Unsurprising to anyone the subject of "shills" working together in the 9/11 conspiracy subforum has resurfaced. The fact is there are "shills", even "government shills", but they don't operate anything like most CTs think they do. From Wikipedia(aka Zionist Disinfo central): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shill A shill, also called a plant or a stooge, is a person who publicly helps or gives credibility to a person or organization without disclosing that they have a close relationship with the person or organization. Shills can carry out their operations in the areas of media, journalism, marketing, politics, confidence games, or other business areas. A shill may also act to discredit opponents or critics of the person or organization in which they have a vested interest through character assassination or other means. Now one can see that a "shill" is a subspecies of conman. They knowingly operate deceptively to exploit people. And their activities can be illegal and actionable "in many circumstances and in many jurisdictions because of the potential for fraud and damage", however, in the unlikely event of "creating buzz" on the Internet, "the shill's actions may be legal". The distinction, in conspiracy circles, is the difference between saying "9/11 is an Inside job", however obnoxiously, and claiming X person is responsibly for 9/11 and targeting them for harassment a la the Sandy Hook survivors (Larry Silverstein, The "Harley Guy"). So far there has been little to no evidence of anyone or agency "shilling" to suppress truther theories. In fact the opposite is true. Truthers, early on, were invited on news media and given interviews and had ample opportunity to present credible evidence if any existed. It was only when it was clear there was nothing there, media organizations moved on. But lets say, theoretically, the government was trying to suppress the "truth" it had murdered 3,000 US citizens on 9/11 and was trying to cover it up. And people were exposing that "truth" in the Internet. Would shilling on public forums even be a thing? CT thinking appears to be: Public posts on forums expose truth >government afraid of legal action > sends shills to forum to muddy waters >truth suppressed or diluted >people disengage What is really happening: Public posts on forums spreading conspiracies >government, by and large, unaware and doing nothing >conspiracies continue to spread until covered by media >people see media coverage and refuse to engage >some truther see media coverage, rethink and disengage >drop in popularity of "trutherism" leads remaining truthers to believe they are targets of government shills. There were never any government shills, people. Think about it logically: if a public forum was a threat to "exposing the truth", the government has plenty of tools to shut down problematic websites without going to the expense of hiring people to post crap online by the hour. One simple credible looking pretext and POOF! There goes ae911truth.org. Or 911truth.org. Or Rense. or Infowars. And it would have happened years ago, within months if not weeks. (OTOH 911blogger.com is down. Coincidence or conspiracy?) But paranoia about shills does serve one purpose: it keeps people stuck in CT thought processes from questioning the obvious inconsistencies in conspiracies. In the case of 9/11 conspiracies, it's going on 20 years and there is no evidence of a conspiracy. One either has to accept they were played by conspiracy grifters and there never was "a there there" or explain their cognitive dissonance with a comforting idea of "shills".