posted on May, 8 2013 @ 08:02 PM
reply to post by Hefficide
Do the definitions of "ignorance" or "reality" change based upon the type of site one is typing on? What an absurd question to ask.
The point is that you are whining about people having certain conspiracy theories, on a conspiracy site. You have no right writing a thread witgh the
intent to bring down this group of people.
You really have a talent for jumping to conclusions, speaking in absolutist terms, and misrepresenting facts to suit your agenda. You should apply for
work in the disinfo field, you seem to have the requisite skills down pat. Beyond your opinion about me, which has nothing to do with the topic - and
your obvious attempt to dictate how other readers see me, was there a point to any of this?
Is the mod calling the member a disinfo agent or shill? I thought there were specific rules against that.
Just trying to establish how credible you actually are.
Let me go ahead and flesh out your thought, rather than the half-assed manner in which you went about it. You are trying to suggest that I am some
sort of Government agent. That's funny and it's also about the lowest hanging fruit one can shoot for. You'll simply have try harder than that to keep
I wasn't trying to suggest that at all, your words. Just pointing out weird inconsistencies, like I always do.
As far as appearing as though I have opposing views and contradictions? I suppose that a person with varied interests and complex opinions would be
confusing to a member who seems only to post on one subject, from one perspective, blindly and without any variation or growth of opinion.
Within the same thread?
I used a hot topic buzz word in a thread title. This suggests or proves what?
No, you wrote a thread suggesting that a false flag might happen. That was 6 months ago. Today you are here blasting people that think that the latest
terror attacks were false flags.
What gives you the right to attack these people? Why say this,
These conclusions rely upon a type of egocentric fantasy thinking that I am simply not equipped of engaging in.
You obviously were 6 months ago.
Again... More of exactly what I hoped to avoid when I wrote this thread. You are exactly the kind of person this OP warns against. Fanatics are
dangerous. Fanatics with agendas doubly so.
Why, because they are more punctual?
How bout schizophrenics?
The press was always flawed, has always gone through periods of great sensationalism and propaganda. But it catered to OUR desires and wants, and not
those of the people in power ( mostly ). By abandoning it, we hand it to those who would use it against us.
Can you explain what you meant here again?
edit on 8-5-2013 by DaveStinger because: (no reason given)