65 votes

Resident Troll or Quality Control?

I cherish the DailyPaul as a place I can go to feel somewhat normal in a world where I constantly feel like an outsider due to my political an philisophical beliefs. However, as we get further from the election and there is much less "pro-Ron" talk, and much more conspiracy talk, my posts and my ideas have recieved a far more negative response than when I was simply singing the praise of Ron Paul to the Ron Paul choir.

If I disagree with a post about a conspiracy, I am labeled a troll, even when I am on topic, not inflammatory, and simply don't agree with the points of logic in the post. I'm constantly accused of being a neo-con who is just trying to subvert the movement, simply because I don't believe many of the conspiracies which are commonplace here.

It seems as though we are to the point here where if you disagree with anything, you are the enemy. I've posted, blogged, and commented on free market capitalism in the past, to a very positive response. This is fitting because like most of you, I assume I have a firm grasp on capitalism and liberty and thus, I supported Ron Paul and still support this movement. However, the conspiracies, whether they are true or not, do not in themselves diminish my view on liberty and free markets any more than they would diminish yours if you were mistaken about them.

I am not a troll because I don't believe a conspiracy. I'm not a neocon because I want more proof. I am simply a free market capitalist with a high standard for truth. You all have a high standard for truth from your government, which is rarely met. Doesn't it make sense to demand a higher standard when debating a conspiracy as well?

I cherish the Daily Paul and I apologize to anyone who thinks I've been a troll. In all honesty, my goal is simply to maintain a high standard of reason and logic, and not let emotion and speculation rather than truth, dominate our dialogue.

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Truth is not reason.

Almost all people have reasoned the towers fell, because of the planes that hit them. However, the same people struggle to explain how a third building fell that day without a plane hitting it.

That is the nature of a psy-op.

Truth is treason in an empire of lies. Who wants to be treasonous?

Cant get around Operation Northwoods.

Not a conspiracy theory. Direct, verbatim CONSPIRACY directly from the mouths of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

If they came up with this stuff in the early 60s when we had actual national enemies and were a much more innocent nation than we are today, one can only imagine what they are doing now.


There's no "disagreeing" with this one. How can one "disagree" with well documented black and white historical FACT?


i have also been seeing this unsettling change, and am wondering why this is happening.
who is doing this, who is allowing this ?

Dr.Ron Paul's 2002 Predictions

What change?

There have been discussions of conspiracies on Daily Paul since day one back in 2007. Perhaps more-so back then than now...

~wobbles but doesn't fall down~


It's very condescending when you spend most of your time watching Ron Paul/Peter Schiff videos, reading the LvM dailies, and preaching liberty on facebook only to be called a "troll" or "sheep" here.

But automatically accepting the

But automatically accepting the official government story is kind of the opposite of having a "high standard of truth"


Show me a quote where this post advocated "automatically accepting" anything.

Free market capitalism isn't right for America because it works better. It's right because it's free (and it works better).

I wasn't referring to this

I wasn't referring to this post, I was referring to you. You advocate it by your actions, by accepting the official Sandy Hook story. Even labeling those who dare question it as "conspiracy theorists".

... Then you turn around and claim to have a high standard of truth.


Show me a quote where this post advocated "automatically accepting" anything.

Free market capitalism isn't right for America because it works better. It's right because it's free (and it works better).

Snakepit, but it seems you have... Yet You're no Sheep!

I can see the flavor of your post being construed in such a way.
But I am trying to find the "Free Market" you are referring too; and I think Dr. Paul would ask you "Where is it? What Free Market?" too.

Just trolling, never mine me .....

Hi snakepit...I totally agree

Hi snakepit...I totally agree with you about liking DP for a place where our political beliefs make us feel among friends. I understand your other frustration but I tend to be skeptical of the government and their theories so I tend to give a lot of plausibility to alternative theories and then I look at whatever facts are put out there and try to make sense of things. I think that is all people with alternative theories expect individuals to do ...is to consider all angles.

As a long term member I do absolutely believe there are trolls and disinfo people trolling sites like this. I never call anyone a troll though, I just try to avoid them. Some of them seem pretty obvious because they will post something but they do not have many of the ubiquitous parts of our belief systems nailed down. Even though they try to blend in and who knows what they are up to, I am not concerned with them because our people and our belief system here among DP people and our movement are rock solid and also so decentralized that they can't rattle us the way they are used to with the Ds and Rs.

My suggestion to you is, if you are really not a troll, then don't let all this bother you. Ignore the posts that aren't of interest to you and follow the posts that are. Just like when people were going overboard on the Gary Johnson thing...I just didn't click on those threads and only commented when I felt like engaging in that debate. If someone calls you a troll, just move on, no big deal.

A few people below completely missed the point of this post

"Yeah but the conspiracies are true because blah blah building 7 blah blah The Federal Reserve.."

I get accused of being a shill for Pharma in every single alternative medicine thread. Apparently belief in pseudoscience is now a part of libertarianism. It's ironic that so many people are attacking mainstream medicine (often with name calling and character accusations) on the Daily Paul when Ron Paul himself is a mainstream physician.

Ron Paul on the swine flu vaccine

As a physician Ron Paul does not necessarily endorse mainstream medical solutions, example, his skepticism on the swine flu vaccine. He gave one of two NO votes on the government’s inoculating people with the swine flu vaccine. He stated the instincts against inoculation were correct and mentions how “out of control” the situation is when panic and hysteria enter the medical care arena.


No, and check facts on suing Big Pharma

Nice try though. Dr Ron Paul has also stated for decades that some homeopathic remedies are fair better than the equivalent recommended pharmaceuticals.

He also has took positions against Scalia and Big Pharma Courts, and the latest Supreme Court decision that Big Pharma can lie about the side effects and best uses of the drug in question.

Interesting quote, wish I knew what the hell you were talking about?

Good work manipulating the subject.

"Some homeopathic remedies fare better than equivalent pharmaceuticals."

That is pretty general, practically meaningless statement. Even Stephen Barrett on Quackwatch admits that certain homeopathic remedies work. This is far different than demonizing the entire pharmaceutical industry, like quite a few alternative medicine advocates. The placebo effect is real, and some home remedies do have a plausible mechanism of action.

Do you hear Ron Paul defending homeopathy with the dilutions? Or magnet therapy? Or subluxation? Or accusing vaccines of causing autism? No.

And who said anything about the courts? Defending medicine is not the same thing as defending the actions of a corporation. I would hope that Ron Paul would be opposed to fraud.

There are a bunch of people in alternative medicine who don't distinguish between a good and the actions of the corporation producing the good. If I defend the science behind a drug, someone inevitably twists it around to portray me as somehow supporting fraudulent activity by a corporation. It's childish debating, if you can even call it that.

**Edit** I just realized you mean Ron Paul said homeopathic remedies are far better.

I call BULLSHIT on this claim. Prove to me that Ron Paul has said they are far better.

Have You Ever

studied herbal medicine? Here is a tidbit for you if you really think that people that do are quacks. I have a neighbor who got bit by a brown recluse. He HATES going to the doctor. So, okay, he wanted to pretend it didn't happen and hope for the best. Sorry, but it doesn't work that way. After 3 days he was turning black around the wound, he was in horrible pain, and he was broken out in a rash all over. He decided he HAD to go to the doctor. The doctor said he needed to be in the hospital and have surgery to remove the area of the bite. Well that was BEFORE the doctor found out he didn't have insurance at which point he told my neighbor he just needed some prednisone. Well now instead of handing you a prescription they have started calling it in to the pharmacy of choice. No doubt due to some new crappy federal law. Anyway, this guy sat and waited for his prescription for 45 minutes and then decided to just come back the next day. Well the next day the prescription still hadn't been called in to the pharmacy. By now he was getting worse and pissed at the doctor's office. He was telling me as much so I told him what to do to fix it. (I have read a lot of books) I told him to use activated charcoal both on the bite and internally. I also told him to drink aloe vera and use that on the bite as well. He thought I was nuts but he was desperate so he took my stuff and used it and 1 week later the bite was darn near healed and the pain was gone. 2 weeks later the rash was gone. Total cost (outside of the lame ass doctor's fee) was 15.00. No scar, no surgery, no bullshit. A brown recluse bite is a very serious and damaging thing to have happen. A lot of doctors prescribe the same meds for it as for leprosy. I used activated charcoal (carbon) and a one dollar aloe vera leaf from a Mexican grocery store and had it healed in no time. Was that a placebo too? So much for your great medical system.


Brown Recluse Spider bites are self limiting

The aloe vera might have likely worked as a mild laxative, but likely had little to nothing to do with the healing.

Don't say "my medical system." It is not my fault the insurance companies are in bed with government. Crappy medical access does not negate evidence based medicine.

Snakepit22, I agree with you somewhat

But please realize some of us have legitimate concerns about government coverup at varying degrees. Or are you saying that we should simply accept everything government says at face value ?

No can't do sir. Especially when we already know they didn't care even if more than 50 thousand of our soldiers lives wasted in LIED upon Vietnam war and more than 5K died and maimed in LIED UPON Iraq war. And these were young american soldiers including teenagers who died in those LIED UPON wars. Or are you calling us "kooks" for not accepting government justification for those wars ?

Please understand our inability to put anything past these deceitful power brokers in this country.

Now regarding Sandy Hook.. it is entirely plausible that the Gubmint is lying about the actual weapon involved. But we shouldn't explore that ?


I'm saying you should accept everything the government says at face value. In fact, I think those were my exact words.

Free market capitalism isn't right for America because it works better. It's right because it's free (and it works better).

Face Value or Question Government?

Face value? Don't go mutton on us now Plissken.
These fools can't even manage a government check book.
I think I'd rather question authority.

A little too bitter

are we ? Where do you want to draw the line on skepticism? Questioning the lying wars is ok but questioning these mass shooting incidents makes us "kooks" ?

Look, I agree that some of the youtube videos about Sandy Hook are over the top. I initially looked at them, but when I considered the things calmly, I came to conclusion that crisis actors angle was totally flawed. That's what you do....you take a thing, do your own research and accept or reject things. Labeling people as "kooks" just because it immediately sounds outlandish is not the way to go. By that standard, all the people who first spoke truth about Vietnam would have been "kooks".


..I'm not sure anywhere you saw me lable anyone a kook because they believed a conspiracy, or where I said we shouldn't question things. In fact, my entire post was about being more accepting of those who question the conspiracies. Nothing in my post advocated blindly believing anything nor blindly denying anything, just being more accepting of those who question the conspiracies.

Free market capitalism isn't right for America because it works better. It's right because it's free (and it works better).

When I Question A Conspiracy

I gather all the info I can from all the sources I can and try to sift out the crap from the facts. Then I mull it over, talk about it to my better half, gather more info if possible, mull it over some more, then decide what I believe. I don't come on DP and bash other people for jumping on me for spouting my opinion without doing my homework.


which came first?

the conspiracy or the theory?

God conspired with his son to redeem from amongst men

a people for himself who will be enjoying him and each other forever. When you are assured of his peace and acceptance, it no longer matters what other men think of you.

With all due respect, I will no longer be a voting prostitute for Constitution rejecting harlots.

Which "Conspiracy Theories"

Is it that you question? That building 7 was blown up and didn't burn down? That the FED is a bankster run mafia organization? That Obama is wanting to destroy the country? That the attack on the Liberty was a false flag? Which ones? What bothers me is that those of us here that have done a lot of research and read a lot of books are attacked and called "kooks" and "conspiracy nuts" and other such names by all you "superior minded" ones. At least that's how you come across to us. It's the air of superiority that irks us into attacking back. Or at least that's how it affects me. Remember how "they" always attacked Ron Paul and called HIM those names and acted so superior to him? I for one am still sensitive to that I guess because it used to drive me nuts when Ron would be speaking the truth which was so "out there" that everyone would roll their eyes and call him crazy. BUT IT WAS ALL TRUE! All you had to do to find out was check out the things he was saying.


Dude your awesome!

And when Skippy states "attack on the Liberty", Skippy is referring to the attack on USS Liberty by Israel.

Thanks For the Feedback and,

Thank you for clarifying that about the Liberty. I could make a big long list of "conspiracy theories" here but I don't think the skeptics would care. I think a lot of people scoff at these things because they are in denial. It can be really overwhelming to have to admit just how corrupt and downright evil the government and globalists are.




Having been around since 07, I feel ya 100%!

'Peace is a powerful message.' Ron Paul

Skepticism cuts both ways.

How come those who accept the "official story" are not also called "conspiracy theorists"? After all, mass shootings, bombings, etc., always involve two or more people, even if the crime is only committed by a single person. Do you believe law enforcement ford not investigates more than one suspect when a major crime is committed?

I go with the theory that best supports the facts. For example, when Flight 800 exploded and crashed into the Atlantic Ocean in 1996, the "official story" was a "design flaw in the 747 was responsible." However, EVERY OTHER TIME THIS HAPPENED PREVIOUSLY, the FAA ordered ALL of that series of aircraft grounded until all of the aircraft had been inspected for the "design flaw".

The only logical conclusion ANY skeptic should draw is the FAA knew full and well the "design flaw" was NOT responsible for the catastrophe.

The government has lied to us so blatantly and so repeatedly that any real "skeptic" would search for other explanations before accepting the government's "official story".

May I relate a personal experience, which draws suspicion to the "Official Story"? When the Space Shuttle Columbia exploded in 2003, CNN provided a "news flash" warning people to stay away from debris as it could cause "instant death". Reports came out of most of the wildlife in the debris stream was found dead. I left NASA only a few months before the Challenger disaster in 1986, so I followed the reports pretty closely. I do not recall ANY reports of "fish kills" as the results of Challenger debris; nor were there any warnings to swimmers, boaters, etc. to stay away from the debris field.

The day after the Columbia exploded, a reporter for THE SAN FRANCISCO CHRONICLE reported an unnamed local astronomer photographed a "Orange-Purple, corkscrew energy beam penetrating the shuttle wing root," which was the site of the explosion. The astronomer turned these photos over to NASA without having them published by the CHRONICLE, because of the possibility the "energy beam" was an "artifact" of his Nikon camera. Neither NASA nor the CHRONICLE followed up on the story. So, about six months later,after NASA had published the "official story," I called the CHRONICLE reporter whose byline had appeared on the story. The reporter said he "hadn't heard anything, but believed the 'energy beam' was an 'artifact.'" However, when I asked the name of the "local astronomer," the reporter told me he had "lost it."

Now, do you honestly believe a reporter with his own byline in a major newspaper, who had written a front page story would LOSE his source?

"Believe nothing you hear, only what you see. Belay that, believe half of what you see." Burt Lancaster, "The Crimson Pirate" (1952)