Employ enough double negatives and trigger words you can make people think you are saying anything they think you are saying which in fact you may not be saying at all.
But I guess that's not what we are discussing here. Or is it? Well, if it is, here is an example. It is taken from page 317 of a book called the Blind Watch Maker, written by Richard Dawkins:
Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter. The essence of life is statistical improbability on a colossal scale. Whatever is the explanation for the existence for life, therefore, it cannot be chance. The true explanation for the existence of life must embody the very antithesis of chance. The antithesis of chance is nonrandom survival, properly understood. Nonrandom survival, improperly understood, is not the antithesis of chance, it is chance itself. There is a continuum connecting these two extremes, and it is the continuum from single-step selection to cumulative selection. Single-step selection is just another way of saying pure chance. This is what I meant by nonrandom survival improperly understood. Cumulative selection, by slow and gradual degrees, is the explanation, the only workable explanation that has ever been proposed, for the existence of life’s complex design.