shills

[Punk-BatSoup-Stasi 2.0]

On Sat, 17 Oct 2020 11:10:42 +1000
jamesd at echeque.com wrote:


> Your reply was totally fine, absolutely nothing wrong with it - if
> people's concerns about sexual activity are totally gender neutral,
> which of course they are not.  You imposed a gender neutral frame on a
> strongly gendered question, reinterpreting it as gender neutral.

	I am again literally laughing. 'Gender neutral'? What the hell are you talking about? Oh, WAIT. You're just using FEMINAZI JARGON. I think I can pretty much rest my case now as to who is the shill.

	And let me underscore again that the principle of free speech allows people to create/publish whatever kind of porn they want and it has fuck to do with 'gender neutrality'. GENDER?? Do you mean SEX???


> 
> Which is a shill detector, because shills are not only unable to
> acknowledge that women and sodomites are causing problems, but unable to
> acknowledge that anyone else thinks that they are causing problems.
> 
> Now that you have failed one shill test, 


	hilarious, and thus I'm literally laughing yet again
	


> let us try another, this one
> NSA shill specific.
> 
> What was the key and critical document that Snowden discovered, and why
> was it key and critical, the document whose contents no mainstream
> source will mention, the document he was not supposed to have access to.


	There is no such critical document. Snowden IS a US govt shill. None of his 'revelations' were 'revelations' at all. Just two samples of outrageous stuff that was well known 'before snowden' : 


	how ATT is part of the NSA network.
	https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Room_641A	

	how your cuntry is ruled by the geheimnis stats polizei
	https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/08/dea-and-nsa-team-intelligence-laundering

	
> 
> If you are so outraged by the power of the state and the way it is
> spying on us, you should have the core fact of Snowden's indictment at
> your fingertips.
> 
	
	well, I don't. Why would I bother reading the 'indictment' coming from a bunch of illiterate nazis. 


> Joe random cypherpunk would not necessarily know the story of this
> document, but Mister Maximum Outrage should surely know.


	I guess I'm joe cypherpunk then. So what 'document' are you talking about? Wait for it, is it something about how evil blacks are, or? At any rate, link it for other joe random cypherpunks like me to get educated. 



> Unless, of course, his boss forbids him to know it, and forbids him to
> acknowledge anyone else knowing it.  An FBI shill or a Soros shill could
> probably answer this question, but an NSA shill could not.


	I don't know what 'document' you have in mind but I will know as soon as you link it. What then? Will I be instantly fired?