Comment: I love this effort!!!

(See in situ)

I love this effort!!!

However, I must make a suggestion ...

Each caller has to think of this as a chess match where each player only gets one move, and the caller has the privilege of making the first move. You *must* make this move very carefully. You have to do it in such a way that their only move is to address your move, otherwise it will look so obvious to the listening audience that the CSPAN folks and their guest are cheating.

Let me explain ...

In this latest video, I saw the same pattern happening over and over. The caller would call in and ask why nobody would address the overwhelming evidence of demolition, and explosive material found and in some cases the caller would mention building 7 and some cases not. The host would then immediately mention the organized effort to discuss 9/11 "twin towers" and/or "plane hijackings" ... etc. What the host is doing is a chess side move ... i.e. a move that totally does not address the callers move, and in most cases it was okay, because the caller didn't fully box them in.

What you have to do, is completely *BOX* them in (Think Hannity here ... as much as you all and I hate Hannity, you have to admit he's the master at crafting his interview questions to box the interviewee in). You have to say that you're not asking a question about the twin towers or the hijackings. You then have to say that you want the guest to address building 7 *specifically* (And again, stress *not* the twin towers or planes hitting the buildings or pentagon etc.), and stress that that building was not hit by a hijacked airplane but still collapsed, at free fall none the less. You could even mention that the BBC reported on its collapse *before* the actual collapse (Which is an undisputed *fact* where there's video evidence all over the internet, so easily accessible) and ask why haven't these anomalies been addressed. At that point, if they say anything other than talk about building 7, then it's obvious they're dodging.

You have to really stick with building 7, it's so key to waking people up. I was a true neocon and Bush die hard and ridiculed anybody who'd talk about 9/11 not being what the gov't has told us. What woke me up *was* building 7, and later on what sealed my belief in cement such that there was no going back was BBC reporting on it 20+ minutes before the actual collapse. So IMO, those things have to be driven home!!!! I cannot stress that enough! Explosive material found and engineers' peer reviewed documents is not going to persuade someone who's completely blinded by gov't propaganda. All it takes for a die hard non-believer is to have a look at BBC reporting on the collapse before the actual collapse, and *that* my DP friends will plant the seed of critical thinking about 9/11 in their head!