posted on Feb, 21 2013 @ 12:37 AM
Originally posted by Rising Against
Nine times out of Ten, anyone getting labeled as a "plant", shill, dis-info agent, and any other variation of, is only labeled that way for
disagreeing with another poster.
That, or because they have, or are very much in the process of, losing an argument. The "shill" argument really does seem to be, to me at least, a
last resort, an act of desperation and the like. A pathetic one too. It's a real pet peeve of mine and It's also a personal attack, one used to wholly
discredit someone else, and it won't be allowed to happen here, and if I see it I know I'll call on it too.
I mean really, I do wish people would stop with it because honestly, it is just silly. Whether you believe they are here or not (I do not), there's no
point in attempting to call it out other than to feed your own ego anyway. For arguments sake - If a shill is here, ignore them, move on and carry on
trying to find your own personal truth. Don't give them the light of day. There, simple. Then again maybe I'm over simplifying it, but I'm yet to be
provided with solid, or even any kind of, proof for their presence here.
I disagree, politely.
On the other side, people are called Conspiracy theorist, Truther, Birther, Climate denialist, Holocaust denyer, Anti-Semite, etc. I find THAT
pathetic, especially when the person is not even claiming to have a "theory" but simply asks questions about things the government has control over
but does not disclose.
I am opposed to any kind of personal attack, name-calling or labeling. But it is important for unassuming readers (such as myself not too long ago) to
become aware of the possibility
of government supported writers with the explicit goal of convincing the public of specific beliefs.
Because I would have never expected them to exist when I was reading just general media forums.
The government has an interest in having the public believe certain things. Why would it NOT hire PR agents? There are many examples of far more
vicious things we KNOW the government has done.
I do not know how any "solid proof" of such an agent could be available because only the government has access to other people's bank accounts. But
whether or not they are being paid, I AM able to point to disinformation where, IMO, it is.
edit on 21-2-2013 by ThinkingHuman because: (no reason given)