What we need is a seminar on how to effectively deal with a person or group of people that calls you a conspiracy theorist for bringing up 9/11. Can someone post something about how to handle that situation effectively?

itsaputon... I touched on that during the grassroots workshop. There will be a video of it available soon.

Jesse in Chicago said--"Before I posed my question I asked if there were any members of the corporate media covering the event. Nobody responded. I then asked if anyone from Amy Goodman’s Democracy Now was covering the event. Again…the room remained silent. I said that I was “not surprised!”"

Gatekeeper Amy Goodman is a main reason why I got onto 9/11 truth LATER than sooner.

I used to watch Goodman's show daily. I trusted her to keep me (and everyone else) informed about important issues that the msm wouldn't touch. Since the "Democracy Now" queen was completely ignoring 9/11 alternative truth, I assumed there was nothing to it, that it must be "wacky conspiracy kooks."

By accident, I finally saw Barry Zwicker on cable, and the rest is history.

I no longer watch nor trust Goodman. If she hides something as crucial as 9/11 truth, what other news does she chose to censor from me???

itsaputon, I know how to deal with such people who attempt to support the government's line by shutting down rational debate by using words such as "conspiracy theorist," etc., as an ad hominem attack. Say something to the effect of the below to them:

Everyone is in agreement that the 9/11 attacks were the result of a conspiracy. But those who are genuinely knowledgeable and care about the truth reject fallacious conspiracy theories, such as the U.S. government's lying, self-serving, a-historical, a-factual, and provably false official fairy tale conspiracy theory concerning the 9/11 attacks.

More than four times the amount of non-combatants have been systematically murdered for purely ideological reasons by their own governments within the past century than were killed in that same time-span from wars. From 1900 to 1923, various Turkish regimes killed from 3,500,000 to over 4,300,000 of its own Armenians, Greeks, Nestorians, and other Christians. Communist governments have murdered over 110 million of their own subjects since 1917. And Germany murdered some 16 million of it own subjects in the past century. (The preceding figures are from Prof. Rudolph Joseph Rummel's website at http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/ .)

All totaled, neither the private-sector crime which government is largely responsible for promoting and causing or even the wars committed by governments upon the subjects of other governments come anywhere close to the crimes government is directly responsible for committing against its own citizens--certainly not in amount of numbers. Without a doubt, the most dangerous presence to ever exist throughout history has always been the people's very own government.

Needless to say, all of these government mass-slaughters were conspiracies--massive conspiracies, at that.

"Jesse: One man can make the difference."

No one person has made the difference here...

Several "one persons" have made an impact, but no one person deserves the credit for what we're accomplishing. It is a group effort, and everyone deserves credit.

Well put, James.

I forgot to mention above that Amy Goodman can be seen on video watching WTC-7 implode--in person! She was some blocks north of said building, probably by her NYC tv studio.

I guess she just assumed that all massive steel-framed buildings can just make a "boom boom" and tumble down as rubble, no explaination needed. Happens all the time.

Democracy Now! Yeah, sure.

posted by itsaputon:
What we need is a seminar on how to effectively deal with a person or group of people that calls you a conspiracy theorist for bringing up 9/11. Can someone post something about how to handle that situation effectively?
===================================
Well, once you become more familiar with the "17 techniques for truth suppression" (techniques which are frequently used by the mainstream media) it will help you in dealing with the childish name calling that certain supporters of the official version tend to resort to when refuting/ignoring the truth.
The most important thing to remember IMHO is never become vulgar, never resort to the same type of name calling or blanket statement generalizations they use, just stick to the facts. Plain and simple, youÂ’re not here to fight them, youÂ’re here to help them.
With that being said, the 17 techniques for truth suppression are as follows:

Seventeen Techniques for Truth Suppression – as employed by many within the mainstream media, and supporters of the official version of 9/11

1 - Strong, credible allegations of high-level criminal activity can bring down a government. When the government lacks an effective, fact-based defense, other techniques must be employed. The success of these techniques depends heavily upon a cooperative, compliant press and a mere token opposition party.
Dummy up. If it's not reported, if it's not news, it didn't happen.

2 - Wax indignant. This is also known as the "how dare you?" gambit.

3 - Characterize the charges as "rumors" or, better yet, "wild rumors." If, in spite of the news blackout, the public is still able to learn about the suspicious facts, it can only be through "rumors." (If they tend to believe the "rumors" it must be because they are simply "paranoid" or "hysterical.")

4 - Knock down straw men. Deal only with the weakest aspect of the weakest charges. Even better, create your own straw men. Make up wild rumors and give them lead play when you appear to debunk all the charges, real and fanciful alike.

5 - Call the skeptics names like "conspiracy theorist," "nut," "ranter," "kook," "crackpot," and of course, "rumor monger." Be sure, too, to use heavily loaded verbs and adjectives when characterizing their charges and defending the "more reasonable" government and its defenders. You must then carefully avoid fair and open debate with any of the people you have thus maligned. For insurance, set up your own "skeptics" to shoot down.

6 - Impugn motives. Attempt to marginalize the critics by suggesting strongly that they are not really interested in the truth but are simply pursuing a partisan political agenda or are out to make money (compared to over-compensated adherents to the government line who, presumably, are not).

7 - Invoke authority. Here the controlled press and the sham opposition can be very useful.

8 - Dismiss the charges as "old news."

9 - Come half-clean. This is also known as "confession and avoidance" or "taking the limited hangout route." This way, you create the impression of candor and honesty while you admit only to relatively harmless, less-than-criminal "mistakes." This stratagem often requires the embrace of a fall-back position quite different from the one originally taken. With effective damage control, the fall-back position need only be peddled by stooge skeptics to carefully limited markets.

10 - Characterize the crimes as impossibly complex and the truth as ultimately unknowable.

11 - Reason backward, using the deductive method with a vengeance. With thoroughly rigorous deduction, troublesome evidence is irrelevant. For example: We have a completely free press. If they know of evidence that the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (BATF) had prior knowledge of the Oklahoma City bombing they would have reported it. They haven't reported it, so there was no prior knowledge by the BATF. Another variation on this theme involves the likelihood of a conspiracy leaker and a press that would report the leak.

12 - Require the skeptics to solve the crime completely. For example: If Vince Foster was murdered, who did it and why

13 - Change the subject. This technique includes creating and/or publicizing distractions.

14 - Scantly report incriminating facts, and then make nothing of them. This is sometimes referred to as "bump and run" reporting.

15 - Baldly and brazenly lie. A favorite way of doing this is to attribute the "facts" furnished the public to a plausible-sounding, but anonymous, source.

16 - Expanding further on numbers 4 and 5, have your own stooges "expose" scandals and champion popular causes. Their job is to pre-empt real opponents and to play 99-yard football. A variation is to pay rich people for the job who will pretend to spend their own money.

17 - Flood the Internet with agents. This is the answer to the question, "What could possibly motivate a person to spend hour upon hour on Internet news groups defending the government and/or the press and harassing genuine critics?" Don't the authorities have defenders enough in all the newspapers, magazines, radio, and television? One would think refusing to print critical letters and screening out serious callers or dumping them from radio talk shows would be control enough, but, obviously, it is not.

I just thought I would put this link about 4000 government workers going underground on June 19th here.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/06/02/AR200606...

Do you think the U.S. government was complicit in 9/11?
No way 57%
I'm suspicious but not sure 27%
Yes 17%
Total Votes: 33,761

from AOL.com poll

go vote!

http://articles.news.aol.com/news/article.adp?id=20060605100209990018&nc...

I think this "thought" posted on AOL's site re: the 9/11 coverage speaks volumes about our country:

"I am so sick of all this nonsense about conspiracies. When are people going to realize that muslim's hate Christian's and the United States is a country based on Christianity and freedom of any religion. Get with it people and realize that we here in this country are not the evil ones. You complain and moan about war in Iraq, If you think Iraq funded none of 9/11 then you are dreaming people."

http://messageboards.aol.com/aol/en_us/articles.php?boardId=563016&artic...

Hey Jesse,

Thanks to your friendly and efficient service, thousands of Deception Dollars are flying all around my redstate, from waiting rooms to grocery buggys, to parkways and newspaper machines to of course personal delivery. A favorite image is of some pedestrian (backroads only) doing the classic maneuver in my rear-view mirror; bending over for their "Fraudulent Event Note". HAhaha!! Last week, a forty'ish year old lady at a grocery store checkout caught a glimpse at my wallet and squealed with glee "Are those 911 dollars?!" On the _same day_, a twenty'ish year old restaurant waitress received a couple DD's along with her usual tip, and began pouring her soul out about suspicions, and how her boyfriend "just studies and studies 911". (I gave her a couple DVDs and music cds a couple days later) Just a couple little product feedback tales and random barometric readings from South Carolina. Thanks also to Carol Brouillet and the artist and all others who brought us these Deception Dollars, the most cost-effective (~4 cents each with orders of 2000) and most laugh-inducing means of spreading the word. "They'll always pick 'em up!" http://deceptiondollar.com

the momentum is clearly on our side

but i agree that we need o develop a strategy for debunking the "conspiracy theory" stigma to our activism.

No one called the investigations into Watergate a 'conspiracy theory' - even though it WAS a damned conspiracy.

It is beginning to appear that as long as we labor under the weight of being labeled "conspiracy theorists" - it does not matter how much evidence we possess or present.

About people who deny it's possible on AOL or anywhere: It's always based on their emotional response; never fact.

Also from that AOL message board. Man, that just defies logic.

"I agree with you 100%. These are the same people that are simpathetic to the terrorists who want to destroy our country. Because of their stupidity, these morons are more dangerous than the terrorists themselves. They watch too much TV and buy in to all the consipracy theory crap. They need to come back to reality.

You are right, it is very scary that these people have a right to vote and will eventually vote in a candidate who thinks the same way they do."

"It is beginning to appear that as long as we labor under the weight of being labeled "conspiracy theorists" - it does not matter how much evidence we possess or present."

The problem is thinking that what you have presented qualifies as evidence. The momentum is clearly against you and other 9/11 conspiracy theorists.

google video, "Bomb in the building, start clearing out."

Aren't ya curious?

John, like I suggested earlier: Everyone should get together with all their family & friends, take 2 hours out of their lives, & watch LC2E followed by EGLS.

I'm certain they would have many, many questions about 9/11 truth after that, and you won't be considered quite the "conspiracy kook" any longer.

I've mentioned it before and repeat it again, Amy Goodman and Michael Moore are avoiding the 9/11 and focusing on the antiwar message. Is it good or bad I don't know..

But what frightened me recently on DemocracyNow was when top UK journalist and Iraq coverage specialist Robert Fisk mentioned that Zarkavi official story might be a hoax and presented some evidence for this as well that the US/UK is fueling some of the "sectarian" gang violence, Amy Goodman went quite ballistic over him so we have a prove she HAS A DELIBERATE STRATEGY TO AVOID AND SUPRESS THIS ISSUE..

"watch LC2E"

How about something more fact-based instead?

"followed by EGLS"

At the very least make it the other way around, LIHOP->MIHOP.

MIHOP is the only way 9/11 could have been guaranteed a success.i dont think this group would have risked a LIHOP failure.they had to make sure things went smoothly.that means MIHOP to me.

"I've mentioned it before and repeat it again, Amy Goodman and Michael Moore are avoiding the 9/11 and focusing on the antiwar message. Is it good or bad I don't know.."

Tonto, how could "avoiding 9/11 and focusing on the antiwar message" be good??? 9/11 is what made Afghanistan, Iraq, (Iran next?) possible. Not to mention the've gotten nowhere in their efforts. +250,000 dead & who knows how many maimed. Wake-up brother!

In addition to what you've said, I've noticed that Goodman has markedly toned down her criticism of Bush lately. She's either scared or a phony, I'm not sure which.

Able, what in which major ways is LC2E not based on facts?

what Able probably meant is that a lot of whats in LC2 is conjecture. some LC2 bashers would tell you it is filled with lies, but they confuse lies with speculation.like the phone calls for instance.not lies, just speculation.

Yes, Chris. But Able should realize that the crime scenes were off-limits to any outside investigations, and then the evidence was destroyed. This means that educated guesses or speculation is all we have to go by. (Also, the fact that the crime scenes & evidence were off- limits & illegally destoyed is, in & of itself, powerful evidence of a cover-up.)

i agree %100 Anonymous. thats why i dont get it when people get up in arms over LC2 going "too far" on some issues.somebody has to go there, the "official" report didnt even try.