Sharing the Truth
Once I made the transition form investigating the truth, to dispersing it, I thought at first that others would easily recognize what's going on. But instead was called many nasty names, considered crazy or gullible, or grossly misguided. I realized that although its easiest to get thru to those who trust me implicitly, or those who have always thought the government was behind a lot of evil crap, it was still difficult to get thru even to a Bush or Republican hater, and impossible to get thru to the white house supporters and true skeptics. For the last 3 weeks, I've used everyone that I've spoken to as test subjects. I've studied reactions to words like "conspiracy", "theory", and "activist", and discovered that these words are damaging. Conspiracy implies paranoia, theory implies unsupported by validated facts, and activist implies politically anti-bush, republican, or government.
I've gauged the results of talking to people based on "over the phone", "in person", and "in person with evidence in hand". The results are obvious, you are less likely to ever succeed over the phone unless the receiver follows up with viewing DVDs or goes on line after to review the evidence, and its too easy for them to cut you off and hang up. You have a better chance in person, but you still need to trust that they will review further on their own, and your best chance is to have the evidence in hand when referring to it, at least the first 3 or 4 things. If you validate the first few pieces of evidence, it provides more validity to what you will divulge after. Talking about what you’ve read or heard, bears much less weight unless you have the proof in hand. We have been conditioned to be skeptical of what reporters write as they are capable of telling half-truths, twisting the truth, omitting the truth, or blatantly lying. So how can you battle the paradox of supporting “I read this article…”…or “this reporter said this…” when many prefer not to believe everything they read in the papers. I’ve heard it a couple of times “you believe everything you read?”, followed by a skeptical laugh.