Cops shilling on this forum?

[TonyGosling]

This is partially copied from a previous thread about Peter Power being confronted by WAC
As it's taking over that thread I decided to repost here.

Did the copper, Bushwacker, do it in his own spare time online, or was he paid to do it. I'd guess the former.

Well we have the evidence now that it was the latter as it is a police network he's posting from.

Unless he's been shilling in his lunch-break.

Gosh we have a confirmed shill - that's what evidence can do




And Bushwacker had been spending a lot of police time....

Joined: 07 Sep 2006
Total posts: 1379
[1.37% of total / 2.95 posts per day]

I supose it's only a small step from putting groups like ours under surveillance to registering on the forum and beginning to mess things up by posting lies and contradicting evidence as it emerges. Is that what Scotland Yard has come to these days?

Maybe we should go back through bushwacker's posts and see where he's been intervening... then we'll know the most damning evidence that the 7/7 perps are most afraid of getting out to a wider public, and the crown prosecution service.

BTW - if anyone suspects a post of being from a cop or other shill just PM your favourite admin with the exact URL of that post (not just the topic) and we'll check it out publishing the IP on that thread if it's dodgey.

[Sherlock Holmes]

I find it a little bit worrying, not the reading of the forum and monitoring of IP addresses which is taken as read. But the actual posting, I know you are all busy, but it would be worth looking through the posts made just for arguements made and points raised it's likely they are 'shill' points and might be commonly recurring posts/themes in the future.

I know it's quite a bit of work, but could be well worth doing. 1300+ posts that's quite a few.

[simplesimon]

Tony Gosling wrote:

Maybe we should go back through bushwacker's posts and see where he's been intervening... then we'll know the most damning evidence that the 7/7 perps are most afraid of getting out to a wider public, and the crown prosecution service.

That's assuming he's an "official" shill. I tend to think he's acting "independently" (to the extent he can, being immersed in the culture). The "official" shills on this forum will presumably have practically impenetrable cover, including their choice of IP address.

Come to that, are you completely confident that this is a smoking gun? The domain doesn't seem to match other police domains. Planet Online?. Hope you're right, but needs a bit more solid confirmation. Best regards.

[simplesimon]

I'm cross posting this as the topic has been taken up here, and also...

I fear this may be a false trail. I hope not, but if so, to preempt any cheap shots from the gallery. Tony Gosling, I want you to be right, but if you're not, I'd just like to say I think (hope!) you are well intentioned, and it's an easy mistake to make. Don't be disheartened by the real shills, and keep up the good work.

Tony Gosling wrote:

He's not necessarily guilty himself remember, could have been unwittingly involved - but his exercise was definately part of the overall 7/7 operation.

It's possible he's not guilty, but:

from http://www.julyseventh.co.uk/july-7-ter ... arsal.html (from Newsnight "blog"):

202. At 09.25 AM
on 17 Sep 2006, Peter Power wrote:
My name repeatedly comes up whenever armchair / conspiratorial thinkers consider the terrorist exercise my company ran in London at exactly the same time as 7/7. This is only the second time I have formally reacted to these numerous statements. I’ve also appeared many times on BBC News / Newsnight to explain post 9/11 & 7/7 concepts such as ‘new normal’ etc. I think anyone familiar with likely terrorist targets will release [sic] our exercise scenario was coincidence rather than conspiracy, but it does start to raise some interesting points on a wider scale.

Several features now exist to create a much more generic and all-hazards approach to numerous risks and threats that are uniquely starting to appear on the global / corporate radar screen irrespective of country, culture, geography or sector. Some of these are already occurring such as a new form of terrorism that has no ‘political’ objective, the effect of high volume and unrestricted information on the internet, spread of disease / mass travel (230m people passed through UK airports last year / all major air hubs are less than 72 hours apart), ineffective world leaders & UN, the consequences of accelerating global warming, the positioning of key essential / physiological supplies (Critical National Infrastructure – CNI - UK) in the private sector (e.g. electricity, water etc.) and an associated failure to understand how vital the private sector is not only in terms of employment, economy and wealth generation, but to maintain almost the entire CNI in most if it not all countries.

In several cases these threats and risks combine to create a series of problems that we are presently unable to deal with as a result of silo based attitudes, incompetence, proprietorial behaviour or just complacency.

There is I suggest, a need to start building a new approach based on conceptualising and hopefully influencing others since we are presently lacking a truly forward thinking and pan global collective body of influential advisors, practitioners and academics that transcends the otherwise valuable but discrete institutions in many countries and their individual agendas. It might just inform many others as to what terrorism is all about and get them to think twice before alleging my own company was some how implicated in 7/7. My aim is to help stimulate, collaborate and disseminate effective and non partisan advice without the handicap of parochial restrictions, silo constraints or inhibited vision.

In my opinion Peter Power is at best an accomplice to mass murder, and at worst an enthusiastic NWO operative. His own words suggest the latter.

paul wright wrote:

Did the copper, Bushwacker, do it in his own spare time online, or was he paid to do it. I'd guess the former. If you want a pig to contibute to a forum, then you don't do it as blatantly and with a traceable IP address
Nice one Bushwacker. Glad you took the interest

I think almost certainly the former. An "official" agent provocateur would likely not be so incompetent? Incidentally, I don't think it's smart to be alienating y'er rank and file "pigs" by calling them "pigs" (as I sometimes do myself for reasons I won't bother justifying here). It's logical to assume that a small proportion are on our side, and wrestling with their consciences. A small proportion of that group might be thinking of what they might do about it. Better, I say, to concentrate on "turning" any you might have a relationship of personal trust with.

I'm wondering whether it would be productive to raise this with his (bushwackers's) employer, and suggesting that the matter be investigated under their internal disciplinary procedure?

Actually, I'm not convinced there's a smoking gun yet... I hope so, but fear not...

[Sherlock Holmes]

Tony you've got a keen eye my friend.

I've done a cursory whois, I'm no expert as you know.

Although the comment is obviously a little bit 'odd' to say the least, the IP address checks out to Planet Online, which became Energis Ltd and was then taken over by Cable and Wireless. A provider of internet services to industry ( lots of FTSE-100 companies) and yeah maybe lots of defence companies too we don't know about. But need to be careful cuz I don't think it was the guys who hang out at Canary wharf or wage war by deception, that would be too sloppy, they would come via a Tor network, or 'untraceable IP' i.e. assign their IP to an 'internet cafe' because they own the backbone in anycase.

------------------------
Domain name:
pol.co.uk

Registrant:
Energis Squared Limited

Registrant type:
UK Limited Company, (Company number: 3037442)

Registrant's address:
Melbourne Street
Leeds
West Yorks
LS2 7PX
GB

Registrar:
Cable & Wireless plc [Tag = CWGLOBAL]
URL: http://www.cw.com

Relevant dates:
Registered on: before Aug-1996
Renewal date: 02-Nov-2009
Last updated: 02-Oct-2007

Registration status:
Registered until renewal date.

Name servers:
earth.theplanet.net
pluto.theplanet.net
venus.theplanet.net

Energis Squared (www.energis-squared.com), formerly known as Planet Online, is the award winning internet and e-business arm of Energis (www.energis.co.uk), the FTSE 100 telecommunications and internet solutions company. Energis plc was founded in 1993 and is focused on the business marketplace.

Major UK national clients include the BBC, Boots, Freeserve, Thomas Cook, Sainsbury, Friends Provident and Whitbread.

Working with partners around the world, Energis Squared delivers products on an international scale. This includes close associations with major partner such as Cisco, Sun, Compaq, GTE, Checkpoint, Network Associates, StorageTek, Microsoft, GEO, Fujitsu Siemens, Cobalt and IBM

But the comment was a little bit "messed up" I think we can all agree on that.

[Bushwacker]

This is partially copied from a previous thread about Peter Power being confronted by WAC
As it's taking over that thread I decided to repost here.

Did the copper, Bushwacker, do it in his own spare time online, or was he paid to do it. I'd guess the former.

Well we have the evidence now that it was the latter as it is a police network he's posting from.

Unless he's been shilling in his lunch-break.

Gosh we have a confirmed shill - that's what evidence can do




And Bushwacker had been spending a lot of police time....

Joined: 07 Sep 2006
Total posts: 1379
[1.37% of total / 2.95 posts per day]

I supose it's only a small step from putting groups like ours under surveillance to registering on the forum and beginning to mess things up by posting lies and contradicting evidence as it emerges. Is that what Scotland Yard has come to these days?

Maybe we should go back through bushwacker's posts and see where he's been intervening... then we'll know the most damning evidence that the 7/7 perps are most afraid of getting out to a wider public, and the crown prosecution service.

BTW - if anyone suspects a post of being from a cop or other shill just PM your favourite admin with the exact URL of that post (not just the topic) and we'll check it out publishing the IP on that thread if it's dodgey.

Don't get over excited, that is total nonsense, I am certainly not posting on a police network, God knows where you got that from.

[Bushwacker]

Tony you've got a keen eye my friend.

I've done a cursory whois, I'm no expert as you know.

Although the comment is obviously a little bit 'odd' to say the least, the IP address checks out to Planet Online, which became Energis Ltd and was then taken over by Cable and Wireless. A provider of internet services to industry ( lots of FTSE-100 companies) and yeah maybe lots of defence companies too we don't know about. But need to be careful cuz I don't think it was the guys who hang out at Canary wharf or wage war by deception, that would be too sloppy, they would come via a Tor network, or 'untraceable IP' i.e. assign their IP to an 'internet cafe' because they own the backbone in anycase.

------------------------
Domain name:
pol.co.uk

Registrant:
Energis Squared Limited

Registrant type:
UK Limited Company, (Company number: 3037442)

Registrant's address:
Melbourne Street
Leeds
West Yorks
LS2 7PX
GB

Registrar:
Cable & Wireless plc [Tag = CWGLOBAL]
URL: http://www.cw.com

Relevant dates:
Registered on: before Aug-1996
Renewal date: 02-Nov-2009
Last updated: 02-Oct-2007

Registration status:
Registered until renewal date.

Name servers:
earth.theplanet.net
pluto.theplanet.net
venus.theplanet.net

Energis Squared (www.energis-squared.com), formerly known as Planet Online, is the award winning internet and e-business arm of Energis (www.energis.co.uk), the FTSE 100 telecommunications and internet solutions company. Energis plc was founded in 1993 and is focused on the business marketplace.

Major UK national clients include the BBC, Boots, Freeserve, Thomas Cook, Sainsbury, Friends Provident and Whitbread.

Working with partners around the world, Energis Squared delivers products on an international scale. This includes close associations with major partner such as Cisco, Sun, Compaq, GTE, Checkpoint, Network Associates, StorageTek, Microsoft, GEO, Fujitsu Siemens, Cobalt and IBM

But the comment was a little bit "messed up" I think we can all agree on that.

I see, what you are saying is that the idiot Gosling made an assumption that pol.co.uk was a police domain, when in fact it is Planet Online, who provide services for Freeserve, the original ISP I signed up with, although now taken over by Orange.

Fairly typical of the standard of research of the troofer community, and of course hailed as "evidence"

I think Mr Gosling owes me an apology, although I doubt I'll get one!

[Sherlock Holmes]

No actually what is shows is this, your initial comment on the WAC Peter Power video was 'odd' as is your current comment referring to us the 'troofer community'.

I think what it shows is that with limited resources we can do some research and come to conclusions which is called gathering evidence based on our initial suspicions founded upon your 'shill-like' comments and now referring to us as the 'troofer community'. This is what the police and proper investigators will do all the time, albeit with more resources, if they would only do their jobs.

You might not be a copper, but the 'shill' label hasn't been disproved, in my opinion, and I stress it's my personal opinion, specifically by the actual comment left on the WAC video of Peter Power and calling us the 'troofer community'.

I'm not going to get involved in a flaming match with you I'll let others on this board make their own minds up *especially the moderators* including Mr. Tony Gosling, who has the right to be suspicious, when 'shill-like' comments appear.

[Bushwacker]

No actually what is shows is this, your initial comment on the WAC Peter Power video was 'odd' as is your current comment referring to us the 'troofer community'.

I think what it shows is that with limited resources we can do some research and come to conclusions which is called gathering evidence based on our initial suspicions founded upon your 'shill-like' comments and now referring to us as the 'troofer community'. This is what the police and proper investigators will do all the time, albeit with more resources, if they would only do their jobs.

You might not be a copper, but the 'shill' label hasn't been disproved, in my opinion, and I stress it's my personal opinion, specifically by the actual comment left on the WAC video of Peter Power and calling us the 'troofer community'.

I'm not going to get involved in a flaming match with you I'll let others on this board make their own minds up *especially the moderators* including Mr. Tony Gosling, who has the right to be suspicious, when 'shill-like' comments appear.

I am a critic, O Great Detective!

[SHERITON HOTEL]

Talking of the 'plod' skiving on the job, (and if you're listening you'll know)Dylan Avery and Chris Sparke reported the murders of 60 plus Brits in New York 11.09.01 with evidence of their murderers to Paddington police station more than a month ago now, what's the latest? I'd like to think they follow up murder reports!

[blackcat]

Bushwacker - they are talking about you not to you. Keep out of here.

[TonyGosling]

Yes, I still think it was an 'odd' post and merited enquiry. I ran it past people who were equally suspicious. Apologies for the mistake which I hope you'll agree was understandable.

Can Bushwacker sue for libel? I think not, but sorry just the same folks.

ooooops............

I got somewhat annoyed that anyone could think it pointless to question someone about the biggest attack on London since the blitz which remains virtually uninvestigated.






I gave no such order. Who did?
Obey!

We obey no one!
We are superior beings!

[marky 54]

anyone on the board is a possible shill due to comments or opinons they have on certain subjects, we don't all agree with each other on every subject and comments that disagree could always be seen as a shill covering up and making comments to divert.

its something nobody can get away from im pretty certain im down as a shill to many who believe NPT/TV fakery because i totally disagree with the evidence and the conclusions.

critics are no different imo, they may well think 9/11 was not a inside job but its just their opinon and current belief, like me thinking npt is total rubbish or someone else thinking their is nothing in chemtrails or even u.f.o's. it dos'nt make anyone shills because their comments don't match the belief of many.

imo these are not the words of a shill:

Do not think I am justifying the invasion, I think it was illegal and a doomed venture from the outset, and did nothing to protect us, in fact made us much less safe.

http://www.nineeleven.co.uk/board/viewt ... c&start=60

however those words were used by bushwacker, somebody who disagrees about 9/11 but agrees about the war in iraq and uses the word "illegal" which is more important to note. its easy to only pick up on what people disagree with and totally ignore what they do agree with. wether you like it or not bushwacker holds the same postion when it comes to the iraq war(unless he changes his stance).

pepik on the other hand could not bring himself to even admit what was reported by the mainstream media on numerous occasions and almost tried to rewrite history whilst calling me a conspiracy theorists for reciting back to him what had been reported.

bushwacker may not agree about 9/11 but at least he sees the injustice of the war, better than nothing imo and trying to claim the goverments are perfect and there is no reason to question anything and its ALL in our heads.

there are far more people i suspect as being shills that would come way before bushwacker.

[simplesimon]

marky 54 wrote:

imo these are not the words of a shill:
Quote:
Do not think I am justifying the invasion, I think it was illegal and a doomed venture from the outset, and did nothing to protect us, in fact made us much less safe.

In my opinion they are exactly the words of a shill.

"I think it was illegal"

- legitimises so called international law.

"doomed venture from the outset"

- promotes the idea that the war is being lost, when from the perps point of view it is going very well.

"and did nothing to protect us, in fact made us much less safe."

- promotes the idea of "blowback", from which of course, we will need more "protection".

there are far more people i suspect as being shills that would come way before bushwacker

Me too. But I do wonder why if he thinks we're a bunch of loons he spends so much time here.

[marky 54]

marky 54 wrote:

imo these are not the words of a shill:
Quote:
Do not think I am justifying the invasion, I think it was illegal and a doomed venture from the outset, and did nothing to protect us, in fact made us much less safe.

In my opinion they are exactly the words of a shill.

"I think it was illegal"

- legitimises so called international law.

"doomed venture from the outset"

- promotes the idea that the war is being lost, when from the perps point of view it is going very well.

"and did nothing to protect us, in fact made us much less safe."

- promotes the idea of "blowback", from which of course, we will need more "protection".

there are far more people i suspect as being shills that would come way before bushwacker

Me too. But I do wonder why if he thinks we're a bunch of loons he spends so much time here.

so it pays to promote the fact the war was illegal? sorry i don't see it, if anything promoting international law exposes how those who caused the war have not been tried for war crimes.

a shill would avoid that fact altogether, the rest can be taken however you see it and could be what you said for all i know.

why do i still keep tracks of the news even though i know they do not report the whole truth if any?

[simplesimon]

marky 54 wrote:

so it pays to promote the fact the war was illegal? sorry i don't see it, if anything promoting international law exposes how those who caused the war have not been tried for war crimes.

It pays if you are shilling for single world government. Pundits will call for "strengthening international institutions", and well meaning folks can be led to think "if only there were someone... something... some BODY that could rein in the USA... (or Iran, AL-CIA-DUH, "global terrorism", "global warming", whatever. Same trap, different bait). As for "war crimes", that issue alone demonstrates my point. It is widely known that the USA/UK/Israel have broken numerous "laws of war" and flout "international law" with impunity, and most of the world's people consider the US to be the greatest threat to world peace. Some may be fooled into calling for a stronger UN, not realising that the purpose of international law is to have international law, and forgetting that lawmakers make laws for themselves, but ignore their own laws when it suits them.

It's a basic disinfo technique to claim some common ground with the target. Hence shysters like George Monbiot who rails against "the injustices of globalisation", but calls for a world parliament "to make it fairer".

Anyway. That reflects my view that the "NWO" is the real threat, that "9/11" was "just" a power play in their plan. If you're not with me here, no hard feelings and respectful regards.

why do i still keep tracks of the news even though i know they do not report the whole truth if any?

I can tell you why I do. I think that "Every word is a lie, including 'and', 'the', and 'but'". But I want to know what lies they are telling. So that when they say "look over there!" I know it's likely I should be looking elsewhere. To try, within my very limited capability, to read between the lines. To know something of the enemy and their plan.

[Bushwacker]

Yes, I still think it was an 'odd' post and merited enquiry. I ran it past people who were equally suspicious. Apologies for the mistake which I hope you'll agree was understandable.

Can Bushwacker sue for libel? I think not, but sorry just the same folks.

ooooops............

I got somewhat annoyed that anyone could think it pointless to question someone about the biggest attack on London since the blitz which remains virtually uninvestigated.

For what it is worth, I do think, and have said so on here, that there should have been an enquiry into the attacks, the "narrative" was quite inadequate.

Ambushing Peter Power and shouting questions at him was quite absurd, was never going to get any answers, and illustrates why his clients would insist their name be kept secret.

[John White]

Ambushing Peter Power and shouting questions at him was quite absurd, was never going to get any answers, and illustrates why his clients would insist their name be kept secret.

He was happy enough sat in front of TV cameras when he thought he was in control

"We are Change" is the shape of the future: talking truth to power. No-where to run, no-where to hide, if the state refuses to investigate, the people will get it done. Sure it can't be expected that Power is going to turn around and answer: but it shows hes not prepared to speak the truth of the matter, and that is a powerful message in itself, and a step in itself to getting him under oath in a public enquirey

If you are trying to tell me that the people dont have the right to know who was organsing terror drills with identical targets on the morning of 7/7, well you can have your opinion sure, but dont expect respect for it

I'm sure you find the idea of activism outside of the control of the authorities scary and intimadating. But thats your fear to face, and its best you face it swiftly, becuase you are standing in the path of the tide

[Newspeak International]

If Bushwacker is what you say he is and the evidence is overwhelming ,why don't you ban him afterall Mason Free Party was banned for far less.

Just a thought

[John White]

If Bushwacker is what you say he is and the evidence is overwhelming ,why don't you ban him afterall Mason Free Party was banned for far less.

Just a thought

MFP is NOT banned: hes on a break till the New Year to see if he grows out of the need to accuse anyone involved in running the forum of being a "Zionist Shill"

[John White]

But if he can't: then he'll be banned

tis, as they say, just a choice

[Newspeak International]

Sorry John, if TG is accusing someone of being a shill without overwhelming evidence,is TG not due for a "break" as MFP.

[paul wright]

Phew! I've had enough of shilltalk for the time being.
Nobody's not a shill, eh?

[John White]

Phew! I've had enough of shilltalk for the time being.
Nobody's not a shill, eh?

Alternatively, what about "everyones a shill for themselves"

[Bushwacker]

Ambushing Peter Power and shouting questions at him was quite absurd, was never going to get any answers, and illustrates why his clients would insist their name be kept secret.

He was happy enough sat in front of TV cameras when he thought he was in control

"We are Change" is the shape of the future: talking truth to power. No-where to run, no-where to hide, if the state refuses to investigate, the people will get it done. Sure it can't be expected that Power is going to turn around and answer: but it shows hes not prepared to speak the truth of the matter, and that is a powerful message in itself, and a step in itself to getting him under oath in a public enquirey

If you are trying to tell me that the people dont have the right to know who was organsing terror drills with identical targets on the morning of 7/7, well you can have your opinion sure, but dont expect respect for it

I'm sure you find the idea of activism outside of the control of the authorities scary and intimadating. But thats your fear to face, and its best you face it swiftly, becuase you are standing in the path of the tide

I find it not at all scary and intimidating, I find it childish. Power was naturally not going to answer, as you accept, and the powerful messages such actions send out is:
1. Those dissatisfied with the official version of the 7/7 attacks are idiots. (Note: this is not my opinion, sensible and informative posts have been made by the J7 group, but this is the impression the WAC action will give of 7/7 activists)
2. The people involved had better keep all information as to their identities a closely guarded secret, and generally give out as little information as possible, to avoid harassment, so this action is entirely counter-productive.

The tide has gone out, matey!

[paul wright]

That's the conversely correct

[John White]

The tide has gone out, matey!

As I said: you find the it scary: hence you tell yourself comforting self delusions

You're in for a shock

[Bushwacker]

Well, we shall see!

Meanwhile, have a very happy Christmas!

[marky 54]

marky 54 wrote:
Quote:
so it pays to promote the fact the war was illegal? sorry i don't see it, if anything promoting international law exposes how those who caused the war have not been tried for war crimes.

simplesimon wrote:

It pays if you are shilling for single world government. Pundits will call for "strengthening international institutions", and well meaning folks can be led to think "if only there were someone... something... some BODY that could rein in the USA... (or Iran, AL-CIA-DUH, "global terrorism", "global warming", whatever. Same trap, different bait). As for "war crimes", that issue alone demonstrates my point. It is widely known that the USA/UK/Israel have broken numerous "laws of war" and flout "international law" with impunity, and most of the world's people consider the US to be the greatest threat to world peace. Some may be fooled into calling for a stronger UN, not realising that the purpose of international law is to have international law, and forgetting that lawmakers make laws for themselves, but ignore their own laws when it suits them.

It's a basic disinfo technique to claim some common ground with the target. Hence shysters like George Monbiot who rails against "the injustices of globalisation", but calls for a world parliament "to make it fairer".

Anyway. That reflects my view that the "NWO" is the real threat, that "9/11" was "just" a power play in their plan. If you're not with me here, no hard feelings and respectful regards.

so what are you saying here? the war was not illegal and anyone saying it is shilling to ferther the agenda of the NWO?

strange how this forum works sometimes, i thought most here thought the war in iraq was illegal, i've never heard anyone equate it with shilling or ferthering the nwo agenda before.

so howcome when others say it it's because they are concerned about the reasons for war and the injustice of war? but when bushwacker says it it's because hes ferthering the NWO agenda?

i don't get it.

do you think the war in iraq is justified or illegal? are you ferthering the NWO agenda if you think it's illegal? or are you just making it up as you go along to make it seem bushwacker is a shill because he dos'nt agree with a lot of stuff on here?

i think the war was illegal also, am i a shill for expressing my opinons to people on that subject because it ferthers world goverment?

nevermind its the same with the peter power thing, threads are started about police harrasment(like the guy filming in his own garden and the police turn up to question him and impose themselves on him when he was doing nothing illegal). then people are frowned upon for pointing out that imposing themselves on somebody and chasing people around has the reverse effect as it is a form of harrasment.

don't think i defend bushwacker or peter power, but when ever was it a case of it's fine for us but not for them? if it is a case of that i was not informed about it.

if theres one thing i hate it is shill labeling, because i find in every case the labels are only ever given to those who disagree with somebody, yet it is far more likely shills will be playing a role of a truther and trying to guide people in the desired direction and being able to tell one way or the other is near impossible without evidence.

BUSHWACKER WROTE:

I see, what you are saying is that the idiot Gosling made an assumption that pol.co.uk was a police domain, when in fact it is Planet Online, who provide services for Freeserve, the original ISP I signed up with, although now taken over by Orange.

it seems to me the only reason left for it is taking a dislike to comments which do not agree with other peoples perception of reality.

i do not like seeing anyone accused as a shill on that basis and i will not stand for it. justifying this would justify truthers or those who question the offical narrative as being labeled as having mental problems base on a differnece of opinon.

[wepmob2000]

if theres one thing i hate it is shill labeling, because i find in every case the labels are only ever given to those who disagree with somebody, yet it is far more likely shills will be playing a role of a truther and trying to guide people in the desired direction and being able to tell one way or the other is near impossible without evidence.

Exactly what I thought after reading through all of this, a shill (whatever the hell that is) or a saboteur is hardly likely to draw attention to himself in this way.

Like him or loathe him, Bushwhacker has always been up front in his opinions and has argued his corner well, even if he were a policeman, would that mean he had no right to an opinion, or to hold forth on it? In fact he's probably one of the most valuable members of this board, because he disagrees with so much that 'troofer' arguments gain in validity (particularly if argued well against him).

Anyone who wants people banned just because they disagree with them is no better than the new-fascist government people here oppose (as long as those critics follow basic internet decorum, which Bushwhacker does, and present 'proper' arguments).