again im being attacked by people, i am not a troll, you are basing your judgements on ignorant belief structures, i have made more valid posts on this forum than you have had truthful thoughts.Those are the words written by the infamous "Anti Cultist" (a.k.a. Paul Jones) on the Zeitgeist forums over a year ago. I ran across them after having some time to follow up on an article written by "Mr T." on his website. When you read the thread over at the Zeitgeist forums you'll actually see that Mr Jones is responding to an allegation made by another contributor and where "Anti Cultist" is addressed as the 'local forum troll.' As you can see above in the quoted text Mr Jones strongly denies the charges, and lays the blame on the ignorance of others. It's in stark contrast compared to another post, written on another forum some 5 months later. Here Mr Jones actually admits trolling the Zeitgeist forum in a debate with another former ZG member.
Considering you have absolutely no idea who i was on the forum. I had many different accounts on there over the year + gone by. I created a complete agreeing character who was all into the movement, then I created a final character who outright disagreed and said so. Which do you think got into trouble the most ? And might I add the disagreeable character was threatened with banning and being watched from the top level admins and mods. I also had a famous character in their movement, in fact one of the most respected members they ever had, talk about them lapping up people who agree with them.To make matters perfectly clear once more, 'Anti Cultist,' 'Edward Scissorhands' and 'Mr Jones' are all the same person. He is one of the fiercest vocal Zeitgeist critics. While he maintains that he was once a supporter of the Zeitgeist Movement, I have ample evidence - in his own words - that he was nothing of the kind. The evidence shows that he was one misleading person. I reckon that some folks would possibly label him as a 'cointelpro,' since he was a person who joined the movement - pretended to be genuine - only later to discredit it by any means possible. But, I wouldn't go that far. Not that I'm that opposed to conspiracy theories but I think it isn't the case here. Personally, I think Mr Jones joined half-heartedly and simply couldn't take half of what he himself dished out. Perhaps you know those kind of folks, those that make fun of others yet get angry when the same stunt is pulled on them. I think something similar happened here. Someone stepped on his ego one too many times and a grudge originated. Isn't it remarkable how you can bring it all back to psychology?