The Brotherhood, with a few outstanding exceptions has chosen to work together in empathy with the purpose of concealing Wrongdoing by their Agency. It has been proven over and over. When the Agency was ultimately subordinate to the Clinton Criminals, no one that now wants to give them a pass on these matters had a problem with Condemning them.
They now are responsible, technically at least, to a new President who many on this forum choose to blindly support. The Switch doesn't flick on and off that easy in Real Life.
It's the issue of how, once again, the "NWO Conspiracy" topic gets thrown into the mix, thus making it extremely easy for most people to just roll their eyes and discount any possible notion of Arab/foreign involvement in the 1995 OKC bombing. It's the issue of how, if this thread takes the typical "NWO" route that is so common at FR these days, then normally-rational people will take one look, get disgusted, and then dismiss the OKC facts entirely. When people start talking about the much larger issue of their viewpoints on the Patriot Act and how they think Dubya is part of a Grand Conspiracy to enslave us all, you'll needlessly lose at least 75% of your readership. I've said this for years, too, so it's not anything new.
Stick to the facts and leave out everything that is superfluous to the matter at hand. One of the reasons we managed to dig out the facts on the Akal/Teg Security threads was because we didn't get sidetracked. We didn't give the shills any ammunition to jump on the thread and use against us and start screaming "NutWing!" Facts are facts and deserve the chance to stand alone without everyone's opinions about Waco, the NWO, et al getting thrown into the mix. It just muddies the water and makes it too easy for the fence-sitters to dismiss the facts at hand.
It's always easier for me to just avoid the threads that start going down the NWO road, but this article and this topic deserves a closer look. Al Hussain Hussaini as John Doe2 deserves close scrutiny and the benefit of an open mind from everyone who reads this thread. But it's a good bet that most people who pride themselves on being part of the "Non-NutWing" crowd will stop reading once they start seeing the Bush-bashing Bilderberger talk.
Look, think of it from a practical standpoint, okay? Throw out any emotional attachments to the overall NWO topic and examine it from a purely practical and egocentric standpoint. And it may help to compare this with people who lose loved ones, go through the grieving process, then get stuck in the Denial Stage. I think that analogy may fit nicely.
The goal is to help them get through their denial so they can face reality, do what needs to be done and then get on with life. But you can't rush it and try to cram it down their throats; a little finesse is in order if you want to keep their attention. Their denial mechanism is a crutch and is helping them cope with the unthinkable. It may be a crutch, but it's a useful crutch and one that is necessary at that point in time. You don't want to just yank it out from under them and cram "reality" down their throats just to make your point. Instead, you take baby steps. You only give them what they can handle at that moment; otherwise they get totally overwhelmed, shut you out completely, and walk away. You only give them what they can safely handle at that moment in time.
This article by John Gibson is about John Doe2 and his possible connection to OKC and WTC2. It's not about Waco. It's not about Ruby Ridge. It's not about Flight 800. It's not about the Patriot Act. And it's sure as hell not about how Dubya is a secret member of the Bilderberger Gang and how we're all doomed for transdermal computer chip implants and the "666 Mark-of-the-Beast" on our foreheads in bright red, tattooed ink unless we get the "evil FBI" to admit they covered up the truth in the OKC bombing.
By bringing in the NWO stuff, Freepers do John Gibson, Larry Johnson, Jayna Davis, Dan Vogel, David Shippers and all the people working behind the scenes a huge disservice. You make them vulnerable to anyone who wants to scream "NutWing!" and anyone with ulterior motives who wants to marginalize the people who are willing to look at all the facts. I saw former CIA agent Larry Johnson on Monday morning's "Fox News and Friends" and almost dropped out of my chair. In fact, I got so excited that I yelled at my husband to turn on the TV in the other room. Mr. Johnson appeared very credible and marked the first time I've seen this on a credible news show. He actually quoted the FBI agent (Vogel?), which speaks volumes. At the time, I told my husband that either Larry Johnson was egregiously violating a precious confidence and will now rightfully get sued for slander, or there are people in the FBI/CIA/Pentagon/?? who are trying to make the truth known and this is a huge step in the right direction.
I do feel bad for being rather sarcastic up there in #20 when I first threw this out and I apologize for that. But I think it's an accurate reflection of the frustration some of us feel. Or maybe I'm all alone in this thinking, I don't know. If I am, it may be because the other 80% stopped reading when the Bush-bashing/NWO talk started and once again threw the baby out with the bathwater before getting through their denial.
Bottom line (finally): I just think it's wiser to change people's minds and open up their eyes by using an incremental, "carrot & stick" approach instead of trying to cram the carrot down their throats. It's much wiser and has a higher chance of being successful. Strategically speaking, of course.
Just my opinion, for what it's worth. :-)
There are two ways to investigate something, including Al Hussain Hussaini and the John Doe2 issue:
Our preconceived notions are all different. Why clutter up the topic and alienate people along the way?