This issue seems to be coming up more now in light of the latest YouTube video by 'Walmart Boy' (which i will not honour by posting a link). I am glad that it is being discussed in a number of groups here in Canada. Personally, I find his actions offensive, ill-conceived and counter-productive, and i let him know it too. I think there are many better ways to get our message out. Walmart Boy, if nothing else, has  kicked-started healthy debate and C.I. is now being seriously discussed. Some say we should never criticize the actions of others in the movement. I disagree. But criticism should be constructive. Here are some new thoughts i have had on the C.I. issue, and a restatement of a few others i have made previously.

In a big city, 20 people out in 20 different places talking to people (regularly) and giving out DVDs etc is far more effective than a 100 or more people in the same place every month to demonstrate, being seen  generally by the same people. Big public events occasionally help to create a buzz and a chance to show case credible people too, but we still need to get personal with people. By the way, of all the people who attend these large events, how many get involved - even though if they agree with us on the key issue? Could it be our image and their fear of ridicule? Could it be because we are tacking on other unrelated social issues or siding with a particular political party or world view?

I have also thought about a telephone call team. Phone books today are very locally oriented. Those who don't like to or who can't get out into the streets could make random calls in their area and offer free DVDs, then drop them off with those who want them. Telemarketing must be effective, as everyone else sure does it! (Have you noticed?) The difference being we have something to offer for free. And some people really like to yack on the phone. Just a thought.

When it comes to getting a message out, big corporations don't do one fancy ad on TV, radio or in the paper. They do a campaign and are repetitive. People (usually) do not even pay attention consciously to ads but we take in may things subconsciously. The same ads and same signs are everywhere and we don't notice them but they do impact us. The more little signs we put out, the more people hear something on the radio, see people with 9/11 truth shirts, or  see letters to the editor, the sooner we will achieve critical mass. HOWEVER, if you give that power away to the media, you (we) are toast.

If the media approach you, never assume that they plan to be objective. Investigative journalism is not what they are about. They are about sensationalism and fear. Find out what their attitude is and what angle they plan to take, and who else they plan to interview for the piece, and what questions they plan to ask their so-called "experts".  Reporters are SLIMY, editors are BASTARDS and publishers are SCUMBAGS.  You can be 99% certain that they plan to do a hit piece on you. If they had any credibility and any sense of honour and had done their jobs, we would not be doing what we are doing and i don't mind telling them so. (With apologies to the tiny fraction of honest reporters).

If we want to hold media accountable, we can do this by calling into radio shows when they are spewing crap with a few choice facts, or write letters to the editor in response to propaganda to correct them. Many news shows on TV also read viewer comments.  In this way, we get the final word in, we make people think, and we don't give them any ammo to shoot us with.

IF we do anything on YouTube, it should be our own interviews with these Professor "Know It All" types and bring them some evidence and facts to look at, then question them about it (because the media won't) in an honest and respectful way and watch their reactions. Then post them.

There are many ways to be the media. Whatever we do, it should be done well, with class, dignity and respect for the dead, and in a way that does not alienate anyone, and in this way, we define ourselves rather than having the media do it.

WAC does a lot of good work, and most of them have the right intentions or at least good motives, and they don't get enough credit for doing the right things. When they are confrontational, however, who gets credited? WAC? NO. It is always "those wacko 9/11 Truthers!!"

As i have said before, to be "change" you cannot be "the same". Think outside the box. Don't do what every other protest group does, don't fall into traps and don't get pigeonholed.

Finally, let's not act out of hate, but out of love and out of respect for those poor souls who were murdered and remember that we are ambassadors of the victim's and their families.  Not vigilantes.

Certainly i am not, nor do i wish to be associated with those who take that approach.

There are no comments to this entry.