a scalp to volunteers serving at their own expense, and £60 to soldiers drawing pay. on one occasion a party of them paraded the streets of Boston with ten scalps stretched on hoops and borne aloft on poles. Sullivan, in his History of Maine, published in 1795, mentions that in 1756 James Cargill was charged with the murder of two of the Norridgewock tribe of Indians, "but was acquitted and drew a bounty of two thousand dollars from the treasury for their scalps." This method of making war was as inconclusive as it was expensive. In 1706 Penhallow estimated that every Indian killed or taken "cost the country at least a thousand pounds." Of the three years war, 1722 to 1725, he says: "The charge was no less than one hundred and seventy-five thousand pounds, besides the constant charge of watching, warding, scouting, making and repairing of garrisons &c, which may modestly be computed at upward of seventy thousand pounds more." And yet after all, the Indians were never really formidable in numbers or resources. Penhallow remarks that "it is surprising to think that so small a number of Indians should be able to distress a country so large and populous to the degree we have related." Of the gladiatorial sacrifices "It would be the Barbarian Christians, the Vandals, who put a stop to the blood sports of Roman North Africa. In 439, the Vandals finally took Carthage. Gaiseric deliberately timed his attack for 19 October, the day of the consular games, when the population - including the Catholic bishop - was gathered to watch the arena 'sport'. The Vandals walked in virtually unopposed, and put the games out of business for ever." Terry jones Barbarians page 235 Just to let you know, the Gladiatorial games were not voluntery. And the emperor didn't provide them to satisfy the people. The Emporer forced the people to watch. And in new conquered territories, if the people raised to big a cry after they were forced to watch. It was toned down for a time, till they were used to it. They brought ruthlessness to these peoples. And any pity for other men died. This point cannot be over emphasized. you see this was not the decaying of the end of empire, but an essential part of all Roman history. This is worse than anything that they accuse the Barbarians of. But more than that, it is the traumatizing of the Roman people the desensitizing of them of any form of conscience. So think about it for a moment, you are a Roman man with a family and you are forced to come to the arena. And people are not only killed in front of your children while you are forced to watch, but the worst form of pornography is done right in front of you. The arena was the combination of lust and murder. Prostitutes were sent into the crowds right when the gladiators were killed. Now I think you probably understand why the Roman people so easily fell for the lies said about foreign wars. And I also think you may know why many people faked their own deaths to get out of the arena. I know it would be hard to synthesis what it would be like to be under roman bondage but lets try. If you were born there, and forced to watch people die as a boy. And this trauma is your "reality" as you grow to be a man. What sort of psychopath would that turn you into to be forced to watch this sort of thing? What did the Romans turn their people into? What would it be like to be turned into a predator? Or just someone who didn't know there left hand from there right. What would it be like to be a Roman citizen, traumatized by the Emporer, Forced to watch death as a child, and when you are grown your told that all the barbarians are cannibaistic savages/Zombies. I personally think, that someone forced to go through this would not have control of there own mind. Although they might believe that they do. Watch Terry Jones BBC history show 'Gladiators: The Brutal Truth'. For more information. Why should we take Zombie movies seriously? Because ancient roman barbarian/Zombies. Because the fiction planted in our mind becomes reality that we will act upon. And because if it did happen, that would mean that it was known about. And we were prepared to burn our conscience and murder. you would have murdered Mel Gibson in conspiracy theory when he bit the nose of his torturerer. And if you didn't walk in at that point, you would have killed him when he was trying to escape in the hallway. because he was acting crazy (while he was on the wheel chair) & because of the blood on his face, mouth and shirt. So what would you do? would you be controlled in fear? Or would you stop and consider? Would you have murdered Mel gibson when he is trying to escape from his abuser? When you come upon a situation or when it comes upon you. You should not assume anything. What is the point of movies? To corner the question what is the point of horror movies? You see, in horror movies you find the situation turned on you. your not allowed to reason and your not allowed to wait. But an immediate reaction is demanded of you. They don't want you to be able to wait. They create a nightmare and only allow you a moment. and the solution they give is murder. Would you murder in the never ending moment of fear? Or would you pray and ask Jesus to show another way out? In Zombie movies often their is a baby on the floor that they want you to kill. And other people who are throwing up and sic. are they basically just victims? Vincent price in "The last man on earth" calls them freaks even after he officially knows their human. That their not vampires. And he doesn't even have the civilized excuse that they didn't enjoy their life and that they had nothing to live for. Because the movie shows that yes their infected but it only makes them a little sensitive to light. So they slept during the day and are awake at night. And their exactly the same as any normal human being. So whats his excuse? Hes not even sorry. not even after he finds out that they weren't vampires that he killed. He looks down on them as a nazi doctor would look down on the Jews. Earlier, you could claim that he thought they were vampires that he killed. We don't have time to go into the lack of evidence for that. But what happened? During the night he is terrified by vampires, and during the day he goes out and kills anyone he finds sleeping. And although you could possibly claim that this is a mistake. But it would be a tragic mistake. But what happens when he finds that hes been killing people not vampires? Is he sorry, does his heart sink because he murdered so many innocent people. No, instead he calls them freaks. He doesn't consider them human. And so he can kill them without pity. And they even try to make him look good, because in the end he uses none deadly weapons against them. But that doesn't change a thing. All he could do when he finds that he has killed so many is call them freaks.
Tell me if you have heard this before. Isn't it weird how there seem to be people that sympathize with vampires (which know what they are doing). But not with Zombies, who even the ones that do cause harm, are merely mindless and have no control of themselves. Bela lugosi was in a movie called 'white Zombie' and he (the actor that plays the old time vampire) "controls" some Zombies. Vampires are the mesmerizers/hypnotists/controllers while it is the Zombies that are the ones that do not control their own mind. I have even seen a movie where I don't think a single Zombie did any more that just throw up on some people. 28 day later' I tried to bring up both the Vampires and the Zombies because they are both part of a larger debate. Now the Romans come in. The Roman description of the Huns is very much like the Zombies. And just in case anyone here is not sure, they said some of the same things about the Celts and Germans. And some Spanish accounts claimed that the Aztecs were not smart enough to count to twenty without using all their fingers and toes. This is just the beginning. They (and the ancient Romans) claimed that their enemies were basically as stupid as cave man supposedly . But also that the Aztecs and the Huns could not understand right from wrong. Is it cannibalism that were afraid of? And that we fight in the movies. I don't think so. If that were the case then why are Vampires so justified? Lets compare 3 zombie movies. 28 days later' zombieland' & I am legend. Im zombieland are they afraid of the zombies or are the able to just run around killing and having fun. But why is the star of 28 days later afraid of the five year old that he kills. Its because he's scared of being infected. Above all else in his mind he has an idea that the kid has a disease that will kill him. It is not the idea that the kid is dead that controls our mind. Remember in 'I am legend' the Zombies were not dead. But merely infected. And in the end cures one of them of the disease. Its not cause their dead but because we think their disease will kill. There are Zombie movies where they are alive (I am legend, white Zombie etc) And I've even seen people admit that they would be alive but that the killing is still excused. Because we could get infected. It is pure selfishness! In that case were already the walking dead because of aids. Or is it, our comrades that were afried of? The ones that will kill us if we are infected? If it did happen. it would be something made known to the public almost a century in advance by hollywood. & lets look at the situation. if the "Zombies" appeared on the scene, Actually endangering man kind. Why wouldn't the army be able to deal with it? If the zombies were slow or fast, the army would be a million times more able to deal with it than any of these unprepared characters in the movies. What I'm saying is that if it did happen these small groups of people would not be able to "save" the world. They would however be able to burn there conscience killing men, women & children. And if they did burn their conscience so thoroughly they would be ready for the mark of the beast and the plagues that fall on those that take the mark. If we take this from films, & examine the rush pushed on people. I know this sounds ridicules but these films are what would be in the minds of men if it did happen. I've seen Zombies in films who don't do anything but act crazy. And They may kill the Christians and call them Zombies, Isaiah 57:1 The righteous perisheth, and no man layeth [it] to heart: and merciful men [are] taken away, none considering that the righteous is taken away from the evil [to come]. You may say, "how innocent are the Zombies? They should be held just as innocent as everyone else. Little child, woman and old men. 2 principles here, 1, if it did happen, the Zombies would be the planned victims and you the planned murderers. The next step I believe would be the mark of the beast, starvation and other plauges then hell. But how innocent should Zombies be held. They should be protected not butchered. you should think of them just as innocent as Mel Gibson in conspiracy theory, he is like a mind controlled child trying to escape. His manners aren't very good, we walks about the city suspicicly. and theres really 2 scenes in question in the movie. in the first he has just been recaptured by the abuser of the film. and the torturer injects him with drugs and he is bound to a wheel chair. and as the tortur gets started Mel Gibson bites the torturers nose. Now if you walked in would you have murdered him thinking he's a cannibalistic Zombie. when in fact he is not guilty of doing anything wrong. Or would you have killed him as he struggled down the hall, with blood in his mouth and on his shirt? Mel Gibson is an innocent victim trying to escape his abusers. you see, when you walk or are brought into a situation. you can't judge it so quickly. you should understand, if the zombie apoclipse did happen, it would be made for you to burn your conscience. If you see Mel Gibson biting his abusers nose, that doesn't prove cannibalism. and if he flees down the hall with blood in his mouth, you don't know how it got there. remember the history of the crusades, it was not some primitive native who committed cannibalism. Or some mind controlled guy who is running around to give you every possible oppertunity to kill him. It was the crusaders who were the cannibals. with deliberate atrocity and preplanned vile purpose, they went forward. not without weapons running blindly letting you kill them. but with a sword and purpose. If you are allowed to kill someone. if some victim is placed before your feet. it is not to save your life. it is to burn your consceince and prepare you for whats next. To prepare you to sin before your killed. You might be thinking, that this is totally insane. Well, please consider the following example. "More than 1200 Serbs from Glina were forced to convert. They were later slaughtered in the same church where they were converted" "Serbian civilians who are being forced to convert to Catholicism by the Ustasa regime stand in front of a baptismal font in a church in Glina." From UNITED STATES HOLOCAUST MEMORIAL MUSEUM http://resources.ushmm.org/inquery/uia_doc.php/photos/18992?hr=null They didn't want converts, they just wanted them to deny Jesus before their death. Zombies, I'm not telling anyone to put their weapon down. If your in some strange situation I would never tell you to put your weapon down. if some people are under strong mind control. couldn't they get them (at least sometimes) to act. the mind control I speak of is tormenting. what actor couldn't they get to growl and howl in the night and act weird. And by the way its fun. Does that mean that you should kill them. So what are the reasons that are used to justify killing Zombies. Because they are all cannibals. That doesn't work, because you haven't seen them all do it. And even if you saw some that wouldn't mean all. Or as a man would you have the right to murder woman and children because they bite you? How sickening. If your not man enough to stop a woman or child from giving you a little bite why don't you run? They couldn't kill you. Well then there's the other claim, they if they touch you or throw up on you, you get infected and die. This is something you wouldn't know because they are running around as if they are alive. And even in a couple of these movies, Zombies are alive. I am legend and "last man on earth. although the second one is kind've a zombie vampire movie. Or the idea that to be infected means instantanious death. Is it something else? Is it that if you did get infectedand even if you knew that you might get well in a FEW MONTHS. You knew more than that, that if you got infected, your death sentence would come from someone having fun killing Zombies and not from cannibalism or the infection. They would not be in effect killing you, it would be the other forces around you. That deem you worthy of death based on a bite. It is part of our culture, and even those who aren't in its belief system "know" its "answers". But this impression, this terror can be turned on, and is a command to kill. Parents, children, spouse and strangers. And as we see here, it is aimed at the most helpless and innocent. Were not really talking about anything new, genocide as carried out by 2 groups of people. The first is the knowing willing propagator, and the second is anyone that is somehow convinced that these men woman and children must be killed. In Zombies movies, they claim that the Zombies that are walking or running are dead. And can be shot without regret. National geographic even has a documentary talking about its possibility. And many people on the internet think it will happen. And then they can kill and have "fun." And I'm trying to prove to them that their wrong. Many of these movies are training people to slaughter each other. Here it is, There is a video, that tries to make a little girl look like satan. First note the hypnotic noise and speaking in the background. "Who is this girl" she is a helpless child, in the hands of the vatican. You can see the girl paying close attention to the popes hands. And she seems afraid. ...... This video claims that she looks like lucifer. But what is happening here? Are we being made to see a helpless child as the enemy, when we should be looking at the vatican priests who rape little children. Our eyes are being moved from the criminals to the victims and we can't tell the difference. Mel Gibson Zombie, biting the controllers nose, and going down the hall looking crazy and with blood on his shirt and mouth. zombies, you see an impossible situation. If a zombie can be so innocent and yet placed in so incriminating of a situation. How can you know. Well, let me tell you if it did happen. And everything was prepared to get you to be willing to slaughter. Then pray without ceasing and look around you. And see what is really going on.
If you can be hypnotised to growl, spit, throw up, howl in the moon light, and act crazy. Then you are eligible to be a Zombie.
Basically, I've heard of 2 different meanings of the word Zombie. 1 is the cannibalistic Zombie. The second is referred to when talking about the three stooges or someone else who is not exactly in tune with culture. The third is in the comment below. Right now I'm going to quote a comment, from under a song called 'Save me' by Aimee Mann "the thing here is not ? exactly about death, but the "death-of-life" of so much people. People walking around like zombies, empty, completely alone, that cannot love for a reason or another. That's my interpretation of the movie, anyway. And people-zombies are everywhere... That's way Aimee's expression its so cold. It fits" This is so sad, people who don't remember the hope in the gospel of Jesus Christ.
I'm not promoting the movie, but the song is something entirely different.