Storytelling is the Key to 9/11 Truth

Trial lawyers know that cases are won largely by the use of human stories and emotions, and not logic. Specifically, MOST people are swayed by emotion, and trials have to be argued with emotion and storytelling (logic also has to be used, especially to reach the minority of jurors who decide based strictly upon logic). All of the leading books on trial strategy say this.

That's also why so many articles in newspapers start out with a human story, before moving on to the facts: most readers will get turned off early in the article if it doesn't start with a personal, "human interest" story.

Psychologists who study how people make decisions say the same thing. For example, a recent article by a political psychologist (which is naive and wrong about Democrats being the good guys and other issues, but does get the basic psychology right) states:

If you appeal primarily to people's reason without first getting them to feel the significance of the issue you're talking about, they're not going to be interested. From an evolutionary standpoint, our emotions play two major roles. One, our emotions appear to capture our attention, so if you don't make emotionally compelling arguments, if you don't use stories or examples to grab listeners, they won't hear important things you have to say. The other role of emotion, which is probably most crucial, is that emotions motivate us -- positive feelings pull us towards things that are generally good for us, and negative emotions move us away from things that are generally bad for us. They're not flawless, by any means, and that's why reason is so helpful to help us tell the difference between a false smile and a real smile, or between a plan that makes sense and a plan that doesn't.

Logic is crucial in fighting for 9/11 truth and justice. Unless we stick with the most provable facts, the most credible speakers, and the most plausible theories, we'll be discredited.

But without emotion, we'll also lose . . .

We have to learn, in addition to using rigorous logic, to tell human stories about:

- High-level military leaders being furious at the deceptions by the current government

- People's fear of terrorism, and the real way to protect them

- Specific people being manipulated by false flag terror (for example, the Italians manipulated by the U.S. and NATO's Operation Gladio, or the Germans being manipulated by the Gleiwitz incident)

- Heroic, dying first responders being ignored by the government

- Grieving family member

- Loss of freedom

- The danger to our children of further false flag terrorism, fascism, and repression

- Other important themes which are emotional and thematic, as well as being true

We all have to learn how to become better storytellers (and at the same time, we have stick to only the most credible facts). Only if we do that will we win the battle for 9/11 truth and justice.

I believe that filmmakers like the Loose Change guys, We Are Change, and others are effective largely because they are good storytellers. The same is true of the artists who create effective visuals to help spread 9/11 truth. Storytelling is not just a verbal thing; it can be visual as well (indeed, top trial lawyers use sophisticated multimedia presentations to tell their story to the jury).

And some speakers already have world-class communication skills, such as David Ray Griffin, Alex Jones and Dr. Steven Jones. These people are so effective at communicating that they might not need to worry about the issues raised in this essay. But for the rest of us, the millions of 9/11 truth activists who are not exceptional communicators, focusing on the emotional stories and themes as well as credible facts is crucial.

Of course, some speakers can be as intellectual as they like: if they are a highly-credentialed expert, then their resumes speak so well for them that emotional intelligence (what has been called "EQ") is not so important.

Finally, psychological studies reveal an important sidenote to this discussion. Specifically, because of the way the brain works, false statements made early and often tend to be believed. And new studies reveal that attempts to debunk the false statements with facts actually tend to reinforce the myths in people's minds.

As summarized in an article in the Washington Post:

The psychological insights yielded by the research, which has been confirmed in a number of peer-reviewed laboratory experiments, have broad implications for public policy. The conventional response to myths and urban legends is to counter bad information with accurate information. But the new psychological studies show that denials and clarifications, for all their intuitive appeal, can paradoxically contribute to the resiliency of popular myths.

This phenomenon may help explain why large numbers of Americans incorrectly think that Saddam Hussein was directly involved in planning the Sept 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, and that most of the Sept. 11 hijackers were Iraqi. While these beliefs likely arose because Bush administration officials have repeatedly tried to connect Iraq with Sept. 11, the experiments suggest that intelligence reports and other efforts to debunk this account may in fact help keep it alive.

The Post concludes that the studies show that "rather than deny a false claim, it is better to make a completely new assertion that makes no reference to the original myth".

Therefore, starting the discussion with a personal and human story about the Italian people who were deceived by the false flag operation known as Operation Gladio, or the German people who were deceived into supporting an invasion of Poland based upon the Gleiwitz false flag attack or by giving power to Hitler by the Reichstag fire may have the additional benefit of planting a new concept in people's minds -- the secret use of false flag terrorism by Western governments -- rather than reinforce false ideas they may have about 9/11 being solely carried out by Islamic terrorists.

Further thinking needs to be done about these emotional issues, and psychologists, social scientists, marketing experts and trial lawyers within the 9/11 truth movement have to recommend the best way to promote 9/11 truth based upon these concepts.


Great post, and the sticky on the front has been really key for this site to have during this important time, a real departure from the past and due to a lot of work on your part -- thanks. This is part of what I mean when I talk about working in parallel but together. Some of us are in tune with ours and others' emotions, and many are not (which is why we are able to look at human remains exploding into the air day after day!!). To move forward we need all of us. Thanks also for teaching the emotional part, not just saying it.

House for Everyone

House For Everyone *

My bed is made of candy-floss
The house is made of cheese
It's lit by lots of glowworms
If I'm wrong correct me please

The village is a pop-up book
The people wooden dolls
The roads are made from treacle
Think it's time that I moved on

My boat is half a walnut shell
The journey will be long
So I filled the hull with pepper-mints
And creamy pink melange

I sailed away for fifteen days
It never once got dark
And came upon two large houses
Set out in a park

On the door of one was truth
On the other door was lies
Which one should I enter through?
I really must decide

The door marked lies had lots of flowers
Growing 'round outside
But looking close, I noticed
It was crumbling inside

The door marked truth was very plain
But stood up very strong
And when I entered through its door
I know I wasn't wrong

Other aspects of "stories"

One thing about 9/11 is that the myth was implanted in the first hours after the attacks. There was already a script ready to promulgate. When people are stunned, outraged and especially frightened they are more susceptible to suggestion. The perpetrators knew this well. This is why I took the time to go through some of the video archives from the day. Unfortunately I don't have access to all of my notes(thank you very much Vic).
Part of my objective was to determine how people had been manipulated and how the myth was imprinted. Another objective, of course, was to determine who was seeding the myth. Both of these sets of facts can be useful in breaking the spell. If you can show people how they were manipulated, it is possible that will plant the essential seeds of doubt. One of the things which keeps these deceptions in place is the fact that people are merely reacting emotionally. If you have them review the events as they were exposed to them, and at the point where the myth was introduced, "stop the tape", and ask them to think about what's happening, it will help them put things in a rational perspective.

Here is one short example of the kind of thing I'm talking about:

Also, personalizing the alleged hijackers should help people think more objectively. The interviews with Atta's girlfriend are useful to that end. But also, get people to think about who the alleged hijackers really were in terms of people with families families, who had childhoods, etc. As it stands, they are 2-D cardboard caricatures. Ask why nobody tried to contact their families to get DNA samples, etc. Weren't they human?

A bit more detached of an exercise is to try to get people to think about the actual piloting skills needed to perpetrate the attacks. If they have experience piloting a motorboat or diving on snow, ask them how easy it would be to hit something going 50 miles an hour while turning sharply. Then ask them how easy something like that would be in 3 dimension. Point out that they were lousy pilots who had never touched the controls for the kinds of plane they allegedly flew like flying aces.

I refuse to condone the view that it's better to maintain the myth of Islamakazi hijackers because it has more appeal than the idea that the planes were under remote control. That lie is utterly offensive to me. Ah, but there's that problem, (you know the one Vic. The one without which there is no "We have some planes").

Mentioning the Amanda Keller interview raises the issue that it is often easier to persuade someone if you have a living, speaking eyewitness right in front of them, even if it's only video. Reading something in print is usually far less persuasive, especially for challenging well established beliefs, and even more so if the beliefs have a significant emotional component. (Check your email, Vic, and watch the video).

I believe this is a very good presentation:
Part of the problem is to get people to stop long enough to pay attention. I had another strategy but was never able to see it through.

Speaking of stories and myths: και γνωσεσθε την αληθειαν και η αληθεια ελευθερωσει υμας

Pindar, Olympian Ode 11. 6 ff (trans. Conway) (Greek lyric C5th B.C.) :
"Ah Moisa (Muse), I beg you, and Alatheia (Truth) daughter of Zeus, with your right hand upraised shield me from this reproach of a pledge broken and a friend’s dues dishonoured."

Pindar, Fragment 205 (trans. Sandys) (Greek lyric C5th B.C.) :
"Alatheia (Truth), who art the beginning of great virtue, keep my good-faith from stumbling against rough falsehood."

Bacchylides, Fragment 57 (trans. Campbell, Vol. Greek Lyric IV) (Greek lyric C5th B.C.) :
"Alatheia (Truth) is from the same city as the gods; she alone lives with the gods."

Aesop, Fables 531 (from Babrius 126) (trans. Gibbs) (Greek fable C6th B.C.) :
"A man was journeying in the wilderness and he found Veritas/Aletheia (Truth) standing there all alone. He said to her, `Ancient lady, why do you dwell here in the wilderness, leaving the city behind?' From the great depths of her wisdom, Veritas (Truth) replied, `Among the people of old, lies were found among only a few, but now they have spread throughout all of human society!"

Aesop, Fables 530 (from Phaedrus Appendix 5) :
"Prometheus, that potter who gave shape to our new generation, decided one day to sculpt the form of Veritas (Truth) [Aletheia], using all his skill so that she would be able to regulate people's behaviour. As he was working, an unexpected summons from mighty Jupiter [Zeus] called him away. Prometheus left cunning Dolus (Trickery) in charge of his workshop, Dolus had recently become one of the god's apprentices. Fired by ambition, Dolus (Trickery) used the time at his disposal to fashion with his sly fingers a figure of the same size and appearance as Veritas (Truth) [Aletheia] with identical features. When he had almost completed the piece, which was truly remarkable, he ran out of clay to use for her feet. The master returned, so Dolus (Trickery) quickly sat down in his seat, quaking with fear. Prometheus was amazed at the similarity of the two statues and wanted it to seem as if all the credit were due to his own skill. Therefore, he put both statues in the kiln and when they had been thoroughly baked, he infused them both with life: sacred Veritas (Truth) walked with measured steps, while her unfinished twin stood stuck in her tracks. That forgery, that product of subterfuge, thus acquired the name of Mendacium (Falsehood) [Pseudologos], and I readily agree with people who say that she has no feet: every once in a while something that is false can start off successfully, but with time Veritas (Truth) is sure to prevail."

Remember the Maine!

Peace Ideas

People would be more willing and less fearful of adopting the views of 9/11 Truth activists if they felt they were calling for forgiveness rather than retribution and punishment.

The peace movement should call for granting amnesty from prosecution and guarantee of an ample, lifetime pension to anyone who agrees to testify on their roles in the events of 9/11, extending this offer to any members of the US government, foreign governments and/or terrorist groups involved in the planning or execution of the attacks of that day.

Additionally, individuals should step forward and volunteer to spend time working with those who give testimony on crimes they have committed so that they might be reintegrated into society.

Instead of executing Nazi war criminals we should have devoted all the human resources available to us to rehabilitating them, awakening in them awareness of the nature of their actions so that they could have come to understand that they must make amends. If they had remained alive they would have been a living testament to the transformative powers of forgiveness.

Historians and psychologists especially should come out in favor of preserving invaluable study material in the form of the opportunity to converse with the authors of unfortunate historical deeds.

A declaration of willingness to forgive would force the government's hand. If it were to arrest or make attempts to discredit someone calling for 911 truth plus forgiveness, that would be a tacit acknowledgement by the government of its complicity in the 9/11 attacks. Imagine the impact of footage on YouTube of police arresting demonstrators carrying signs reading: "I forgive you George Bush for 9/11". Perhaps even the passively complicit mainstream media could be convinced to show someone carrying a sign calling for amnesty for the perpetrators of 9/11.

If we consider ourselves morally superior to the government, we should propose actions and attitudes that are more humanitarian with respect to them than their actions have been with respect to us.

I strongly suspect that the white apartheid government in South Africa did not agree to fair elections until assured that they would not be executed or imprisoned by the black majority government when it came to power.

In "The Art of War", Sun Tzu said never to surround an enemy. If you do not leave him an out, he will fight to the last man

Finally, these ideas do not depend on the media for their dissemination. If you can convince six friends of the merit of these ideas and get them to tell six of their own friends tomorrow, each of whom tells six of their friends the next day, and so on, then the ideas will reach every person in the world in two weeks by word of mouth alone (do the math).

(to see an interesting discussion of these ideas, please see

Show "9/11 is a little lie of history" by Epimanes

Holocaust denial

has no place in this forum.

As far as I can tell, you are suggesting the Nuremberg Trials (the link you provide) are a big lie.

Please correct me if I am wrong.

Some form of amnesty needs to be on the table

It is certainly true that without some form of amnesty the truth will be much harder to get to. Fear of reprisal will certainly keep those who might spill some of the beans from doing so.

Prosecutors routinely use carrots like reduction in sentences, promises of parole etc. to induce those involved in a crime to testify against those who aren't willing to admit their part in the crime.

The problem right now is who are these few who might come forward going to trust. I think they can go to some of the well known people in the movement such as Professor Steven Jones and others and then to a District Attorney.

Additionally, 911 was probably pulled off by very seasoned operatives with big time political power and connections. It won't be easy getting these people to talk.

I think we are still in a mode where educating the majority of the populace is necessary and especially the fireman and police all over this country. Once the majority of them know and this administration's credibility and thus power is totally destroyed, it will be easier to possibly get someone to talk.

Individuals who were

Individuals who were involved in these crimes are beyond "rehabilitation". Rehab can work for certain situations; however, I do not think this is one of them. Humans just as animals have special periods where they can be imprinted (hard wired) to perform certain behaviors. Many pedophiles were sexually and physically abused as children. Serial killers are beyond rehabilitation. The people near the top who planned and executed 9/11 are more dangerous sociopaths than serial killers. It is kind and benevolent to think of rehabilitating them; however, they are in most if not ALL cases going to be hardwired to express certain thoughts and emotions. Serial killers can not be made to feel empathy nor can these 'advanced sociopaths'. Advanced sociopaths are more dangerous to a free and just society than serial killers could ever be and the best option, in my opinion, is to execute them. Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot, and Bush are NOT about to be rehabilitated.

A declaration of forgiveness would be seen as a sign of weakness from those in government behind 9/11. You ARE NOT dealing with the average person here. You are dealing with advanced sociopaths. If they were to ask for forgiveness and repent you would find out their lack of rehabilitation when they stab you in the back or torture you for the weakness they perceive in you.

Again Rehabilitation WILL NOT work in this context! They consider morals a weakness. Stop thinking from your own perspective and try to think from theirs. Look at their actions and words and you can get an idea of where they are coming from.

"... In questions of science, the authority of a thousand is not worth the humble reasoning of a single individual." (Galileo Galilei, 1564 - 1642)

Best short history of Nazis

For story in a capsule, go here:

Then hit Goebels and Himmler in the same short article.

The more concise the story telling, the better.


is this person allowed to post this garbage on 911blogger?

Take this shit somewhere else, disinfo clown.


To stay off topic :
yeah, shut up you subversive dissident !!
zionists had ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with 9-11, PNAC, AEI etc etc .
they only wanted to "document the events"
and if we stay away from it we will get to the bottom of this mess ......

and back on topic : does anybody have an idea to how we can spin the truth
so it touches peoples emotions without making them sick ?
I know from my own experience that it was sickening
to have to accept all the facts that point to an "inside"-job .
I'm quite certain that the "emotionally driven" will refuse all logic or fact-based arguments
as these people tend to want to hold on to their little cozy dream about how the World really works ..
"Listen carefully now : DO NOT DESTROY OIL-WELLS" Dubya

When it comes to HOW we advocate 9/11 Truth is ALL on topic

And anti-Zionism(Israeli imperialism)IS NOT the same as anti-semitism/Holocaust denial. Learn to make the distinction.

Victronix's Good 9/11 Activist Guidelines

1-Protect alliances

2-Treat ALL with respect - including military, government, journalists, etc.

3-Call out and separate from those who abuse others

4-Call out and separate from those who protect transparent baseless claims (nukes,DEW, etc)

5-Allow strong civil debate and critique to guide us to the scientific truths

6-Reject "Big Tent" (pairing of baseless claims with strong evidence)

7-Reject efforts to pair leaders on stage with UFOs, Fetzer, DEW, "no planes," etc

8-Reject all forms of racism

9-Reject efforts to mix holocaust discussions with 9/11/01

10-Keep speculation in our own forums, reject those who put it on FOX News, YouTube, etc.

Impeachment. Accountability. A better world.

Excellent question, sim

Maybe time to take it to the mods?
Impeachment. Accountability. A better world.

9/11 Truth "Elevator Speech"

...IMO, we all should strive to boil down our message, when encountering the "unaware", to a short, succinct and compelling one, one that can grab people's attention and stimulate the desire to find out more on their own. I believe that it should include a mix of facts and questions. One caller in to Alex Jones yesterday said he has had some luck by asking people to recite their interpretation of the OCT.....that upon doing so, many are struck by the ridiculousness of it....and then one can delve further into the topic from there.

As Alex says, there is so much evidence that it is like trying to "drink from a firehose" when discussing this topic. It's important not to overwhelm the uninitiated with too much, too soon. They won't accept it, without looking into the evidence themselves.

Refining our message is something we should all be working on, continually.

9/11 Truth ends the 9/11 Wars

One sentence that is succinct:

Pancake collapses do not happen at free fall speed.

Especially following the path of greatest resistance. Physics would predict the top to bend and fall to the ground.

Fires cannot bring down steel buildings in one hour.

Pancake collapses and fires cannot pulverize concrete in mid air.

Pancake collapses and fires cannot eject tons of steel horizontally 500 ft.

Pancake collapses and fires cannot produce huge explosions at the top and bottom as reported by First Responders and news reporters before the onset of destruction.

Pancake collapses and fires cannot give stand down orders to air defenses.

Trying my best to wake people up who are pretending to be asleep.

Hot fires always blow out

Hot fires always blow out windows. Since the windows on WTC 1, 2, and 7 were not blown out prior to their pulverizations, the fires burning inside them were not that hot.

JFK on secrecy and the press

Very good post. One example

Very good post.

One example of a balanced and convincing mix of reason and emotion is Bob Bowman's recent open letter: "Duty, Honor, Country 2007."

We surely have to use both reason and emotion in our arguments. As I see it, the main block for most people is emotional/psychological--at very deep levels they sense that they will be lost if they accept the weakness of the "official story." You can see this deep emotional reaction in almost every piece that defends the OCT; Garcia's recent bs on Dissident Voice, Ridgeway's piece on Mother Jones, Cockburn's hysterical shrieking, etc. These types always do two things--attack the person or idea and/or defend the OCT against a very selective group of what they call "myths."

In politics, it is essential that any person or movement "define the issue." For most people, 9/11 is still being defined by the gov't through the OCT. Our main goal must be, therefore, to redefine the issue. I believe the most effective redefinition should have two parts: 1) demonstrate that the OCT is a very weak theory and 2) say that therefore we need a new investigation. This is a clear and logical next step and it provides a bit of safe ground upon which people can begin to get past the cognitive dissonance stage of awakening. It also provides a clear course of action. Whether we believe that this course of action will actually produce the desired effects or not should not matter all that much because right now it is more important to get people past the OCT than it is to provide them with a complete solution to the problem.

To seize the "definition of the issue," we should use any ethical means that work. I believe that the psychological core of 9/11 is the image of the Towers pulverizing. This is the central hypnotic image that reduced the American public to a mass trance state. No one can fully get free of that trance state until they have understood how and why that image hypnotized them and how that trance state has affected their judgment from then on.

So we have hooks--emotion, story telling, humor, anything that works to gain an audience's attention. We have a deep logical position--the OCT a bad theory because it has not met it's burden of proof or explained all of the evidence. We have a reasonable course of action--a new investigation now.

I think some sense of this short outline should be in our minds whenever we discuss or write about 9/11. We will win by repeating these truths many times and by each us of convincing a few more people every day.

I agree with altruist's post above: "...we all should strive to boil down our message, when encountering the "unaware", to a short, succinct and compelling one, one that can grab people's attention and stimulate the desire to find out more on their own."

JFK on secrecy and the press

Storytelling is Key

I agree - I think storytelling can be the most powerful form to spread the 9/11 truth message.

Have you heard of The American Truth? It's a book that puts the 9/11 Truth issues into a novel - it's very engaging, and it helps to put 9/11 truth in a concrete narrative that's easy to understand, as opposed to long, abstract discussions on logistics and theories.

You can read The American Truth at:

I've greatly expanded this essay.

Please take another look.

Some counterpoints

I agree with GW and his essay, but some of the comments should be addressed.

1) "Amnesty" is not "on the table" and it wouldn't work anyway. If the buildings were brought down by controlled demolition then it was the Israeli agents working out of Urban Moving Systems who wired the charges. They are never, ever, going to respond to US law and legal tactics. To admit any part in the plot by Israel could very well be the END OF ISRAEL. Silence is insured. The silence of the congress is insured. The silence of the heavily Zionist influenced (totally controlled?) US corporate media is insured. Everyone who disagrees is demonized as "antisemitic" and the war crimes roll on.

2) "demonstrate that the OCT is a very weak theory"

The OCT is NOT a very weak theory. That is why it has lasted so long and been such a monumental burden to counter.

1. Project Bojinka existed, this exact scenario.
2. Suicide bombers exist.
3. Some number of patsies and/or hijackers existed in the USA -- for what reason were they studying flying?
4. Osama bin Laden was a real person who declared war on the USA in 1998. Proving he is not genuine, or not an independent actor, is quite difficult, given that nobody in this country even speaks Arabic!
5. The massive weight of the US government and the corportate tightly controlled media have brainwashed the masses without stop since that day.
6. We have a lot of criticisms that aren't solid proof but instead are likelihoods. A likelihood is filtered through the biases and perceptions of the person considering it. In that regard, we are at a disadvantage compared to the corporate elites in telling people what is most likely.
6. We have been discounted, discredited, attacked and had our credibility challenged at every turn in a massive disinformation war that tries to hook people on pods, space beams, tv fakery and soon UFO's.

Now, I'm all for challenging the official story, but it's not implausible. It's highly plausible. They MADE IT SO. We are at a disadvantage there, and should recognize it.

I still, to this day, cannot say if actual hijackers rammed those planes, or if they were electronically hijacked in their auto pilot computers. I don't think this one may ever be answered.

Regarding Atta's purported inexperience flying -- Amanda Keller said he had a number of pilot's licenses from other countries. If he was a covert drug smuggler, then those guys tend to be very capable pilots, who can land on tiny dirt runways in the jungle. Hopsicker also reported that Atta's father was in the Muslim Brotherhood. And that the father was giving orders at a pharmacy when sending a fax from Florida.

Muslim Brotherhood has known CIA infiltration. It's also highly radical and a militant Islamic group. So what is the truth there?

I don't know.

Neither do you.

If you can prove it, then do so, using all the evidence.

70 Disturbing Facts About 9/11

John Doraemi publishes Crimes of the State Blog

johndoraemi --at--

I think this needs a bit of

I think this needs a bit of refinement.

The OCT is a convincing story, for the reasons given by GW. It is a weak theory because it either fails to explain or is contradicted by a great deal of evidence.

There are plenty of facts that show this, so no need to list them here. The difficulty is getting people to look at them. This is because the OCT story came out first and was seized upon by a public that needed an explanation right away. The same basic plot was used in the JFK assassination--the story came out right away and then it became difficult to get people to think critically about it.

Today, some 70+% of Americans believe that JFK was killed by others instead of or in addition to Oswald. It took a long time for people to get to that stage of understanding. The 9/11 OCT has many weaknesses and many of them resemble the Oswald story. The difference today is that we have the internet.

It's true that people tend to stick to the first plausible story they hear, but it is also true that when they repeatedly hear counter information, they begin to think about it and begin to form different conclusions. 9/11 happened six years ago. It took the JFK story 25 years (rough guess) to be as deeply questioned as 9/11 is today. So we are making progress. What we have to do is keep getting the info out, keep making people question the OCT by looking at the evidence.

It's good to have some people claiming "inside job" or "Bush did it," but it is also important that the main thrust of the movement be directed toward deconstructing the OCT. Whenever we get too far into saying what we think happened or who did it, we become vulnerable to someone questioning us, and since the OCT is still the main story-line, this results in people going back to sleep again.

JFK on secrecy and the press

"To admit any part in the

"To admit any part in the plot by Israel could very well be the END OF ISRAEL."

It may well be that many officials/journalists/celebrities (Maher?) who are aware of the evidence BELIEVE this, and censor/self-censor for this reason. If so, they must be assured that this is not an inevitable consequence of the 9/11 revelation. The role of the Mossad need no more doom the state of Israel or the Jewish people than the role of the CIA or DoD black ops dooms the USA or US Christians. On the contrary, only exposure of these deeds and their motivations, while painful, can allow healing and a restoration of trust.

“On the altar of God, I swear eternal hostility against all forms of tyranny over the mind of man."--Thomas Jefferson

I've been saying this for months

As we know in Psychology repetition helps to ingrain an idea. The technique of employing straight factual arguments w/o emotion laden content is the "central route" of persuasion. This is most effective with a minority of the population (wouldn't it be nice if it was effective with the majority?). When using emotion laden content the persuader is employing the "peripheral route" of persuasion. This works with most people which is why false flags work so well against populations. Incite fear and guide the herds where you want them to go.

The best technique for persuading the masses will be to invoke emotions. This is going to work better on issues that are salient to the individual. Let's think anger and fear. If the masses are informed that they are being taken advantage of by the ruling class because the ruling class thinks they are stupid, it's going to piss them off. One should find and use quotes from members of the ruling class to invoke this anger AT the ruling class. For example, Henry Kissinger comes to mind. He was going to be the head of the 9/11 commission. He is on the record as stating that, "...military men are just a bunch of stupid animals to be used as pawns..." Zbiggy Brezinski also comes to mind " is an opiate for the masses...". Find quotes from the ruling class about the working class and tell them to people (cite the references). In terms of fear, we don't want to fear monger as the ruling class has been doing. Humans can be scared to the point of losing all hope and they will literally become paralyzed and lose control of their bodily functions. However, if the population does not have any fear AT ALL of the ruling class the situation is just as bad. In this instance the population would be like the doe-doe bird which had no clue that it should avoid humans and it became extinct. So, people need to be told of previously documented acts of terror on the part of the ruling class such as project Gladio, Ajax, the overthrow of Mossagdh, etc. This will help them to see the pattern of terror and open their minds up to 9/11. 9/11 facts without historical context are more readily dismissed by individuals.

Feel out people when you engage them. Practice making eye contact to see how they are responding and listen carefully to their responses. This will give you information regarding their current stance. If people seem open-minded to what you are saying go with the central route. If people are being defensive about 9/11 issues start dropping quotes on them from the ruling class. No one likes to have smack talked about them. This should open them up.

We should compile a list of insults from the ruling class here for use in pamphleteering and discussions.

"... In questions of science, the authority of a thousand is not worth the humble reasoning of a single individual." (Galileo Galilei, 1564 - 1642)

I agree. Here is another

I agree. Here is another story you can copy and modify:

The corrupt and violent Bush-Cheney mafia reached power by conspiring with Jeb Bush against Al Gore in Florida in 2000, and in 2004 they stayed in power thanks to corporations close to them, that sold and controlled electronic voting machines. They helped their rich oil buddies and military-industrial complex accomplices make hundreds of billions more, trillions by counting Iraq's oil reserves. A violent mafia (2 wars, preparing a 3rd one) at the helm of the US could have engineered a 9/11...for thousands of years, men have proven that they are capable of anything to extend their power and riches.
I wondered if 9/11 was an inside job, and I was finally swayed by some unforgettable, very annoying facts: on 9/9, Bush was examining the plans for the invasion of Afghanistan. On 9/10, Rumsfeld announced that more than 2 trillion dollars were unaccounted for at the Pentagon (he could have announced it long before). On 9/11, flight 77 hits the Pentagon exactly at the location of the computer files which should have been examined to find out who where the people and corporations guilty of what constitutes the hugest hold-up in History. Flight 77 totally deviated from its flight path to hit that precise location, the manoeuvre took several minutes over Washington, as if they knew that the missiles or fighters from the 3 military bases that could have shot that plane at any time would not. A few hours later, WTC7 collapsed, destroying the accounting files of thousands of companies under investigation for fraud by the SEC, to the relief of many friends of the Bush-Cheney administration, who did not want to end up in court/jail like the big shots from Enron and Worldcom.
The mark of a mafia is all over 9/11. Anyway, weeks after 9/11, Bin Laden, in an interview to a Pakistani newspaper, said that it was not muslim to kill so many innocents. If he had really planned 9/11 for years, he would also have prepared a memorable video to be released on 9/11 as well, to make the World listen to his words. But no, he said nothing on 9/11. Nothing on 9/12. Nothing on 9/13...But it gets stranger: Gary Berntsen, the CIA officer who lead operation Jawbreaker to capture Bin Laden, says in his book that the higher-ups of the CIA, of the Pentagon, and the White House did sabotage the operation when Bin Laden was about to be encircled, letting him escape from Tora Bora. And Sy Hersch revealed in his book that thousands of Talibans and Al-Qaeda members were allowed to fly to Pakistan by the Pentagon.
Also: the Bush-Cheney killed thousands of New-Yorkers by lying to them about the contamination of the air they breathed for weeks, months (the last scientific report predicts 300,000 victims in the coming years). The Bush-Cheney mafia killed 1500 inhabitants of New-Orleans, according to the extraordinary documentary by BBC investigative journalist Greg Palast:
If you had to decide which corrupt administration in the history of the USA would have been capable of sacrificing 2000 lives to start wars for the benefit of ruthless corporations and billionaires, would you agree the Cheney-Bush mafia is the most likely criminal culprit? You can face the truth now, and help impeach them by joining the efforts of congressman Kucinich and many people with him. You can do the right thing and be proud years from now, when you are asked what you did during these shameful and scandalous times for America, against the administration that most dishonored this country.

Read the last genius on this Earth:

I tested it on digg one more

I tested it on digg one more time a few hours ago and it got a +3 vote:
I put it in the first thread: apexim/themastersb/ISIfunded911.
I tested it before on digg in stories about 9/11. At one point many months ago truthers were dominating on digg but not anymore. Truthers who talk about the Pentagon or the WTC with technical arguments get dugg down badly, but my story manages to get positive votes most of the time, and always gets much better accepted, much less rejected, than the scientific approach.

Read the last genius on this Earth:

Emotion vs. logic? No, more

Emotion vs. logic? No, more dialectics.

Human interest is closer to the mark; catching someone's genuine interest (which is tied in with emotion) but not manipulating their emotions in lieu of inducing thoughtful behavior, no matter how "just" the cause.


If you're talking Bush and Cheney, you're talking Israel.

BBC's "War Party": a 49 Minute Documentary about the Neocons