What we can do

After listening to Mr Tarpley, I again felt motivated to do something. This time, armed with the information about Brezinski's warning, and Putin's statement, I looked up on the internet the names and numbers of all the Senators and Representatives, and for two hours, called the offices of one after another, leaving my request for the opening of a House Panel (in the case of Rep's. of course) to call Brezinski before the House to explain why a new 9/11 scenario is "plausible" and what we can do to prevent it, ask that they pledge not to support using nuclear weapons in Iran, and that they ("pretty please") re-open the 9/11 investigation. I get the distinct impression, especailly when I am put on speaker-phone, that my words are not being written down for their delivery, but that this is a tactic designed to have me believe I am being heard.
I believe that I need to record these calls, so that it can be heard how a citizen is mistreated by the very people whose responsibilty I thought would be to care a great deal about the content of received phone calls from "the people". I am beginning to understand why people are staying away from the polling booth. When our elected Representatives ignore, in word and in deed, the collective opinion of the Americans they cynically claim to represent, what sense does it make to petition them? It is a practice in futility.
Each call has to be approached much like a salesperson making a cold-call. Mood and tone and choice-of-language decisions must be made instantaneously to determine approach. My goal in these calls is to leave my opinion. It is not to identify myself as anything other than a "tax-paying citizen", and to avoid whenever possible getting into a civics argument with one of the office staffers, as they often try goading as a tactic in preparation for summary riducule and dismissal. For example, at the end of one of my calls, after making my final request, that of re-opening the 9/11 investigation, one of these staffers challenged me, asking, "What exactly do you wnat investigated? What are you trying to find out?" I said that I would not be comfortable volunteering what information might be discovered in such an investigation, that that would be to assume "facts not in evidence", and that I would not conjecture as to what those facts might be. She again pushed me to come up with something specific, saying that there have already been investigations, and asking what more was there to find out. She was obviously spoiling for a fight, but I was not going to let her have one. I repeated to her that it was my request, and the reason for my call, to put these thoughts before the representative as my proxy in Congress, Assembled.
I do not believe that it ought to make any difference who I am for my opinion to have the merit of being heard, and considered prima facae (sp?). Citizen or no, opinions and ideas need no standing. This is not a court of law, subject to the dissouluting influence of rules of procedure and rules of evidence. If this is not redress, then how else and where else?
I will continue to make calls and will let you know how it goes, but I feel that I'm playing their game, and being at best, even if what I say gets through, but a drop in the ocean. There must be something else, something with more theatrics to draw a crowd, to approach with the demeanor of one who cannot be assailed or intimidated, not be called out or have the tables turned upon them, costumed in impeccible respectability, but FILMED or RECORDED. We must save our Republic, it has so much promise for mankind as an example of the possibility of self-rule, instead of flocking to a tyrant, munificent or despotic, benign or dangerous.
How else can I help this along? What else can I help with?

Thanks for your activism!!

If more people took the initiative like you are doing, we would be further along in exposing 911 Truth and ousting this corrupt regime!!

Monday, August 20th, Converting the Opposition

I realize that part of my work on this planet involves not only spreading the word to anyone who will listen, but to hopefully convert them into a more critically-thinking human being. I have been speaking with a "Republican" friend of mine for some years, and through our continued association, find myself understanding why he believes what he does: As he has some interest in politics, and can carry on a rational discourse, we have spent many hours revealing our opinions with our reasoning and citing examples. We are both careful to keep seperate the realm of facts, and our own conjecture, which makes for some very fine discussions, indeed. As Cheney and others have pointed out, 9/11 has provided tremendous opportunities. Though it was certainly planned for and developed by the para-nazi "patriots" workng at the behest and for the profit of their monied-interests, it is not the possibilites for war that I speak of here. The possibilities I speak of are those which the US government conspiracy theory, with all its holes and inconsistancies and secrecy, provides as the basis, the proof, for the total lack of credibility and therefore legitamcy of this particular group of the monied interests' front-men -- cum -- politicians and opinion-makers, and by direct association, the monied interests that they front. Knowing that these front-men are merely the public face of enterprises that are as old as civilization, begun when one man, or by agreement, a group of men, first set to impose illegitimate rule over other men (and women and children), justifying the usurpation in whatever language proved effective, and continued until its effectiveness wore out only to have at the ready some new justification for that which has no justification... My goal is therefore to get him to indentify his real interests, apart from the labels he once vigorously - but lately with less certainty (he's getting it!) - applied to himself, complete with all of the opinions that he thereby inherits (and so must justify, or else be unable to sustain) by identifying himself as, in this case, a "conservative Republican". I show him how, as a pattern and as a practice, his interests are not reflected by either political party, and historically speaking, never has been. That, no matter what the spokes-people say, the facts and the history tell a very different story, if you will but look at it. My task, through kind, patient, supportive and gentle questioning, is to find enough points upon which we both agree, so that he sees that we really aren't that different (because we really aren't) and through our friendship. have him trust me enough to drop his defences enough to let some time for thought clear the mist, to break apart the terms of the pundits and policy-makers, look at the facts, and being now more enligjhtened, re-think what he now knows. If he still holds on to what are clearly arguments unsupported by logic or the evidence, then I haven't done my job. Somewhere in the argument, I've lost him, and we have to go back there, and find out what that is. Mostly, I listend to what he's saying, and am thinking what motivation is behind what he says. Usually, it is some kind of fear, or some kind of frustration, and usually pulled directly from the latest "terror" or headline controversy.
What I eventually wish to do, is to show him that he is indeed a "conservative", but that "conservatism" is, strictly speaking, not what today's "conservatives" preach or practice. That much is being done in the name of being either "liberal" or "Conservative" that are demonstrably counter to his own and his neighbors' interests, and to the interests of the Republic, and its democratic Constitutional structure. Politicians, no matter what they call themselves, are only front-men, and that apart from the fact that it is all a sham in place to keep the masses in line, that the real split in opinion in this country is not between he and I, or the so-called Republicans or Democrats, or even the Liberal and Conservatives, but between what the vast majority of what the American people want, and what "their" government is doing. If we had a "Free Press", that's what would be in the headlines. I am not being disengenuous with him, either. He and I DO agree on most of the basics, on the greater moral and ethical questions, and I am very conservative when it come to the illegitimacy of those who would disregard the Constitution's Bill of Rights, or otherwise restict my "inalienable right" to life liberty and my pursuit of happiness. But neither he nor I were taught to be quzzical at school, taught to think critically. In fact, from my own schooling, I remember how the ridcule and otracization cowed me into keeping my hand down and my answers to myself. Many of those who raise criticism of the dulling effects of the media call attention to only a contributing factor. What is instilled in school bears closer resemblence to indoctrination than educating the "ignorant herd" to think critically. When we do not know our history, we do not see the similarities, and realize that the same arguments are trotted out, century after century, by the spokesmen of the powerful of every Nation, all of it nonsense and all of it tried before. To an uneducated people, these events come as a surprise. An educated people would immediately see the parallels that are obvious to any thinking 12-year-old, and would treat any and all government pronouncments with a critical eye bordering on scorn. Am I mistaken that earlier in even our own early-American history, that the people were quite distrustful of any government, or is this just one of the many things I have come to find were merely myth.
I find, therefore, that much of the time that he and I spend discussing these issues, I have to give him history lessons as well. This is not the case with all of those I speak with, but it is with many. But my friend, like most everyone else I speak with, is no idiot. He thinks the way he does because he doesn't know any differently. Once he knows, my job is done, and from there, it is his decision to believe what he likes. That won't stop me from trying to convince him otherwise, but that is only because he is my friend, and I care about my friends.