A Critique of Ian Crane's Hidden Agenda

[zoomer]

I recently got an amil telling me about Leeds 9/11 conference, and this is where I first heard of Ian Crane.
I went on to watch his video The Hidden Agenda, and this is my review, and critique of it:

The whole of it is a mish mash of New Age-ism. I have been very inluenced by the late Monica Sjoo, who was a lone voice, years before 9/11, writing exposes about the patriarchal propaganda 'hid' in much New Age thinking, and I really want to continue with this......

The Hidden Agenda http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=-8033480007652331640&q=ian+c rane+the+hidden+agenda

Well Ian Crane starts off implying that Zacharia Sitchin's myth of the Annunaki is correct. he doesn't mention his name, but this IS Sitchin's myth. Of the Anunnaki being from a planet Nibiru, and developing genetic technology, etc etc etc

To this he adds about the Sumerian gods brothers Enki and Enlil. Kind of adds this to his stew. Throughout Crane never gives sources for his views or anything, just various slideshows pertaining to back up what he is claiming.

I an Crane also implies that 'ancient Egyptian wisdom' has been lost to us, but is secretly been kept by the elite who use it the wrong way, and that soon it will be released to us, and then there will be loveonce again.

I am sorry, but all of this is New Age Bull *!

For when we are talking Egyptian Mystery schools, these are really ANTI Nature. The goal is to escape Nature and return to a 'spiritual' source!!

So for Crane to assume that it isn't the 'KNOWLEDGE'/mythis flawed, but the elite who refuse to share it is being naive.

What I am learning and wanting to share and speak out about, is that these beliefs, be they Abrahamic myths, Secular humanist myths, occultist
myths, scientific myths, etc., that we HAVE to really examine them and not just accept others telling us them, thus spinning us into absurd notions, which often can erupt into actual reality causing all manner of horror. Look at the Nazis and their myths, which are veryu much connected to the elite's myth of now. And look at the so-called scientific myths too.

And speaking of science. Let us look at one of the so-called Father of science, Rene Descartes. His myth, though he believed it to be fact, and so did those who believed his myth.................he thought he was a thinker who was divorced from the rest of Nature. So for example, he assumed that thought/the mind was of 'God' and some how connected with the machine like body via the pineal gland ONLY in humans. And that animals did not have this mind/soul and were thus 'automata'. And because of this myth he believed in, real animals were to suffer horribly, because when they naturally cried out with pain, and tried to get away from psychopaths like Decartes and his followers they were said to be nothing but machines making noises. Not real beings with feelings!!!

[Craig W]

An interesting review, zoomer. Hello again (and I have not forgotten my promise regarding your first post - I have some thoughts I will share some time soonish!)

I have also seen this presentation and agree with much of your critique.

I found it good fun and reasonably entertaining. But much of the content was recycled and flawed mumbo jumbo.

I felt he tried to pack far too much stuff in to the time he had. And sometimes it was not clear whether he was saying he believed this stuff or just that some people believed it or that "the elite" believed it. A lot of editing, filtering and clarification was needed for me.

That said, I find the man and his style quite appealing. But then I always enjoy seeing people presenting unorthodox views (even the turgid Michael Tsarion!).

I had previoulsy seen a google video film of his presentation on 911 and 7/7 in Bradford and I thought that was much stronger. Iwould recommend anyone to see that as a good example of a quick presentation on these matters (though there were a handful of factual errors).

All in all, I'm glad there are people like Ian prompting people to think widely, deeply and most of all, for themselves, about the nature of our reality.

[zoomer]

[Craig W]

[rodin]

Anyone talking about myth stuff as if it is gospel should be discounted. I have pointed out Crane as a disinfo agent before on this forum and got soundly reprimanded for it. But truth will out, and what was once ignored on UK911 is now discussed - albeit sometimes in 'hushed tones'.

It is ALL a scam.

http://www.sitchiniswrong.com/open_letter.htm

[ian neal]

Rodin

Have you seen Ian talk? I have and the last thing he does is present the information he presents as if it is gospel and not subject to correction.

To call someone a disinfo agent (which I interpret as someone deliberately trying to deceive us) without presenting any evidence other than you disagree with his views, is out of order. Feel free to disagree with Ian but don't throw baseless accusations around.

Thanks

[zoomer]

[zoomer]

[chek]

I'd agree with much of the thrust of this discussion regarding Ian Crane's entertaining lectures. I particularly enjoy the 'long' views of 'history'.

I wouldn't take them at all seriously however, but they do serve to challenge our preconceptions and make us re-examine them, for which purpose they are valuable in the same way I find David Icke useful.

But as usual, the more easily impressionable are prone to swallow it all as gospel and incorporate it into a belief system. Belief being the operative word.

I'm not sure there is any way to guard against that in a free society though.

[rodin]

[chek]

[zoomer]

Yes I agree with Rodin. IF we, the 911 truthers choose to be errrm slackarsed when it comes to the fringe myths surrounding it, this doesn't tsay much for our main thrust arguments about the 'nuts and bolts' of the case.

As I have said somewheres else. The Nazis had a myth too, and one could be oh so entertained by its 'romanticism' and what have you, but its belief ---well, i dont have to tell you the damge it did and still does right.

So, what i want to encourage is using reason, and all of one's faculties to really checkout the myths being pushed. We is doing it with the OCTers so cant we do same with the David Ickians and Ian Crane-ians??