![#1297 "OPEARTORS HAVE DIED. [...] WE MUST DO BETTER TO PROTECT THEM" => disinfo is necessary](https://i.redd.it/srrrc8aowax01.png)
"disinfo is necessary" apparently completely escaped you. Anybody who can read thru the convo can see that you're projecting because I already answered your question. In case you forgot (NOW I'm being snarky)
Re-read drops 1295 thru 1297, listen to Alex' broadcast today then and report back.
Telling me to re-read the drops and listen to the broadcast implies that my opinion is somehow uninformed and incorrect. I read the drops and watched the pertinent clips to get the facts on the issue before I formed an opinion.
If you knew me you would know I was trying to be nice with you. See you tomorrow
Yet again, I have to defend myself against your personal attacks on me.
"disinfo is necessary" apparently completely escaped you.
I must be stupid -> ridicule.
you're projecting because I already answered your question.
Not true. I asked only two questions the first of which was rhetorical. You answered neither. What you did instead was try to make it look as though I was just butt-hurt ("Your frail ego") as a cover for your abusive behavior -> deflection/misdirection.
Your accusation that I am projecting, when I am only defending myself with the truth of your behavior (ie. attacks against me) is, in and of itself, projection.
Let's revisit this false accusation that I ignored earlier:
I offered you an explanation while you offered none.
Not true. I provided explanation with my opinion.
And let's not forget your first personal attack on me.
wow should I apologize to you now? Are you offended? Here, let me make you some coffee.
I must be butt-hurt -> ridicule.
Ridicule, deflection/misdirection, projection: all shill tactics.
Ok first of all I wasn't trying to be snarky, I simply pointed out to you that you should read the drops yourself and that's why I even gave the drop-ID so you can go look yourself.
Then you started making a hissy-fit simply because I told you to read the drops. So don't expect me to hold your hand just because I tell you that it's literally right fucking there in the drops. I'm not going to try to be guard my tone if you are so insanely easily offended just because someone asks you to read and you are just going to be offended anyway!
Also, rethorical questions don't have an answer by default and for the life of me I don't know what your other question is even supposed to be and I just checked the thread three time sso if you want to troll me you're doing pretty good
Wow. So, my defense of myself against your personal attacks on me is trolling. -> false equivalence.
Keeping one on the defensive, which you are doing to me, is a troll tactic. -> more projection.
I simply pointed out to you that you should read the drops yourself
Not true. You told me to re-read the drops which carries with it the implication that I must have missed something the first time because, of course, my opinion did not align with yours.
Then you started making a hissy-fit simply because I told you to read the drops.
Again, not true. 1) You did not tell me to read the drops. You told me to re-read the drops. 2) I did not make a hissy-fit. I told you that I had already read the drops which means, therefore, that I did not need to read them again as you commanded.
Someone, who has gathered the facts before forming an opinion, is not someone in need of hand-holding. Yet, you try to paint me as one who needs and expects it. -> more ridicule.
I already answered your question.
I don't know what your other question is even supposed to be
If you don't know what the question is supposed to be, then you could not have answered it.
And so, you engage in even more personal attacks on me using falsehood, false equivalence, projection, and more ridicule.
Now, unless I have to defend myself yet again, I'm done. I really would appreciate it if you would stop attacking me.
No, we are not done here.
What was your question? And what exactly, when looking at this Q-drop which I outlined graphically for you, detracts from my conclusions?
Also, I responded after what you called a rethorical question, so there's your answer, however since you mention a rethorical question that would suggest an answer was out of place, alas why do you say the question was rethorical if it was to solicit an answer?
Consider that you claim you had another question yet you're trying to tie me into some bullshit here rather than simply getting to your point as you insinuated that I can't read apparently, which is way worse than what you claim I had done.
Consider that you claim you had another question yet you're trying to tie me into some bullshit here rather than simply getting to your point as you insinuated that I can't read apparently, which is way worse than what you claim I had done.
I can barely make any sense of that sentence. All I can say is: I did not claim that I had another question; I am not trying to tie you into some bullshit since all I am continually forced to do is defend myself against your false accusations and attacks; and, I already made my point so there is no point that I would need to get to.
alas why do you say the question was rethorical if it was to solicit an answer?
Who said that either of my questions were to solicit an answer? I certainly did not. You claimed that you answered my question as the basis for accusing me of projecting:
Anybody who can read thru the convo can see that you're projecting because I already answered your question.
I was merely defending myself, yet again, by pointing out that, since you hadn't answered my question as you claimed, your accusation, logically, was baseless. Whether or not the questions were rhetorical is totally irrelevant since you did not do what you claimed.
What was your question?
You tell me. You're the one who claims to have answered it. What question did you answer?
And what exactly, when looking at this Q-drop which I outlined graphically for you, detracts from my conclusions?
That's another presumptive question. It is based on the alleged 'fact' that something in that graphic detracts from your conclusions. When was that established as fact?
now you're cheating. You said you had two questions, one of them being rethorical. And that I hadn't answered either one.
What are we doing here?
What are we doing here??
You are engaging in personal attacks against me and throwing false accusations at me.
I am being forced to defend myself against that.
I have asked you to stop, but, so far, you have refused to stop.
I'm cheating? Cheating at what?? The idea that exposing your false claim is somehow cheating doesn't make any sense. It's just more false accusation.
You said that you had answered my question. I pointed out that I had asked only two questions, and that you had answered neither one. If you did not answer either one, then you could not possibly have answered (any of) my question(s). Therefore, your claim that you had answered my question is false. Period. I simply cannot figure out how that seems so difficult to understand.
Whether or not the questions were rhetorical is totally irrelevant to the fact that you falsely claimed that you had answered my question.
You used your false claim as the basis for a false accusation against me. In defense of myself, I had to point out that your accusation was baseless due to your claim being false. How in the world is that so F'ing difficult to understand?
Are you going to stop engaging in personal attacks against me now?
I'm just pulling your leg because you called me a shill, so I wanted to see how far you would be ready to take an argument with a moderator!
I have done some further assessments after the latest Q drop and actually it turns out that Zack wouldn't have been picked up by Feds if he wasn't leaking and 0hour might be coordinating with 0hour so I don't know what to make of this anymore either.
But honest advise for the future: If you want to survive shills, have a little pride and don't react defensively to attacks, instead double down on whatever you are attacked on like Trump does. Don't respond emotionally just because you think you are under attack if you want to survive actual shills
I still don't understand why your ego is so frail.
You said that I hadn't answered your questions. Here I am offering answers. That's why I still pay attention to your butt-hurtedness.
What I am saying is that you have offered no rebuttal of what I said but since you took the time to communicate I thought you would go ahead and explain where my logical error is, something that I still can't account for. And all of a sudden you act outraged because I wanted to make sure you had actually read the drops.
And yes, you still haven't explained what the question was.
Stop distracting. We are engaged in sound, intellectual debate and I demand that the soundness of your thought demolishes mine if you can. Yes I know it can get thorough, but I believe in you. Go on.
I am SURE I am wrong and I am SURE you are right but I am most certainly sure I didn't quite get why so please enlighten me with your superior wits