“We had fax machines. We had radio in the US which was a big deal, talked radio and we had the emerging intern and our belief was that you could take a couple of people, take complex tissue, make a plane and bring it forward and we did it. If somebody said hey you be doing this 17 years later on, these subjects you know, the related subjects, I would have said in those days no way, no I just couldn’t imagine that happening and I think the underlying message in all of that is, it only takes one or two. Think about any revolution that’s ever been fought or whether it’s in science, business, politics, religion, starts with one or two. There’s more people in this room that are necessary to change this whole planet and I know that because all that is required is effort and what we find in a lot of this and I’ve washed it with many of my colleagues over the years they get involved in a controversial issue and they are first accused of being conspiracy theorists and really the best conspiracy theorists in the world are militaries because their job, they are supposed to think of the most horrible situations that could ever occur and they’re supposed to think of all of them and then build a plan to overcome them. That’s their job. Which is why in democracies and democratic republics like the United States, the military theoretically is in a closet. You know the civilian sector regulates them because we’re supposed to be conscious and aware and not the paranoid thinkers that we want our militaries to be and that’s really the reality. It’s really that way. If you’re sitting in this room, we’re having this conversation and we’re in agreement, you know we’re not having a conspiracy conversation but the guy on the outside looking in, is going to think that they are conspiring to change the world in some fashion. And I hope we are but it doesn’t have a conspiracy, it’s a matter of choice of words. It’s a plan. And even writing this book had a lot stronger environmental position than I did and so I’m editing out some of the hot words which are like saying a nasty word in church you know to conservatives so you don’t really want to do that because words can really inhibit the communication of what your message is and as a result the primary support that we’ve got initially going into this was from conservatives because we’re sensitive to the fact that you can say the same thing, you can be selective in your words and make sure that the words you are using that are creating the thoughts are trying to generate aren’t offensive because you can still deliver the message without being offensive but be sensitive to your opposition so that at least you have a fighting chance if you can’t swing them at least split them but don’t do it on words that can be avoided in the same concepts delivered and that’s what we were able to do with what both what we wrote and the way in which we delivered our material and you know we’ve been at it a long time.”
Menu