please <strong>'Red Flag'</strong> This!!!...or <strong>How to Rule the World!</strong>

<em>Warning: Thinking caps required</em>


What can we learn from the following...



<strong>a national news source reported:</strong>
                                <blockquote>"He said she did...She said she didn't"
                                    has major implications!

                              By Simon Sez</blockquote>
<strong>a national new source reported:</strong>
                             <blockquote> "He said she did..."

                              By John Story</blockquote>
<strong>a national news source reported:</strong>
                              <blockquote> "She said she didn't..."

                              By Karen Newsworthy</blockquote>
This is what I learned from the 3 reports.

There is a <strong>story</strong> here with few facts and...
<strong>'Information Management'</strong> is a function of <strong>story</strong> telling

  The story is that these people <strong>have lives, families</strong>, ties to their respected communities, jobs, people who rely on them, and people they answer to. Not only 'He' and 'She', but the reporters and their families, the national news source, its' stockholders and employees. <strong>They are all in the story.</strong>

  The facts we have are few but they too tell a compelling story. We have confirmation of <strong>"He said she did..."</strong> and confirmation of <strong>"She said she didn't..."</strong> and a judgment from a respected personage that it has <strong>'major implications'</strong>. 'Major implications' means something of value is at stake i.e., <strong>honor, prestige, life, liberty</strong>, money, respect, salvation, safety, job...

  We know that <strong>one is accusing the other of lying</strong> but we don't have enough facts to tell who. Since we have confirmation on both statements <strong>we know that somebody is telling the truth</strong> (you did, no I didn't is the question here).

  As you see, there is a <strong>story</strong>, with few facts, of major implication to someone, but no resolution.

  <strong>How do we find resolution here?</strong> Who's lying and who's telling the truth? If it were a legal matter our legal system would provide resolution. But what if it's not a legal matter?

<strong>Who judges then?</strong>

  On all non-legal matters of consequence <strong>we rely strongly on the media</strong> and the power of the <strong>interviewer</strong> to bring out the truth [sic]. <em>Think PBS interview with Jim Lehrer.</em>


And this is where the game of <strong>'Red Flag'</strong> begins...


<strong>The Story</strong>

  I was talking to a friend today about 'blogging' and she said with grave concern, <strong>"You better be careful, they'll 'Red Flag' you!"</strong>

  And of course I knew exactly what she meant. Pressure would be brought to bear on me, my employers and employees, on my family and friends, on the things I and others value.

 
Now imagine it's nothing less than <strong>the fate of our Nation that is at stake.</strong>


Imagine being asked to bring <strong>resolution</strong> to this matter.


Now imagine them with a <strong>big "Red Flag"</strong> hovering over them.

<strong>Who's immune to this pressure</strong>?
 Who can blame them for drawing the line between truth and family, bravery and overwhelming consequences, family and nation?

Let the innocent among you cast the first stone. Because we are all afraid of the big "Red Flag" <strong>(my apologies to the bravest of the brave!)</strong>

I would suggest that our Nation as a whole is under the rule of
<strong>the big "Red Flag".</strong>