If there was ever a petition that died with a whimper and not a bang, it's NYC-CAN
NYC CAN’s campaign was carefully orchestrated to engage voter support by presenting incontrovertible discrepancies to combat skepticism and create reasonable doubt. We countered objection with fact instead of theory, allowing individual deductive reasoning to poke its own holes in the 9/11 Commission’s story. By doing so we persuaded 80,000 New York City voters to listen, think and act.
Let me point out here that NYC-CAN'T, when asked to recheck their petitions came up with about 20,000 uncertified by their own tally out of 53,000 or so, so we can deducted another 10,000 more from the additional 27,000, which puts them at about 50,000 signatures.
Still, this is New York City, where something like 8 million people live. So even if we were generous and granted them the 80,000 valid signatures they don't have, it would still be about 1% of the city's population.
Lessons learned? With the experience gained in persuading 80,000 NYC voters to act, the strategy that will work has become ever more clear: a national public relations campaign to persuade the American public to rethink the bill of goods they were sold and now accept as bible truth. Public relations is a time-tested strategy that has been embraced across the board and through the ages; this proven methodology has been utilized to the advantage of the most progressive elements of society and embedded in the core strategy of every corporation in America. Why?
Yes, no kidding, they think they can sell 9-11 Troof like Madison Avenue sells life insurance. It's completely crackers of course, and it's not like the Troofers haven't tried marketing the nonsense themselves. This movement is a lot like Amway; everybody's convinced they're on the early legs of the pyramid and if they can only convince those doggone slow adopters, the world will be saved and they'll make a lot of money.
As with any marketing or sales effort or any successful social movement, one must engender trust before one seeks to close the sale. The problem inherent in our movement and its passionate base is the desire to close the sale without making the sale. We need to take a step back, recalibrate, redefine and reeducate. We need to employ persuasion, not pressure, with the right strategy and the right voice.
And who decides whose voice that is?
It's a rhetorical question BTW, although I assume the voice is Les Jamieson, but the post just blathers on and on and I lost interest. You know, I could do better than this, with similarly meaningless phrases about "we will build upon this foundation" and "thanks to our committed core of volunteers and donors."