The effectiveness of 911 truth in achieving change.
I would suggest that many people devote their interests to 911 truth because they see it as having the potential to change the way we are governed. We believe that 911 was a criminal deception designed to justify war , imperialism and the curtailing of civil rights. We have no prospect of change through a co opted political system that totally ignores the evidence of the 911 truth movement, and the current mainstream media has censored or misrepresented any evidence that the official explanation of 911 is a lie.
Jon Gold has suggested a dwindling interest in 911truth, citing for example the fact that the NYC CAN march only attracted 150 people compared to thousands previously. He suggests that the reason for this, is the perception that 911truth is synonymous with a CD (controlled demolition) only argument, and that we have to change the way we are perceived and change the focus of 911truth away from CD towards a selection of diverse evidence instead.
I agree with many others that 911 truth should include diverse evidence and areas of investigation, but am concerned that the selection process of what other evidence should be promoted instead of CD is not critical enough regarding the potential that other evidence has to effect change.
For example , drawing attention to the fact that Atta allegedly received $100,000 from Pakistan’s ISI shortly before 911 suggests implicitly that Atta , Muslims, and Al Qaida were al least partly responsible for 911, something that has yet to be proven to me. By choosing to promote this information, you actually reinforce the premise of the Official Theory (OT) that Al Qaieda were responsible.
If any ‘selection’ or prioritization of evidence is actually necessary, (rather than letting people decide for themselves and research and promote what areas they find to be most valuable) surely the most important factor is the question of how damaging the evidence is to the OT along with analysis of how solid the evidence actually is.
Before I expand on this further, I have to say that a call for diversity is one thing, but to actually repeatedly spread unsubstantiated ideas like “‘You have to be an engineer or physicist to understand CD evidence”’, or “CD evidence is not as valuable or conclusive as you might think”’ or "Controlled Demolition is a HARD pill for MANY people to swallow” is another thing entirely. This sort of claim has to be highly scrutinized , because rather than encouraging diversity it is actually calling into question the value of the work of David Ray Griffin and AE911truth, who I would suggest have done more than anyone else in challenging the OT, and importantly, changing the damaging perception portrayed in the MSM that the 911truth movement is a bunch of dysfunctional nut jobs. DRG is very clear that there is no ambiguity in the conclusiveness of CD evidence .http://www.911blogger.com/node/21671
The main point I am trying to make is ‘What is the most effective way to achieve change?’. Evidence that the government were negligent on 911 is at best going to achieve a ticking off or two but it wont change anything. Particularly it will do nothing to highlight the part of the MSM in the cover-up, because they have to some extent covered these issues already.
To achieve actual change we must be more ambitious. The fact that MSM and the political parties have ignored credible evidence for 911 criminality within the administration, along with their easily demonstrated cover up and propaganda tactics is actually an opportunity.
By promoting evidence that suggests US criminality and cover up in the act, the realization that this evidence has not been reported to us, is a real eye opener as to what the extent of the problem is and that substantial change is essential.
Maybe we should consider that if one person in 10 realizes the extent of the problem and is motivated to try and change a corrupt system, It could actually be more beneficial than 3 people in 10 asking for a reinvestigation into unexplained 911 anomalies?.
I make no suggestion here that these following evidence points are valid, and would defer to the consensus and analysis of the movement to show what is the most valuable evidence, but for example:
The information that WTC complex was an inefficient asbestos ridden white elephant and NY Port authority had been denied permission to demolish the towers on several occasions prior to 911, and were facing a $1.5 Billion bill to dismantle them brick by brick because of the risks to public health though demolition. Pyroclastic flow of dust during collapse. The convenient loss of evidence of 100 high level corporate fraud investigations in WTC7. Impossibility of calls made from the allegedly hijacked planes, etc
Don’t attack my premise based on the conclusiveness of evidence regarding these examples, as I said I trust the movement to do that, but these examples (if true) would be more effective and motivational to people concerned with change than for example evidence that ‘Usama bin laden is or was dead on 911’, or that ‘Bush was more popular after 911’.
Other than the tactic of raising awareness, I have seen no discussion anywhere about what can be done to effect the change I assume we seek. If there is a dwindling interest in 911 truth, (though I don’t personally believe there is) then it is more likely to be around the perception that the movement has no where else to go than where it is already. Whilst awareness is still of immense importance and much has yet to be achieved, there are some people who will never support it for varying reasons, and so I don’t accept that we will ever necessarily reach a tipping point whereby if enough people know, something will happen.
I tried to suggest that the movement could progress to a political force through a 3rd party commenting on this article http://www.911blogger.com/node/21649 , but was bombarded with the opinion that ‘911truth is a political Taboo’ and of ‘too high strangeness’ to be of any value politically.
I questioned the value of an article http://www.911blogger.com/node/21649 that seemed to reinforce the OT, but was told I should concentrate on areas where I agree with the OT as a starting point to awareness.
I was told here http://www.911blogger.com/node/21739 That CD is not as valuable or conclusive as I think it is.
If I have just had a bad run that is not representative of the majority of opinion here, then I am sorry if I have turned my frustration into being argumentative. I do not want to be divisive. However, if my experience is indicative of a shift towards ‘throwing the baby out with the bathwater’, then this site will no longer have any relevance for me.