TNL called out by OWS idiot.

http://algoxy.com/ows/owsforuminfiltrators.html

haha

Wow....."Gawdoftruth" needs a vacation.

Seriously, he's so worried about being made fun of that he isn't thinking clearly. I feel sorry for him and anyone who thinks he's right.

My favorite part is that they seem to share certain traits with religious zealots.....I guess they're actually the same thing in many ways. If you question the absolute truth of what they preach, they merely dismiss you as one of the sheeple.

Tech's 100% right about one thing, they don't read or research. They quote that book as if it were the Bible yet none of them have read a single page of it.

Tech's 100% right about one thing, they don't read or research. They quote that book as if it were the Bible yet none of them have read a single page of it.

LOL! Wait a minute....

TechJunkie was actually on other websites telling people to read the same book that I caught him lying about reading? You remember the one....the 750 page book that he claimed to have fully digested in just a few hours. Then, when he realized he got caught doing his Google-search, Wiki-paste nonsense, he used his administrative powers to delete posts (pulled an Icon) that proved he was a liar....

http://forum.talknightlife.com/viewtopi ... a&start=20

This guy ChristopherABrown is the second guy that I caught citing the Iserbyt book without reading it, after Shaun.

The Occupier was even funnier because he cites the Iserbyt book in defense of his effort to change the First Amendment to add, "forgiveness, tolerance, acceptance, respect, trust, friendship and love, protecting life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness." The book that he cited is all about how liberals who "reject truth and absolutes in favor of tolerance, situational ethics and consensus" are trying to undermine the Constitution and, "advocate the religion of secular humanism in violation of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution." He is the enemy that Iserbyt spent the whole book writing about, but he doesn't even know that because he obviously didn't read it before he cited it.

It's a hilarious direct contradiction that's obvious to anybody who has read Iserbyt's book. I'm not surprised that Shaun doesn't get the joke either. Shaun claims to have spent seven months reading Iserbyt's book and checking the references but the only thing that he's capable of discussing about it is ... whether or not I read the book? Yeah that makes sense.

When I tried to suggest to ChristopherABrown that he should probably read the book before citing it, he said:

The book will tell me nothing new, it simply supports that the dumbing down took place.

more...

Then he tried to flip the script just like Shaun by declaring me to be the one who was "against the Constitution", when he's the guy who is determined to modify the Constitution like Iserbyt warned.

Gawdoftruth is a totally different wing nut. Read this from him, it's just hilarious. "your civilization is a con scam against the sheeple;"

At least Shaun isn't as paranoid as these guys who concluded that I was a paid "cognitive infiltrator", working to undermine their plans as part of a vast, right-wing conspiracy. (While citing a book warning about a vast, left-wing conspiracy made up of people like them.)

Oh and you're all sock puppets. You're all really me, posting under different names.

ChristopherABrown's slam dunk at the end of his post is hilarious because it shows that he still just doesn't get it.

I asked techjunkie this question.

Which mother or father in this nation will ignore or pass up the real opportunity to assure their child will grow into a nation that holds high and honors understanding that can create; forgiveness, tolerance, acceptance, respect, trust, friendship and love, protecting their life, their liberty and their pursuit of happiness

No answer from techjunkie.

The book that he cited is all about how terrible it is that liberals are teaching our children to "reject truth and absolutes in favor of tolerance, situational ethics and consensus". By the seventh page of the book, the reader is well aware of this. That's what Iserbyt meant about "dumbing down". So it's layer upon layer of hilarious irony that this guy willing dumbs himself down by insisting that reading the book won't teach him anything new, while citing it to back his world view that's 180 degrees opposite of the author of the book. As he advocates what Iserbyt would refer to as the "deliberate dumbing down" of America. (She quotes herself like that over and over through the whole book, which is also really funny.)

This guy ChristopherABrown is the second guy that I caught citing the Iserbyt book without reading it, after Shaun.

LOL! Deflect all you want, but you cited page 645 from a book only hours after I recommended it, proving that all you did was Google search other people's critiques and repeat them here. But you fucked up. You forgot to consider the page number the critiques were aimed at, and I busted the fraud.

Rather than own up to it, you double-downed and used your administrative powers to delete your own posts in an attempt to hide your fraud and, for good cover, attempted to bait me into long chains of distractive stupidity by accusing me of not reading it and calling upon me to prove that I did by debating it with you.

LOL...You had already won the twister triple crown for that amazing feat of linguistic trickery. But today, we learn you didn't stop there, you went to the OWS site and cited the same book, repeating the same critiques that other people wrote, passing them off as your own.

There are 31 pages in that book. Her message is very clear by page seven.

There is no way to delete a reply and then restore it.

You and Christopher A Brown both cited the book because quotes from it seemed to back your world views, without knowing what the book actually said. You didn't realize that you were citing a book that asserts over and over that the US education system was hijacked by a secret Bolshevik conspiracy operating as a fifth column within the United States government after the fall of the Soviet Union. Christopher A Brown didn't realize that he was citing a book that warns over and over that people like him would try to encroach on the Constitution in order to preach tolerance to children. You both interpret the phrase "the deliberate dumbing down of America" in your own self-serving way, regardless of the communist worker-indoctrination conspiracy that Iserbyt was actually talking about.

There are 31 pages in that book. Her message is very clear by page seven.

Yet, you somehow managed to quote from pages 645 and beyond....

There is no way to delete a reply and then restore it.

You did it, you know it, and so do other people....

Post deletion... the ultimate "twist".

There are 31 pages in that book. Her message is very clear by page seven.

Yet, you somehow managed to quote from pages 645 and beyond....

You only need to read about seven pages to get the point of the book. I started commenting on that point about seven hours after your book recommendation. I didn't need the entire seven hours to read seven pages.

And there are only about 31 pages, total, which are spread over hundreds of pages because of all of the references. You claimed to have spent seven months checking those references, but a few days after I started reading the book I started to post commentary on the references that I checked, that didn't check out. You had nothing to say, after spending seven months checking those references? Yeah, right.

The whole thing is funny because if we're to believe you, then that means that you actually advised us to read a book about the Bolshevik conspiracy to indoctrinate children into communism. Don't you understand that I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt by assuming that you didn't know what the book actually said? The alternative is way worse for you: that you seriously tried to push this conspiracy theorist's crackpot book on us, knowing what was in it.