Recent Daily Kos posts and responses highlight why 911 truth movement needs to change tactics
I've just read 2 recent posts on Daily Kos about 911. It appears they've been left standing as an example of what will happen to anyone who tries to raise the subject : ridicule, venom and tinfoil hat construction tips.
At the same time, this does show that 911 truth movement tactics now need to be overhauled if further progress is to be made.
I read in the Guardian recently that Loose Change is to be upgraded for cinema release. If this happens, it will sink the 911 truth movement. I'm not saying that it's deliberate disinformation and I'm not saying that anyone who disagrees with me is necessarily of that ilk either. However, whilst it may be commercially successful, it won't gain any converts and it will serve the same purpose for 911 deniers, that the dKos diaries have.
In contrast, 911pressfortruth features the Jersey Girls, who led the charge of victims' families and forced the evasive and lying Bush administration to hold the 911 commission. This is a ready-made and inspiring human interest story that could capture the imagination of the world. 911pressfortruth wisely avoids many of the controversial areas of the 911 story, which might be debunkable. I think it needs to be re-edited to exclude the Afghan-related material; to strengthen the JG narrative thread and to emphasise certain points so that they don't get lost in the detail.
The moment you start referring to PNAC or the cabal, you lose the mainstream. That's why the PNAC documents were put on the net; that's why they called themselves the cabal.
I'm calling for simplification, consolidation and rallying round the cause of the victims' families, whilst giving more extensive exposure to the basics, which are unanswerable.
Lastly, I apologise if I'm merely repeating what others have said before and for transgressing site etiquette if that's the case.
- nlight's blog
- Login to post comments
wrong.
wont gain any converts? i'll just copy and paste my message from another thread, as it seems to fit here as well:
ive heard many people say this. In Plane Site gets bashed more than Loose Change 2 around here, and yet ive found that it has opened more eyes than any other 9/11 video except for Loose Change 2. funny how that works out. obviously In Plane Site has some questionable info in it but that doesnt mean it hasnt opened many eyes. it most certaintly has. so fuck the micromanagers who get pissed whenever Pentagon questions or CD is put front and center. your arguments have no facts to back them up. the pentagon theories and CD theories have done more good for the movement than harm. that is an indisputable fact. yet some people still get all pissed when others lead with CD or the pentagon. anyone remember the Pentagon flash video and the huge impact it had before LC2E came out? think it would have had the same impact if it only focused on the ISI connection? USE ALL EVIDENCE. thats all my point is. im not talking CGI or mini nukes here, im no fool, i know what it would look like leading with that even if their was good evidence to back it up(there isnt in my opinion). the pentagon and CD theories are not on the same level as those things. the pentagon and CD theories have been proven to be effective in changing minds and opening eyes. thats why i find it so ridiculous when people around here get all bent out of shape when these things are mentioned.
and yeah, lets NOT mention PNAC, that makes perfect sense..............(huh? the one part of 9/11 that liberal gatekeepers are NOT afraid to speak about? you want us to ignore that?)
i agree..
I think we should be postitive about ANYONE that spends many many hours/days/weeks/months in the name of those that lost their lives on 911.
Yes LC2E may contain mistakes, or rather questions that have now been answered. But it was made in septemper 2005, that is a long period in this timescale.
For the final cut They have a lawyer, or something like that going over each sentance, triple checking things, and I really think they have taken on board the criticisms by fellow 911 investigators/truthers etc.
Even if it has stuff that isn't what everyone wants, the coverage it is gonna get, this will be BIG!
As soon as it gets seen at Cainnes I got a feeling europe will be buzzing, it may take a little longer to catch fire in US, but it will..
This can ONLY be a good thing, no one KNOWS what went on that day, so there shouldn't be internal censorship within the movement IMO.
the LC crew have my respect for what they have done; possibly made more people question the official line than any other video/group.
What are these "mistakes, or rather questions that have now
been answered" in LC that you allude to?
I wouldn't quite put it like that
Saying that a cinema release for LC3 will sink us is a bit much, especially before you've seen it, even if LC does have a few problems. Hopefully, the LC crew has been working hard and will produce a more factually sound film next time.
And I don't think calls for unity are going to get us anywhere - we are not unified and are never going to be. We need (a) activism to get the message out, (b) research to refine and develop the message, and (c) internal debate to clarify the issues. And I think that is what we are getting.
What are "problems" that you allude to in LC?
?
It's only a vocal minority
It's only a vocal minority of fascist assholes, and the owner of the site (who's more interested in his ad money and a number of other detestable things than growing some balls). We shouldn’t be appeasing a bunch of clowns on daily kos. We should though carry on with what we've been doing and improve by strengthening 9/11 Truth's credibility as an issue. And the way that's being done is through a focus on the more solid research while weeding out the "conspiracy theory" type stereotypical bullshit about "no planes" "space beams" etc.
And I would feel more hopeful about the Final Cut if I were you. I’ve heard that David Ray Griffin is helping to fact check and council them in the making of it.
Plus Markos could be covert CIA
He admits on tape to spending 6 months interviewing with them.
Yet another typical disinfo post to bash Loose Change & promote
Press for Truth is a video that does little or nothing to dispel the government's steadfast theory that fanatical Muslims perpetrated 9/11. It mainly proposes that the Bush regime is lying about 9/11 to cover their incompetent asses.
"I read in the Guardian recently that Loose Change is to be upgraded for cinema release. If this happens, it will sink the 911 truth movement."
Releasing the movie that opened the most people's eyes to 9/11 truth will sink the truth movement??? Only a lying shill would post b.s. like that here, you lying shill!!!
Furthermore, PNAC & their need for a "new Pear Harbor" is also great evidence that can easily be understood by most people.
I love the way LC & some other truth vids expose the Pentagon
fraud. The initial impact hole at the Pentagon is shown to be 16-feet in diameter! A Boeing 757 has a 125-foot wingspan! It has 2 huge engines of steel/titanium! How the hell could all this fit through a 16-foot hole??? It can't!!!
Why were the huge engines not recovered??? Where are the 250 seats??? The luggage??? How did they ID 63 of 64 of the plane's occupants if the plane was obliterated???
and the Pentagon was part of
and the Pentagon was part of a larger point i made. it pulls some people in, it causes some people to be exposed to the rest of the hard truths of 9/11. some people in the movement like Fenton scream about how the pentagon or CD theories "damage the movement" and even compare them to the CGI and mini nuke theories. this is completely unfair and ignores reality. the reality is that the pentagon and CD theories have been crucial in opening the eyes of millions worldwide. to leave these things out because they might sound "outlandish" in some way is ridiculous. this isnt CGI, this isnt "no-plane". Flight 77 not being at the Pentagon is not video fakery. if they produce a definitive video of Flight 77 hitting the Pentagon, i will expect people with better skills than me to analyze it but i will NOT scream that its a fake. they have yet to produce any video.
Explosive demolition
You wrote:
"some people in the movement like Fenton scream about how the pentagon or CD theories "damage the movement" and even compare them to the CGI and mini nuke theories."
When did I ever scream about explosive demolition, or compare it to CGI or mini-nukes?
You made that up. Shame on you.
no i didnt. just the other
no i didnt. just the other day i noticed you called people who question if Flight 77 hit the Pentagon, and i qoute, "no-planers". its obvious to me why you would choose those 2 words. i honestly dont remember which thread it was, but just ask most of the people who post here if i would make something like that up. shame on you, you certaintly wont fool me : ) plus, you work for Thompson right? he does great work but he refuses to theorize. thats fair and also smart in some circumstances(not all). but that also means that he doesnt do any work in the area of CD which in many peoples minds is a crucial part of 9/11.
Explosive demolition
You wrote:
"some people in the movement like Fenton scream about how the pentagon or CD theories "damage the movement" and even compare them to the CGI and mini nuke theories."
I said I didn't scream about explosive demolition - I am actually a supporter of ED, so you accusing me of being against it is completely bizarre.
You replied:
"Just the other day i noticed you called people who question if Flight 77 hit the Pentagon, and i qoute, "no-planers".
It is clear from your reply that you accused me of being against ED based on absolutely zip. Your argument is I think a jetliner hit the Pentagon, so I must be against ED - this holds no water. If you want to argue that a Boeing did not hit the Pentagon, you can. However, you should not mischaracterise my position on ED.
I was also surprised to learn we don't cover ED. For example:
10:28 a.m. September 11, 2001: Some Witnesses Hear Explosions as North Tower Collapses
Many witnesses hear explosions during the collapse of the north WTC tower. Some report hearing a single explosion:
bullet Reporter Mike Sheehan hears “another deafening explosion. I looked up and saw the top of the north tower, the mast, begin to fall.” [Gilbert et al., 2002, pp. 126]
* Fire Lieutenant William Wall: “[W]e heard an explosion. We looked up and the building was coming down right on top of us.” [City of New York, 12/10/2001]
* Firefighter Roy Chelsen: “All of a sudden we heard this huge explosion, and that’s when the tower started coming down.” [City of New York, 1/18/2002]
* EMT Jason Charles: “I heard a ground level explosion and I’m like holy shit, and then you heard that twisting metal wreckage again.” [City of New York, 1/23/2002]
* Firefighter Kevin Murray: “When the tower started—there was a big explosion that I heard and someone screamed that it was coming down.” [City of New York, 10/9/2001]
* Firefighter James Ippolito: “I heard an explosion and turned around and the building was coming down.” [City of New York, 12/13/2001]
* Fire Lieutenant Gregg Hansson: “[A] large explosion took place. In my estimation that was the tower coming down, but at that time I did not know what that was. I thought some type of bomb had gone off.” [City of New York, 10/9/2001]
* Firefighter Kevin Gorman: “I heard the explosion, looked up, and saw like three floors explode, saw the antenna coming down.” [City of New York, 1/9/2002] Others report hearing multiple explosions:
* EMT Gregg Brady: “I heard 3 loud explosions. I look up and the north tower is coming down now.” [City of New York, 11/1/2001]
* Firefighter Richard Carletti: “I remember seeing the antenna do a little rock back and forth and I could just hear the floors pancaking. I heard it for about 30 pancakes, just boom, boom, boom, boom.” [City of New York, 1/2/2002]
* Fire Lieutenant Michael Cahill: “That’s when the second collapse started to come down. All kinds of noise. Boom, boom, boom, boom, boom, very loud.” [City of New York, 10/17/2001]
* Firefighter Sal D’Agostino is actually inside the north tower, around its fourth floor, when the collapse occurs. He says, “It’s pancaking from the top down, and there were these huge explosions—I mean huge, gigantic explosions.” [Providence Journal, 9/11/2002; Dwyer and Flynn, 2005, pp. 241-242]
* Firefighter Bill Butler, who is with D’Agostino inside the tower, says, “It was like a train going two inches away from your head: bang-bang, bang-bang, bang-bang.” [Providence Journal, 9/11/2002]
* EMT David Timothy: “[Y]ou started hearing more explosions. I guess this is when the second tower started coming down.” [City of New York, 10/25/2001] CTV will later assert, “When eyewitnesses claim to have heard explosions prior to the collapse, those were just the sounds of a massive building contorting and crushing anything inside.” [CTV, 9/12/2006]
Entity Tags: James Ippolito, William Wall, David Timothy, Gregg Hansson, Mike Sheehan, Roy Chelsen, Kevin Gorman, Kevin Murray, Bill Butler, Michael Cahill, Sal D'Agostino, Richard Carletti, World Trade Center, Jason Charles, Gregg Brady
Category Tags: All Day of 9/11 Events, WTC Investigation
Link:
http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline.jsp?timeline=complete_911_ti...
i should have been more
i should have been more clear. saying he hasnt "done any work on CD" isnt exactly fair. though you certaintly wont find any of Jones work on his site. i noticed you didnt deny calling people who think something other than Flight 77 hit the pentagon "no-planers" though. is that fair Kevin?
ok then, i'll just ask. do
ok then, i'll just ask. do you think that the Pentagon and CD theories have been a net gain overall or do you think they have done more harm than good in spreading doubt about 9/11? thisis such an easy question with such an obvious answer, yet i suspect you will say "the media uses it against us!" or something along those lines. but dont let me answer for you. what do you think? more harm than good in spreading doubt about the official story of 9/11? you know where i stand, i feel tht ALL solid evidence should be put forward. CGI, mini nukes=not too solid. controlled demolition=pretty solid. pentagon questions=worth being raised. but thats just my opinion.(also i should add that the latest "craze" in Nico circles, the "space beams" or DEW theory should be placed alongside the CGI theories. its not fair to compare CD or pentagon theories to this either in my opinion. thats disingenuous as hell)
Pentagon no, ED hopefully
ED should be a net gain, especially with Jones and Ryan. If we can get the scientific community that supports NIST to actually read their damn report, quite a few of them should figure out it's based on a computer simulation that got tweaked, not actual evidence. We don't necessarily have to prove ED, we can just disprove NIST, which is much easier. There's also the small matter of the hundreds of people who died at the WTC. If we won, but didn't get the WTC, it would not be a complete win. Having said that, it does turn some people off. I don't see any way people like Jones, Ryan and Hoffman can turn round and ignore the WTC - it's what they do, they can't change.
I see no net gain from the Pentagon. For example there were only holes in 2 walls not six, the walls were made of masonry/limestone, not concrete (even Meyssan says masonry, I have no idea where the concrete came from), the eyewitnesses back a jetliner, there are actually quite a few photos of wreckage, etc.
Having said that, there are still plenty of questions we need to raise about American 77, like how did it hit HQ over an hour after the attacks started? Most ordinary people think the attacks were simultaneous, so they're gonna be surprised by this. There's also the small matter of Hani's flying skills, or lack thereof. And the military timelines that changed several times. And Pilots for Truth came up with some interesting stuff about the flight path.
However, even though I don't agree with the no-jetliner theory at the Pentagon, I don't think it is nuts like CGI or space beams. I differentiate between points I don't buy on a line from space beams (completely out there) to Fahad al-Quso being at the Malaysia meeting (plausible, but will probably not check out).
The way I see it, we need a big win on one topic to open up a hole to jam the rest of the stuff through, and we're most likely to get that from the "hunt" for Osama, the ISI, the two hijackers who should have been caught, or something like that right now.
"The media uses it against us" is a subsidiary issue. We gotta back what we think is right, though we could play around with the emphasis a bit.
"I see no net gain from the
"I see no net gain from the Pentagon."
i cant help you then Mr. Fenton. Loose Change is a video you critique quite frequently, yet in terms of ACTIVISM and not just being airtight it has been the single most effective activism tool for causing people to question 9/11. its heavy on the pentagon and CD. then, like i said theres the Pentagon Flash video. remember it? remember the numbers that thing put up when the movement was barely a movement and just a blip? it must have set records as far as flash videos go just like LC2E has set records. you dont see the value in that? in causing people to look closer? who cares if its an issue that makes you uncomfortable? its an issue that has "recruited" many.that CANT be denied. you are talking about a prosecutorial case in which we put forward ZERO speculation and only the available facts. this severely limits the scope and power of our activism. i cant help you if you fail to see the value in questioning what happened at the Pentagon. the proof is in the numbers. do a poll. ask around. you'll see just how effective the Pentagon issue has been. a big win on one topic? thats where you really lose me. we cant limit ourselves like that. we should press on all fronts. and i find it disturbing that some people are urging us to limit our activism and play it "safe" when the proof shows how effective the pentagon and CD have been. i for one will not only talk about the Pakistan(aka-the fall guy) connection. i will talk about CD, i will talk about the ISI, i will talk about Israel, i will talk about Saudi Arabia, i will talk about put options,i will talk about wargames, i will talk about warnings and executive orders and i will talk about the Pentagon. you stay in your narrow lane while i try and wake up as many people as i can.
Just a few points
I never said LC was all bad. It's done some really good things for the movement. However, the problems could come round and bite us on the ass. I don't know if it will turn out to be a net gain or a net loss. A lot rides on the final cut. Some people see it and are converted, some people see it, think it's bull and close their minds.
My opinion is that we need a multi-pronged approach. Some people can push ED, some people can push the problems with the air defence and some people can push the hijackers who should have been caught, etc. The problem now is that we are day-of heavy, so we need to communicate the non-physical evidence more and better.
There is stuff about Jones in the Timeline's WTC chapter.
I called people who think a cruise missile hit the Pentagon "no-planers". They do not think the Pentagon was hit by a plane, hence "no-planers".
You can call me Kevin.
who's afraid of the big bad kos?
Honestly... They have only ever registered like 60,000 users (and banned half of them, including me like three times) Their community judging by their most voted on poll is no more than around 15,000 people. Kos is former(?) military and beyond question a conscious gatekeeper. The site should be hammered with posts, yes, but aside from that there is nothing to worry about--we should not cite them in any way as some kind of example of how we need to change our tactics.
____
Real Truther a.k.a. Verdadero Verdadero
WTCdemolition.com - Harvard Task Force
We need to evolve our tactics and craft our message
We are in a different phase now so we need to become much more conscious of the audience we're pitching 9/11 Truth to.
For some people LC2 is just fine and I think that LCFC will be even better for the younger demographic. 9/11 PFT works better as an introduction to 9/11 Truth for older or more resistant demographics. For some people all you need to do is show them WTC 7 going down and they immediately discard the government myth. Adjust you message to match your audience.
We are now going after the middle third of the population and we need to craft our message and approach very carefully, both in person and online. Listen first and respond to their questions, draw your audience out, establish some common ground and thus credibility. Be patient.
Regarding DKos and other gatekeeping sites: if you're willing to take the time, go in quietly and slowly work them to the truth. Start with the environmental disaster in NYC. Get them hip to the dust and then get them to wonder how all that fine dust could've been created in the first place. Additionally, as other peripheral issues arise you can analyze them always keeping 9/11 Truth just in the background. Finally, I wouldn't worry about converting everyone online right now, most of those online that will come to the truth easily have already. Focus on people in your own community and engage with them one-on-one. Once you've helped someone realize 9/11 Truth we have another foot soldier for peace.
We are winning, brothers and sisters. Every day more people reject the government myth and want new investigations.
The truth shall set us free. Love is the only way forward.
Be well.