>>13567327Dude why do you keep talking AT me, not to me. It's like you just read and then priceede with your monoligue-like diatribe.
Pasta time!
>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!"