
-------------------------------------------------------------
1) no constructive discussion
2) constant strawmanning and name calling
3) will lie badly about anything they can't adequately debate
4) when they realise the bread has too much truth, they start misdirection with a dump useless non thread related topic and try to hijack the thread
5) will not leave the thread even though just considering this idea is "retarded"
6) lazy and obvious fuckin lies
7) will accuse the person calling them out
-------------------------------------------------------------

CONDEMNATION BEFORE INVESTIGATION IS AN ADMISSION OF INDOCTRINATION
This post brought to you by the same shitposters that push cuck porn on red boards.
Again: first it's optional, then it's default, then they find some excuse to remove the old option.
I bet a few years ago you'd laugh at conspiracy nuts who think Epstein run a child sex traficking ring
Worried about Russian disinformation. Meanwhile China and Israel own most of our politicians with bribes and blackmail. Billionaires own everything else. The FBI, CIA, ATF, etc work for them not us. If you believe the Russians are the biggest threat then the Chinese/Israeli disinformation program is working.

-------------------------------------------------------------
>Mention obvious stuff that everyone knows, even if based on circmustancial evidence (like Mossad is a false flag powerhouse.)
>They will pretend to be retarded and claim they will need an argument with sources.
>Then you proceed to show them pretty clear links with examples;
>MISTAKE! this is when they go full retarded and claim that they still don't get it
>So when you keep on explaining, they can use your own words to PETTIFOG
>Pettifog meaning:1)quibble about petty points.2)practice legal deception or trickery.
>Obvious use of all the basic fallacies like strawmen, non sequiturs, slippery slopes, black or white etc.
>Force you to engage in lenghty paragraphs to call it "word salad dribble" and "pilpul" and put the burden of proof on you
>Outright call you a mentally-ill person in need of medication, which is a long used trope by intelligence agencies and dirty lawyers. Which is called discrediting tactic or "ad hominem"
>Assuming your posture by an unrelated comment, example: "look how cringey Trump looks on that picture" or "where will Bernie take that money from?", so they will accuse you of being a "contrarian shill", just because you are pointing out an apolitical opinion or logic observation.
>They will pretend to have the reading comprehension of a teenager with ADHD, as an example say something like "It is A, as long as B". They will reply that there is no way it could be A, and when you point that you clearly typed that "as long as B", they will ignore it or pretend to be retarded, gaslighting on the real meaning of the words you typed. example -"I'd wish we could have free healthcare, but seems unlikely" they reply:"lmao low iq subhuman, there is no way you will get your precious free stuff, it's very unlikely hahaha!"
-------------------------------------------------------------


-------------------------------------------------------------
>Reply AT you, not TO you, so no matter how much you prove them wrong about their ad hominem accusations, they will keep on typing their monologue-like diatribes AT you, completely unrelated to a real debate or conversation.
>Pretending not to understand the diference between literal and figurative; either way if they ask for it or you give an example, they will get fixed on the literal example or , rather than the obvious concept behind the example. Example: "what was first, the egg or the chicken?" they will reply with literal and technical explanations about the reproduction of chicken. So when you try to backtrack to point out you were being figurative, guess what...
>They like to end their sentences with captious phrases like. "It's clear you are wrong because you are stupid and I'm right" usually in the shape of questions "maybe you are just fucking stupid".
>they like a very aggressive approach for their ideas, which is unorganic and seems a clear larp; what I mean is they will portray themselves as an outstanding radical with a higher moral code. It's very important for them to fabricate a higher ground, but rather by diminishing your position, rather than organically lifting themselves in a trully righteous way.
>Try to use these same tactics on them and watch them ignoring you, like engage them into petty semantics, unrelated details, even typos, ask for "proof" or "more reliable sources"
>Engage with them long enough to make them commit logical inconsistencies, or straight up ignore you in desperation. So make sure to end your sentences with a taunt, so in case these shills stop responding, everyone else can see you validared your argument as the one who laughs last.
-------------------------------------------------------------


-------------------------------------------------------------
Kikes use the amygdala hijack as a debating strategy. K-strategists (whites) want to win an argument, while r-strategists merely want to turn the crowd against the K-strategist. You are debating truth, while the r is out-grouping you, and doing so unopposed. Truth can be on your side, but still the force disparity will disfavor you. But turn the tables and fight to out-group the r-strategist, and suddenly they panic and back off. What happened was you found their amygdala-trigger in the conflict and hit it, and the force disparity shifted. You need to find the right amygdala button to push, and with shills it is exposing the facets of their organization which pose a real threat if exposed. With them, by comparison, the original issue is meaningless.
So when in any forum online, first you must realize that the shills are there and the scale of their operation. They are there and being paid to create operations like you see documented above in that article, because on each site you have thousands of lurkers, maybe tens of thousands of lurkers, waiting to be manipulated
-------------------------------------------------------------

You shills always go one layer too deep in the lies. You get eye fillers? Do you also personally know someone that died in Sandy Hook?
Just to shit up the board anon. I don’t have the pic handy but it’s been mentioned in their training and research material that if they can’t change minds they just act like retarded douchebags to try and annoy everyone into leaving
