Offense is much more often taken than it is intended.  A frequent reply is to take offense--sidestepping the substance of the evidence in an effort--usually successful--to stop the exchange from continuing.

If I say, "Circumstantial evidence is highly suggestive of a Jewi$h Crime network having been involved in planning, executing and covering-up nine-eleven", I'm not intending to offend, but to inform and stimulate sharing of the evidence.

In this example, the comedian who has personal life experience in his Jewish upbringing makes an admission against the interests of his 'tribe'.  It is sufficient to acknowlege the admission of loyalties--without lowering the tone of the exchange with righteous indignation (taking offense).

The 1% have put themselves sufficiently at risk of being exposed that we must take the high ground and continue to invite direct engagement in the evidence.  That the conspirators scatter in the light of day--or cry "foul" is sufficient progress.

Keep hammering the evidence into the public domain.  Mass media has shown their allegiance is not to truth, but to the cover-up.