Shills??? MOD ALERT

It wasn't in response to you truthers, YOU STARTED THE THREAD. You are post #1, that is the initial post that started a thread. It wasn't in response to anything, don't lie, just eat crow dude. You know you do it, and I showed you that it's been done. You're just moving the goalposts and making stuff up. This is exactly the reason why the truth movement is a non factor in society. Why, in 12 years, the truth movement is a group of nobody's lead by a team of nothings. There's no progress because there's no evidence to stand on. The truth movement is a joke because of exactly that same behavior.

Wow, just amazing.

 

I use his own dodge ball tactics back at him because I choose not to take his remarks seriously. When I use the term you are apparently so aggravated about, I use it with the same sarcasm and patronizing disrespect I infer from his posts. I am very careful NOT to name anyone specifically as that is an insult (apparently) that is selectively enforced so, I avoid doing it. How one "talks" on an internet forum is somewhat different that real life, face to face conversation, as it is open to interpretation. If I were actually face to face with some folks, I'd have a whole other "tone" and respond unrestricted and free to say what I actually think.

I maintain, that there are shills whose job it is to discredit anything that varies from the "official" line by any means possible. I leave it free to the reader to interpret specifically who is who. I give my opinion within the limitations of the "rules" as best I can. I'll try harder in the future to try and do the "dance" a little better in the future.

 

So you fear stating what you really think.

 

Let's see...the government could have...

1) Sued you on any number of charges (legit or not) thereby:
2) Forcing you to miss work defending yourself in court
3) Cost your your job
4) Put the IRS on you, which would cause your imprisonment

and that would take care of any dissent once and for all

or...

they could pay people to come on to obscure message boards, live under an arbitrary TOS, and sabotage arguments you guys are too cowardly to make.


Yeah...that makes sense.

 

You refer to your opponents here as "shills," so either you are attacking all of us as shills or you exclude some. Who here, then, is, in your opinion, not a shill?

- - - Updated - - -

As per #13 Sweeney/Martin, it makes perfect sense.

 

Not so much fear as it is awareness of the situation. Not allowed to say what I really think unrestricted so...oh well.

 

That's right, everyone is out to get you. /sarcasm

Stand up and have some courage.

 

Great advice. Thanks man.

 

Nonetheless, your inability to comprehend what I am saying is amazing. You just keep moving those goalposts. Now you've added another qualifier, "Find me an instance where a truther isn't blah, blah, blah."

I'm not playing your game, anyone that reads the thread can see your backpedaling, goalpost moving, and blatant lying. If you don't want to admit it, I'm totally ok with that. I've proven my point.

 

aka trolling

 

They certainly can. Thousands of pages to illuminate themselves. We finally agree...

 

Where did I accuse you of naming a shill?

psik

 

You didn't. I misread the post. I apologize.

 

The behaviour of a poster can identify him as a shill. Shills usually maintain the attitude that they have the upper hand even when anyone can see that they're cornered. Here's a classic example.

Look at what LoneStrSt8 said in post #13 of this thread.
http://www.politicalforum.com/9-11/...-conspiracy-big-picture-2.html#post1062436283

I responded with this.
(post #17)

He responded with this.
(post #1

I responded with this.
(post #19)

He tried to get out of it by playing games here.

(post #20)

I pointed out that he was just playing games.
(post #24)

Now look at this lame response.
(post #22)

Sincere seekers of truth don't evade the issue when they're cornered. They realize they were mistaken and then modify their opinions to fit reality. Shills have a foregone conclusion and they stick to it hell-or-high-water as this guy did.

This guy is obviously a shill who doesn't even believe his own arguments.

What do the rest of you pro-official version posters think of this guy's behaviour there.

 

This forum is definitely infiltrated by dills.

 

So, since you're a sincere seeker of the truth. You will realize that you are mistaken in regards to your evidence that a missile hit the Pentagon in light of the evidence here. I mean, if you don't, that just means you're a shill that can't modify your opinion to fit reality. You would be a shill with a foregone conclusion that you are going to stick to no matter hell-or-high-water, right?

 

I asked you to comment on the way that LoneStrSt8 ducked the issue when he was cornered instead of admitting he was wrong. Do you think he was wrong? If he wasn't wrong, why did he duck the issue instead of explaining why he wasn't wrong.

Answer my question. Don't duck the issue.

 

The issue is that you are throwing around the shill accusations at no planers, when you yourself are a no planer. I think Scott is a shill, guys. Exposed.

 

You're trying to mislead those viewers who haven't read enough of the threads here to know my views. I think that planes did hit the towers. No-planers are infiltrator shills who are trying to make truhers look silly. Real truthers think planes did hit the towers.

I think the craft that hit the Pentagon was too small to be a 757. Read about it here on pages one and two.
http://www.politicalforum.com/9-11/275987-few-debunking-links.html

Calling me a no-planer because I think the craft that hit the Pentagon was too small to be a 757 makes some viewers wrongly think I maintain that no planes hit the towers. I guess I'll have to keep setting the record straight as long as you keep playing this game.

Only desperate people play this game. By desperate people I mean cornered shills.

You're also trying to divert attention away from this question I asked.

Why don't you answer that question?

 

Scott, what is the basis for your claim that shills can be identified by their attitude? Your supposition that shills maintain that they have the upperhand when cornered is based on exceedingly subjective criteria. Whats more you havent offered any substanative evidence to support your opinion regarding the behavior of shills. It will be telling as to whether or not you amend your position or if your behavior will be consistent with how u believe a shill would behave.

BTW, Im not exactly sure why you think you have the poster you quoted 'cornered'. Care to elaborate

 

The fact that you're playing dumb about why he's cornered shows you to be a shill.

http://www.opposingdigits.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=1222
(excerpt)
-----------------------------
9. Play Dumb. No matter what evidence or logical argument is offered, avoid discussing issues with denial they have any credibility, make any sense, provide any proof, contain or make a point, have logic, or support a conclusion. Mix well for maximum effect.
-----------------------------

Go back and look at post #241.
http://www.politicalforum.com/9-11/289757-shills-25.html#post1062450475

Is this...

...a serious answer to the preceeding question? He's tap dancing around instead of answering the question because he'll have to admit he was wrong.

 

Oh stop whining scott/cosmored/fatfreddy88/david c

 

How about answering the question that you ducked?

 

So i'm a shill because i disagree with your opinion??? That is rediculous Scott.

 

That's what the shills for the Organization do when a rational person challenges them. They throw #2 Sweeney/Martin at you.