"We are essentially trying to run a good PR campaign." -Jon Gold

Keenan's picture

Jon Gold finally admits the truth: Jon Gold's agenda is NOT to expose the truth. It is all about "PR" for him. Not that most of us didn't already know that. But it is rare for Gold to be so upfront about it. Thanks Jon. I think I'll save this for posterity.

But what I still can't fathom is how Jon could think anybody would take him seriously or consider him a genuine truther after unapologetically and consistently asserting year after year that we should let the controlled media decide for us which aspects of 9/11 truth are acceptable to expose and which are not. According to Jon and the other PR police, any topics or avenues of 9/11 truth which have been targeted with ridicule by the mainstream media, or of which Jon expresses a fear of potential ridicule, should be taboo and not discussed or promoted by the "movement" (this restriction does not apply to any LIHOP material no matter how much ridicule it receives, for some reason). Is he really that clueless as to how much that hurts his credibility with genuine truthers?

Adam Syed had to remind him that We are a truth movement, not a PR movement.

http://www.911blogger.com/node/21590

There have been multitudes

There have been multitudes of hit pieces about controlled demolition too.

At some "progressive" news outlets, like the Daily Kos, even "lihop" arguments are forbidden. "Massive incompetence" is as far as you're allowed to go re your interpretation of the events of 9/11. Even you would probably be banned at many of these gatekeeping places.

A piece of friendly advice: Forget about the god damn hit pieces. Just follow your nose and keep searching for the truth, enemies of truth be damned.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
I make a point of reading all the down voted comments because I find many of them to be the best comments. - Atomicbomb

You're right...

And that's why I advocate that the question of how those buildings came down does not define this cause. The media has run a very successful campaign at defining what 9/11 Truth is about, and for the most part, they have defined it as a group of people who think Controlled Demolition took place at the WTC, and that Flight 77 did not hit the Pentagon, and instead was hit by a missile/global hawk/A-3 Sky Warrior/Bomb. Our purpose is to reach people. When the media drills into people's heads "keywords" like "missile, explosives, controlled demolition", and align those words with "crazy, lunatic, etc..." over and over and over again, what happens sometimes is that people hear those "keywords" and turn you off. At least, that has been my experience. Like recently, I was speaking to a 9/11 First Responder who was there on the day of, and in the days after, and I asked him to endorse the NYCCAN initiative. After I told him that it is a call for a new investigation, he said to me, "I support the 9/11 First Responders, but I don't think there were explosives in the buildings." I didn't say word one about Controlled Demolition. We are essentially trying to run a good PR campaign. We have to counter the propaganda that is catapulted against us. That is why bottlenecking our message into Controlled Demolition, with a side of Pentagon is not the smart thing to do, and why I advocate against it.


Do these people deserve to know how and why their loved ones were murdered? Do we deserve to know how and why 9/11 happened?

We are essentially trying to

We are essentially trying to run a good PR campaign.

This is where you and I will have to agree to disagree. By this, I mean: We are a truth movement, not a PR movement.

I've noticed that most of the hit pieces, especially after 2007 (advent of ae911truth), that focus on controlled demolition and the Pentagon, receive overwhelming support for those avenues of inquiry, judging by many of the comments in the reader feedback sections.

Remember when change.org deleted our No.1 entry for Obama?

Remember the comments? There were SOOO many who agreed that the buildings were demolished.

I guess maybe at this point I have a bit more faith in the people to see through the propaganda than you do. My Cincinnati 9/11 Truth group is even joining forces with a number of "tea party" people in the region, who are genuine (not neo) conservatives and agree with many "right of center" principles but see through the lies of 9/11.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
I make a point of reading all the down voted comments because I find many of them to be the best comments. - Atomicbomb