Perhaps you are "the enemy".
Whether or not I am an enemy is perhaps for DCP or anybody else to decide (this takes us back to the "what is an anti-Mormon" question, perhaps).
But returning to jon's point above: are the people who read DCP's Maxwell Institute piece in which he cites the Bat Creek Stone, or who watch his 'horses in pre-Columbian America' sequence in the video legitimately to be treated as enemies too, with whom fair play is not required?
If so, it does seem they ought to be warned by a little disclaimer, along the lines of:
WARNING: this item has been created in order to persuade you to agree with the CoJCoLDS. We believe that this church is so important that we feel no obligation to tell you the whole truth, if there is a risk that will give you ammunition against the church . So if you allow yourself to be persuaded, and later discover that this item contains misleading material, the only appropriate reaction on your part is that you should have researched harder in the first place.
A serious problem here is that DCP's value as an LDS apologist depends to a major extent on his academic credentials, which suggest to people that if he leaves an article online over his name, he is willing to stand by its contents - since otherwise he would have modified it - and if he says something in a video, he is willing to stand by that just the same way he would in a seminar where experts are present who may disagree with him. If he was just good old Kerry Shirts, his writing would have much less impact on believers and on unbelievers alike.
But in fact it does seem that when he writes or speaks on LDS subjects, he sometimes operates according to different standards, without warning his audience. That would seem regrettable.