It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

DisInformation Agent Label

page: 3
0
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 28 2008 @ 02:16 PM
link   
They way I see it, everyone on ATS who writes without better knowledge is disinfo agent, those who descend down to ridicule character (and/or mental capabilities) of their opponent, are also disinfo agents, plus that they are infants and quite clearly show it by their actions.

The only thing is, which all recognize or should, that if you throw yourself into debate, be prepared to debate politely, without any ad hominem, and be prepared to back up your claims. This is not want-to-believe contest. There are very clever people here on ATS that can write comprehensive posts, so if you come up with very few thoughts that are poorly backed up - get prepared to get mentally raped


Anyway, there are people that have different opinions, and there are people who want their opinion be the orthodox one, yet they do not have slightest idea about what do they cheer for. They are like those religious people who cannot tolerate others. They are dead people btw, dead in a specific sense, and almost physically


G'bye




posted on Apr, 28 2008 @ 02:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by SaviorComplex
Actually, his claims are on topic.


I disagree. According to the initial post, the topic regards a visable system to negatively "star/flag" posts/threads.


Originally posted by SaviorComplex
MajKarma and his ilk have made the accusation that there are disinformation agents ...


I have a strong feeling that MajKarma's discussion of specific members, instead of the topic at hand, was an influential factor in why his account is no longer active.

Again, Courtesy Is Mandatory here on ATS, and I'd hate to see any more members getting banned because they couldn't maintain such decorum. Referring to members who don't agree with you as "child" isn't much different than labeling them "disinfo agents"; both are intended to insult/belittle.

[edit on 4/28/08 by redmage]



posted on Apr, 28 2008 @ 05:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by SaviorComplex

Originally posted by MajKarma
I have no control of or interest in this friend and foe silliness and have not chosen or engaged any of you. As for your small mind comment; I am an Engineer with a Stanford MBA and am an ex marine corp officer. I have socks older than most here. So, spare me the rhetoric from the Green Lattern and have whatever system you like.


I don't care if who you are, or what you're supposed background is. For all we know, you could be telling the truth, or you could be lying; therefore, you're about as real as the Green Lantern.

But it does strike me as odd that someone with your supposed background and education would propose or endorse a system like the one you did. Color me skeptical...

And yes, we will continue to use the same system we've been using. It seems to be working out just fine. If you don't like it, you know where the door is.


Originally posted by MajKarma
As for the star/rating system, this too is a done subject.


So you say, now that you've been beaten into the ground over it.

And by the way, we're still waiting for you to name and prove there are disinfo agents here.




For all I KNOW, the media, the "official sources" could be lying...

[edit on 28-4-2008 by thetruth777]



posted on Apr, 28 2008 @ 05:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by SaviorComplex

Originally posted by thetruth777
That leads me to question your purpose of joining ATS.


One does not have to believe every claim that is voiced here.


Originally posted by thetruth777
If anyone is a DisInformation agent, it is SaviorComplex.


Really now? I must be really getting in your craw.

Prove it, child. Show one single shred of evidence that I am a disinformation agent, outside of the sin of being a skeptic.

[edit on 28-4-2008 by SaviorComplex]




Prove it? Oh, I don't have to. Alex Jones, Loose Change, and Freedom to Fascism already did all the work for me.


Now, CHILD, prove to ME that 9/11 was NOT an inside job. That the media in NOT a propaganda tool. That the government is NOT using terrorism as a scare tactic.


The only response I get for my well-backed claims is "prove it". How about you prove to ME that I'm wrong.


We'd all love to see your evidence. And from now on, please debunk TERRORSTORM, LOOSE CHANGE, etc. with EVIDENCE, rather than a simple "prove it".



Because here on ATS, the burden of proof lies with the skeptic.



posted on Apr, 28 2008 @ 06:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by thetruth777
Prove it? Oh, I don't have to. Alex Jones, Loose Change, and Freedom to Fascism already did all the work for me.


Wait? What?

How does any of that prove I am a disinformation agent? That some odd reasoning...


Originally posted by thetruth777
Because here on ATS, the burden of prof lies with the skeptic.


Really now? I doubt that rule can be found anywhere in the T&C or any of the social mores on this board.

Every reasonable person on this board would agree the burden of proof lies with person making the claim, regardless of their status as skeptic or believer.

Now, being you are the one who is making the claim that I am a disinformation agent, the burden of proof is on you.

Now prove it, show the evidence, or drop the claim.

[edit on 28-4-2008 by SaviorComplex]



posted on Apr, 28 2008 @ 06:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by redmage
I have a strong feeling that MajKarma's discussion of specific members, instead of the topic at hand, was an influential factor in why his account is no longer active.


Considering how often the label of "disinfo agent" is thrown around by the small-minded and intellectually challenged, I doubt that lead to his ban. It may have been his threats of violence against people who did not agree with him.

[edit on 28-4-2008 by SaviorComplex]



posted on Apr, 28 2008 @ 07:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by SaviorComplex

Originally posted by thetruth777
Prove it? Oh, I don't have to. Alex Jones, Loose Change, and Freedom to Fascism already did all the work for me.


Wait? What?

How does any of that prove I am a disinformation agent? That some odd reasoning...


Originally posted by thetruth777
Because here on ATS, the burden of prof lies with the skeptic.


Really now? I doubt that rule can be found anywhere in the T&C or any of the social mores on this board.

Every reasonable person on this board would agree the burden of proof lies with person making the claim, regardless of their status as skeptic or believer.

Now, being you are the one who is making the claim that I am a disinformation agent, the burden of proof is on you.

Now prove it, show the evidence, or drop the claim.

[edit on 28-4-2008 by SaviorComplex]



I wasn't saying you were a disinfo agent, *snip*. I was only claiming that you have no proof against my statements. Site at least ONE reference as to WHY 9/11 was NOT an inside job, and it better not be the Popular Mechanics article, as it was debunked. And do you have ANY evidence to prove thaat mainstream media is reliable? NO.



*snip I am NOT the one making the claim. Everyone on ATS knows that 9/11 was an inside job. If anyone is making any claims, it is you. Prove that mainstream media is reliable. Prove me wrong. PROVE me wrong.

[edit on 28-4-2008 by thetruth777]

Edited out personal attacks.

Mod Note: General ATS Discussion Etiquette – Please Review This Link.

Courtesy is Mandatory

[edit on 28-4-2008 by GAOTU789]



posted on Apr, 28 2008 @ 07:44 PM
link   
Also, why do you delete all comments with which you, at least slightly, disagree, from your comments page?



posted on Apr, 28 2008 @ 07:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by SaviorComplex

Originally posted by redmage
I have a strong feeling that MajKarma's discussion of specific members, instead of the topic at hand, was an influential factor in why his account is no longer active.


Considering how often the label of "disinfo agent" is thrown around by the small-minded and intellectually challenged, I doubt that lead to his ban. It may have been his threats of violence against people who did not agree with him.

[edit on 28-4-2008 by SaviorComplex]




Also, tell me how William Cooper could have predicted 9/11 2 months before it happened. Prove to me how Patriot Act is NOT the eradication of our constitution.


Do you, by any chance, watch Fox News? Did you vote for Bush? Judging by your posts, the answer to both is "yes"



posted on Apr, 28 2008 @ 08:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by thetruth777
I wasn't saying you were a disinfo agent, idiot. I was only claiming that you have no proof against my statements.


Umm...Actually you did.


Originally posted by thetruth777
If anyone is a DisInformation agent, it is SaviorComplex.


When you have a tendency to forget the accusations you've made, especially when you can easily scroll up to see them, you may want to lay off the insults.


Originally posted by thetruth777
Site at least ONE reference as to WHY 9/11 was NOT an inside job, and it better not be the Popular Mechanics article, as it was debunked. And do you have ANY evidence to prove thaat mainstream media is reliable?


Ummm...who is debating 9/11? I think you are confused again. No one brought up 9/11...


Originally posted by thetruth777
Also, why do you delete all comments with which you, at least slightly, disagree, from your comments page?


I think if you read your own question, you'll find the answer to that.

[edit on 28-4-2008 by SaviorComplex]



posted on Apr, 28 2008 @ 09:01 PM
link   


Ummm...who is debating 9/11? I think you are confused again. No one brought up 9/11...



With no way to prove me wrong, you resort to calling me "confused"...



pathetic.



posted on Apr, 28 2008 @ 09:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by thetruth777
With no way to prove me wrong, you resort to calling me "confused"...


No one even brought up 9/11. 9/11 has nothing to do with this conversation. 9/11 is not the topic. You're the only one ranting and raving about it.

The topic is disinformation agents, which you accused me of being, and still refuse to provide one shred of evidence for, by the way.



posted on Apr, 28 2008 @ 09:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by SaviorComplex

Originally posted by thetruth777
With no way to prove me wrong, you resort to calling me "confused"...


No one even brought up 9/11. 9/11 has nothing to do with this conversation. 9/11 is not the topic. You're the only one ranting and raving about it.

The topic is disinformation agents, which you accused me of being, and still refuse to provide one shred of evidence for, by the way.



You're right: I don't have one shred of evidence to suggest that.



But do you have any evidence to prove that the conspiracies are wrong?



posted on Apr, 28 2008 @ 10:39 PM
link   
reply to post by thetruth777
 


Jeeze dude, he wasn't saying the conspiracies were wrong either, here at least. Stop derailing and get on topic. SaviorComplex, stop feeding the troll. Ignore him if you have to.
To the both of you: You're making the other look bad.
SC, yeah he called you a disnfo agent, any person who uses research found anywhere else other than a webpage or Youtube get's called a disinfo agent here.
TheTruth777, I don't know what your problem is, but whatever cause you're trying to put forth is being blacklisted by your behaviour.

To the OP, if he still is lurking around, or to anyone else for that matter. Making a system to mark negatively on threads would have the same problem that marking positively has. To many threads are started where people just aggree with whats said without researching it, or making their own conclusions.

[edit on 28-4-2008 by RuneSpider]



posted on Apr, 28 2008 @ 11:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by RuneSpider
SaviorComplex, stop feeding the troll. Ignore him if you have to.


Oh, but it's so cute when they get their feathers all up!


Originally posted by RuneSpider
SC, yeah he called you a disnfo agent, any person who uses research found anywhere else other than a webpage or Youtube get's called a disinfo agent here.


I know, I probably shouldn't be getting so worked up about it. But it is a frequent tactic on here, and it's grown a bit tiresome.



posted on Apr, 29 2008 @ 04:55 AM
link   
Jep, as someone here post above pointed out, please stop this unnecessary thread expanding by having a dialogue that actually won't contribute on the conversation at hand. Try using u2u's. As I said above, this is not want-to-believe contest. No one cares what you guys think about each other, but instead the worthless thread expansion you both are contributing, is annoying. Send u2u's if you love each other that much
And besides SaviourC, while I usually appreciate your posts of skeptism that can ground feet of almost anyone, your defensive stance on this conversation is not nice to watch. People will know you by your posts, so my suggestion you keep yourself posting more unless you have something to contribute on the conversation, otherwise you'll just ridicule yourself.

Thank you.

In fact, the best tactics disinfo agents can have is ad hominen in order to derail the conversation. Once people start using terms like 'child' and if worse 'retard' and such, they show their own 'intellectual challengesness', and furthermore it is a perfect demonstration of maturness level of that person; they demonstrate that they themselves cannot stand the opposite views of the their opponents.

Nevertheless, happy thoughts



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join