From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of a_truth_soldier Sent: Sunday, February 28, 2010 6:25 AM To: [email protected] Subject: [TheTruthSoldiersClub] From Shock Info to Persuasive Argument on 9/11 Inside Job
>From Shock Info to Persuasive Argument by Robert Lynn Sadly, many Americans remain unconvinced or perhaps even uninformed about the astonishing achievement of the 9/11 truth movement in gathering evidence of US government orchestration of the attacks on the WTC. As Joel Hirshhorn's recent article 9/11 Mind Swell solemnly notes, the movement's the lack of concrete results, such as a new investigation, is disappointing. At this point, after years of organizing, it is perhaps worthwhile to re-examine important aspects of the movement's basic work approach. Since the 9/11 truth movement's primary task is one of persuasion, its success depends largely on the effectiveness of its video materials. As many have assessed perhaps fairly, there seems to be an unhelpful trend in videos stressing shock value, or narrowly focusing on latest research findings. To improve, it might be better to avoid hype, and keep in mind: a strong video for 9/11 truth should be comprehensive. Already available evidence builds conclusively and should be presented as such. As foundation for a comprehensive structure, I would propose, as a Statistician, that a video make preliminary comments on WTC attacks from the perspective of probability. A shrewd departure point might be correcting the misconception that the US government could never have pre-meditated the WTC attacks. It is widely known in the 9/11 truth movement that there are numerous historical precedents of false flags, e.g., Operation Northwoods, Gulf of Tonkin. These examples can be used to establish that a government plot was at least: possible. By evoking the theme of examining possibilities this example purposely cultivates an open disposition in the viewer, prior to digesting the richly broad body of evidence. Early on, it should be carefully articulated that 9/11 truth, like many crimes, will likely never be pinned down with 100% certainty or "proof", with a signed document or a "smoking gun". The point is that the aim of every American should be to react to the predicament of the WTC attacks responsibly. In the absence of "proof", one is obligated to at least begin by drawing reasonable inferences based on available information. This sort of probabilistic coming to terms leads to a paramount assertion: regardless of how one assesses the likelihood of government orchestration of the WTC attacks - unlikely, highly likely, whatever -- one must reckon with the potential ramifications if a false flag did occur. If the government was involved, the stakes are --with certainty -- extremely high. Thus the video should be clear: if one thinks there's even the slightest possibility of government involvement, one should be pursuing the government aggressively to account for what has happened. To behave differently doesn't make any sense. With probability foundation laid to begin a comprehensive structure, it helps to recognize the WTC attacks as a complex event - i.e., with many layers. Some layers that might be appropriate readily come to mind: physics, eye witness, financial, etc. However, to really benefit from the immense value of the wide-ranging evidence - instead of just picking layers - one has to focus on how those layers combine information meaningfully. Uncovering this pattern is the key to finding a good comprehensive structure. >From a bird's eye view, the WTC collapse can be observed as palpably beginning (at least in a story-based way) with a plane crashing into a building. Thus, ostensibly the event has a physical layer where it started. Then, moving out, the event can be viewed as unfolding onto a more interpersonal layer, where key individuals are associated the event. On this level, one can see first responders, eye witnesses, people with agendas, etc. -- constituting a social, political layer. Thus, the multiple layers that constitute the event are perhaps helpfully conceptualized from the physical beginning or inner-most layer, to the societal context or outer-most layer, and layers in between. Building on a foundation of probability, here is a sample list of layers going from inner-most to outer-most, including pieces of evidence (which are not being specifically endorsed for inclusion, except for those in probability section): probability (false flag precedents; Op. Northwoods, drawing inferences rationally, etc.) failed air defense (pilot testimony, evidence of rehearsal, etc.) engineering (structural evidence of explosives, heat from plane combustion, etc.) physics (particle analysis for thermite, molten material, micro-nukes, etc.) logistics (WTC security inconsistencies, removal of evidence at crime scene, etc.) intelligence (patsy recruitment, warnings ignored, CIA AlQaeda relationship, etc.) contrived attendance/absence (privileged warnings, Enron evidence destroyed, etc.) financial (insider trading, insurance claims, etc.) economic (oil interests, defense contracting, cronyism, etc.) political (PNAC documents, Neo-Con agenda, dynastic families, Israel Lobby, etc.) social (Suspicious deaths, media plants, freudian slips, harassment of truthers, etc.) As anyone in the movement knows, each layer has several key pieces of evidence that can appear on it. Thus, within each layer, evidence can be ordered according to increasing persuasiveness, particularly where it suggests integration with the next layer. In sum, the approach which has been suggested is similar to simple spreadsheet analysis. The analytical layers of the WTC attacks are like rows, which organize evidence thematically across columns. If done patiently this analytical approach to account for the WTC attacks illustrates not only the overwhelming amount of damning evidence, but integrates it powerfully. It is difficult to dismiss such unifyingly rational, layered (i.e., row and column) analysis. Any mind that rejects such thoroughness in argument is likely clinging irrationally to emotion, not wanting to face the reality of 9/11. __._,_.___ *** exposing the hidden truth for further educational research only *** CAVEAT LECTOR *** In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. NOTE: Some links may require cut and paste into your Internet Browser. Please check for daily real news posts and support the truth! (sorry but don't have time to email all posts) at <http://tinyurl.com/33c9yr> http://tinyurl.com/33c9yr or <http://groups.google.com/group/total_truth_sciences/topics?gvc=2> http://groups.google.com/group/total_truth_sciences/topics?gvc=2 ; You can also subscribe to the multiple daily emails by sending an email to <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected] ; free book download: <http://www.lulu.com/content/165077> http://www.lulu.com/content/165077 *** Revealing the hidden Truth For Educational & Further Research Purposes only. *** NOTICE: Due to Presidential Executive Orders, the National Security Agency (NSA) may have read emails without warning, warrant, or notice. They may do this without any judicial or legislative oversight. You have no recourse, nor protection.......... IF anyone other than the addressee of this e-mail is reading it, you are in violation of the 1st & 4th Amendments to the Constitution of the United States. Patriot Act 5 & H.R. 1955 Disclaimer Notice: This post & all my past & future posts represent parody & satire & are all intended for intellectual entertainment only. To be removed from the weekly list, please reply with the subject line "REMOVE" __,_._,___ -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "total_truth_sciences" group. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/total_truth_sciences
