Making Campaigning Materials

[Andrew Johnson]

This is something I quickly put together for the Blackpool gathering in the hope that it will be some use to someone. Basically a summary of what I do re making stuff to send and give out as cheaply as I can.

Some Information and Practical Ideas for Producing Home Made Campaigning Materials

Andrew Johnson (ad.johnson@ntlworld.com), Jan 2006

Download Campaign Materials from: http://tinyurl.com/2zxfcy

1.1        Sources/Suppliers of materials etc

www.svp.co.uk	DVD’s, Duplicators, A4 Paper
www.ebuyer.co.uk	DVD’s and drives and PC equipment
www.ebay.co.uk	Stickers, Laminators, Laminating Pockets, Long Arm Stapler.
www.vistaprint.co.uk	Business cards etc
www.viking-direct.co.uk	sometimes good for paper + envelopes.

1.2        DVD Duplication

1.2.1        Cheap DVDs

(Approx 15p each) when bought in batches of 100. Try to get in 100 or 200 as postage always adds 25 or 30% to the cost (from SVP)

Single layer DVD-R will play in most players. “Printable” ones now cost little or no more than “non-printable”. Much quicker and neater than hand writing – also means you can put in clear plastic wallets – simple and cheap packaging (and light for posting).

1.2.2        Burners + Duplicators

Pioneer DVR 111 is supposedly one of the best ones (I have one). They are £20 each. An external (USB) burner can be got for about £45 from SVP.

Nero 7 PC Burning Software can be for from SVP for about £5.

Approx £250 – you can buy them empty or full of drives (i.e. built or in kits).

Can fit a hard drive into most of these (which will multiple DVD “images”)

1.2.3        Plastic Wallets

Approx 1p each when bought in packets of 100. Paper wallets can generally be more expensive.

1.3        Printing

1.3.1        Printer and Ink

I use an Epson R200 DVD Printer (Approx £60), now superseded by R265. New cartridges for this printer are currently expensive – and full sets of 6 cartrdiges sell on e-bay for approx £20-£25.

For earlier EPSON R200, I use cheap “clone” Cartridges (Approx £1 each – 30 for £2. Each cartridge does about 200 or so pages.

1.3.2        Paper

Decent A4 paper (80 grams per square meter) can be got for about £2/ream from SVP, although postage can add to this. Wilko’s can also be cheap. Viking Direct can be cheap too.

1.4        Stickers

I have used 3 different  styles – 24 on A4 (white), 24 on A4 (fluorescent yellow) and 8 on A4. You can stick these anywhere. They are best indoors. I have sprayed some sheets with “fabsil” to give them a little water resistance. This adds a little to the cost, however.

1.5        Booklets

These are a little more tricky to do, although the later versions of  Microsoft Word (2003) have booklet printing features built in (but I haven’t used these).

I currently print – “Tyranny Alert’s 9/11 Fairy Tale from Hell”, Steve Jones WTC paper and Morgan Reynolds and Judy Wood’s critique of this.

A while ago, I looked at getting booklets printed professionally, but with minimum order of 50 or 100, it was looking like between £1 and £5 per small booklet. I worked out I could print them myself at a cost of approx 20p each (including Paper and Ink)

I use some software called “Fine Print 2000” which can generate booklets, 4 pages per sheet, 8 per sheet etc. However, I have a PDF writer so can generate PDF’s ready to print out as booklets if you need this

I can print 10 copies of 1 side of the booklet, flip the wad over in the printer, then print 10 copies on the other side. I then use the long arm stapler (£17 from e-bay) to staple the sheets together – a very simple process.

1.6        Laminated Acetates

These are fairly easy to make and also quite cheap – approx 10p each, if you get the acetates in boxes of 100 (e-bay - £6 or £7). These can be attached to traffic light pillars, signposts etc. I used to use tie-wraps to put them up – these are good, but at about 4 – 5p each they add to the cost (again you can get packs of 100 for about £5 from e-bay).

I have now started using insulated wire (I have an old reel). I had one A4 laminated sheet on a busy set of traffic lights (A52 into Nottingham) which survived for about 2 months!

1.7        Banner Printing

My printer software supports printing an enlarged A4 design across multiple sheets, but I haven’t made use of this yet!

1.8        Business Cards

I have had several boxes of these from www.vistaprint.co.uk - you can get 250 for about £3 or £3.50 – sometimes you can get 500 for £6. These are very good. They often give you other free things like address labels and you can re-order through the web site.

1.9        Campaign Kit

These are just sheets printed in large text, put into plastic A4 wallets (I got about 400 for £8 from partners on a 2 for 1 offer). You can put these in an A4 ring binder, then use them to illustrate key points, if you are talking to people in the street. Again, you can make 1 for £1 or £2 (if you get the wallets in smaller packs).

1.10   Packaging / Posting

All the materials I use are recycled – quite often what I’ll do is keep the boxes/packets that DVD’s, printer cartridges etc are delivered in, then cut them up to use for smaller packets. Also generally keep other packaging from stuff we get.

Breakfast cereal packets can also be cut up.

Junk mail can sometimes contain A5/C5 (half-A4 envelopes). Using these in conjunction with re-cycled cereal packets can make packages which will keep disks protected enough.

Alternatively, cheap envelopes can often be got from “pound shops”, Wilkinsons (Wilcos), e-bay or Viking Direct (www.viking-direct.co.uk )

I got a free set of digital weighing scales on an offer from www.staples.co.uk. I use this a lot for postage and “counting by weighing”. I get low denomination stamps then asked people to pay me in stamps for items, then I use those to post the “next lot of stuff”. This saves people sending cash or wasting money buying postal orders.

[Patrick Brown]

So if somebody asks you if you believe aircraft impacted the twin towers what will be your reply?

Isn't your tactic somewhat like getting to the small minority that are prepared to look at the evidence and then confusing them so much that they go back to sleep?

So just how far have you got pushing beam weapons and missiles disguised by holographic aircraft Andrew?

Hey I'm only asking the tough questions!

[Andrew Johnson]

[Patrick Brown]

[ian neal]

Patrick

Are you telling us that anyone who takes an interest in and is inclined to be supportive of the controversial theories (NPT, beams, TV fakery and so forth) are automatically to be considered suspect? Are you aware of the background of the main US researchers who are supportive of these controversial hypotheses? Whilst many would not win many prizes for tact and diplomacy, they have a long track record within the movement. Are you suggesting they are all not who and what they say they are? If so let's see some evidence?

I suggest you check out the copious amounts of campaigning materials that Andrew has produced and distributed. I stand to be corrected but I don't believe any of them are based on the controversial theories. In all the public campaigning he has done that I'm aware of Andrew sticks to the strongest and most mainstream evidence.

If you use this forum as your sole window into understanding this campaign and you are of a suspicioius bent, then I could perhaps understand your suspicions. But IMO they are missed placed and don't just take my word for it. Check out other people who know Andrew, who will also vouch for his integrity and lack of agenda within the movement.

[Patrick Brown]

Ian

I called you at your request several months ago but you wasn't there and didn't reply to my messages. I have given you a contact number but you haven't called me. You showed an interest in my idea of setting up an independent, evidence based, forum but on setting up such a forum you didn't contribute.

And:

You keep sticking up for Andrew when he has been seen to push very dubious, some would say shill like , theories and ideas. I've given you the benefit of the doubt Ian but I can only surmise that your motives/agenda are akin to Andrews.

So Andrews defense is he does a bit of campaigning and burns a few DVD's!! Yes that would be a good front for somebody that had a hidden agenda. An absolutely feeble and pathetic attempt at brushing over that facts concerning Andrews comments and associations.

[Sixy]

Just to return to the original topic of this thread!....

Thanks very much for sharing this information Andrew

I'm thinking about producing my own materials and DVD copying, so the info that you have provided will come in very handy!

Thanks again

[Pikey]

Thanx for that Andrew, imo you have and continue to make a huge contribution to the aims and objectives of the 911 truth campaign.

I cant believe that any bona fide campaigner would personally attack you or recognise what you are able and willing to offer. Your action/doing inspires! I respect your choice to put forward alternative theories of what really did happen.

Sadly though for the campaign a minority use that to attempt to divide the community. Maybe what they and their paymasters fear is the message contained in the film "V for Vendatta"......that:-

[AllThatWeSeeOrSeem]

Patrick

This isn't a fascist forum - we are allowed to differ about details and interpretations - but we MUST unite about the key issue that the 9/11 official line is a lie - and that we want answers to serious questions.

Your tone and manner do the forum a disservice. You have a lot of energy that would (imo) be better spent doing something constructive rather than taking pot shots at someone who has contributed a lot to the cause.

We don't have to iron each other out - to create an homogenous mindset - we don't have to theorise - we just need to raise the questions.

Respectfully,

PS. Thank you Andrew for advice and info on campaigning materials - all useful.

[Patrick Brown]

[Andrew Johnson]

[marky 54]

hopefully these comments will help bring some reality to the situation with the judy wood interview/other theorys on this forum, if not then just ignore it, but anyway my take on the whole situation is this.

after watching the judy wood interview and the lack of scientific thinking or proof within it and the failure to remember anything of her website which she studied and wrote(i presume), i am suspious of her motives and think she could be a plant. however i could be wrong and have to execpt that could be a possibility.

as a result it is very hard for me to listen to beam theory at this time as from what i can see there is not enough evidence to show people it could be true(if any going by the judy wood interview). i have to admit again i could be wrong but the interview is what made me come to my conclusion.

this dosnt make anyone associated with judy wood a shill or need to explain what judy wood said(or could'nt back up /prove). the person who should be being questioned is judy wood, and those that push the theory nonestop also need to be asked what their evidence is.

however some people who support these theorys only ocassionally put forward questions or evidence to get some feed back and do not spam the theory as fact. andrew johnson in my opinion comes under this category and therefore dosnt not deserve to take the flack from judy woods interview. we have to distinguish between researchers and disinfo spammers, researchers tone of posts usually ask question and opinions and dont push it as 100% fact. spammers who beileve the theory 100% on little evidence and state its conclusive proof when its not and avoid questions and also use the same piece after it has been debunked are promoting potential disinfo. andrew johnson and some others who believe other theorys do not do the spamming but do do the reasearch from what i can tell and i dont see anything wrong with this.

the only problem i have personally with these other theorys is the spamming flimsy evidence as fact as this makes the movement look bad to onlookers and media who can debunk in 10 seconds flat and then write about it and hint we all think the same making us all seem like looney tunes. i could list some who come under this category but i think they are obvious and it aint andrew johnson. researching untill proven is not a crime in my eyes. its the spamming as fact when it is not proven that gets under my skin.

the beam theory and judy wood took a big hit by that interview and she really has to answer questions to be taken seriously again, but i dont know her and although i dont understand the theory(as its not been explained properly so far in my eyes) it dosnt mean it dosnt hold any truth even though its hard to see at this point. however i think it is dangerous to promote this theory as fact untill it can be proven or the judy wood interview will be what the movement will look like if and when we get a chance to prove it to the media.

as for NPT just read the above and add NPT where it says beams and the same applies to how i see it.

[marky 54]

loose change is an example of promoting disinfo as fact, the mistakes within it are now being used to debunk all the fact of 9/11 even though the film wasnt 100% wrong. were the makers shills? no

some people have good intensions but get it wrong sometimes its a part of being human. but also shows the danger of promoting disinfo/wrong facts. so i suppose this post is just a warning to everyone really, but at the same time shows why aj is not a shill and also points out why wrong facts is dangerous and hopefully you will both understand eachother with this example.

make-up niether of you are wrong about your concerns and BUT neither of you are shills.

[Patrick Brown]

[Patrick Brown]

Andrew,

Do you, yes or no, believe that aircraft of any kind hit the twin towers?