Pizzagate

google tony podesta art and helen van meene...

Tell me that's normal and acceptable? if that was found on your PC at work as a screens aver you'd be sacked! or reported. and for them it's art?

you have to ask, if a person finds this artistic, what are their boundries in terms of what's normal or rather, what's not abnormal?

it's really really weird stuff to be fair.

Leroy42

I agree it all seems very creepy, I said that, and I agree that there does seem more than a whiff about this. But, and itsw a big but, there is simply no direct evidence. It is some serious conspiracy if all the people who have anything at all to do with any of this has failed to provide anything.

We have some dodgy, no context video. Was it a performance, a parody, real? No idea.

And Art, I mean for sake sake, Art is always weird. But do we know if he liked it because of the message that we are attributing to it or the art itself? Does a white person liking Rap make them a black person?

My point is that this is being put out there as a massive scandal, proof of corruption, links to Clintons etc, but very little is actually being provided.

I certainly would not like to be caught up in such a witch hunt where pretty much anything can be said and if repeated enough time people simply accept it as truth coz 'the internet' said it.

King Mob

Didn't try too hard to decipher that bizarre mess, but here's something that I think illustrates just where the problem is.

They are assuming meanings and leaping to huge conclusions based on the flimsiest pretenses, and often it seems when they contradict themselves.
For example, in the list of pictures, which are laughably innocuous, we have this one.

Nidom wrote: »

https://i.sli.mg/wGsp3j.png - "I LOVE KIDS" T-Shirt with two shirtless men

Which, along with the lovely undercurrent of homophobia that permeates the whole thing, is implying that wearing a shirt such as this must be evidence of them being a secret pedophile. (If this is not what he is implying, then I'd like to know what makes the photo suspect.)
However it doesn't take very long at all to figure out that the shirt refers to L'Enfant Cafe, as it's made clear by the comments.
The writer of this rant knows this as well as just a few lines up we have:

Nidom wrote: »

http://archive.is/sSzEZ - "La Boum Boum Room" (euphemism for brothel) is a Burlesque show under L'Enfant Cafe

So again, either the author was deliberately twisting stuff to make it sound shadier than it is, or he made a genuine mistake that silly.
Either way, it calls into question the rest of his investigative skills.

Also, these "weird comments" seem to be referring to the TV show Dexter and various other serial killer fiction tropes. Also, werewolves. Also Donald Judd, an artist known for using stark empty rooms for installations.

http://archive.is/jXWrG - Photo of refrigerated meat locker, weird comments

Overheal

Copy paste dump post deleted

ScumLord

rusty cole wrote: »

google tony podesta art and helen van meene...

Tell me that's normal and acceptable? if that was found on your PC at work as a screens aver you'd be sacked! or reported. and for them it's art?

you have to ask, if a person finds this artistic, what are their boundries in terms of what's normal or rather, what's not abnormal?

it's really really weird stuff to be fair.

Googling Hellen Van Meene brings up lots of portraits of mainly women, of all ages. I don't see anything out of sorts in my search results (which is why I question what google could be showing you). I have a sister who's an artist, so I've been a few exhibitions and some of it can be disturbing, sometimes the artist is trying to disturb. Modern art is often weird, disturbing, disgusting because it's holding up a mirror to society in general. What you should have said is "I don't get this art".

Japanese people like very violent art, yet are some of the nicest people on the planet. Being interested in certain art doesn't mean you'll go out and try and mimic that art in the real world. It would be like saying people who watch the news enjoy war and violence.

Leroy42

Leroy42 wrote: »

I agree it all seems very creepy, I said that, and I agree that there does seem more than a whiff about this. But, and itsw a big but, there is simply no direct evidence. It is some serious conspiracy if all the people who have anything at all to do with any of this has failed to provide anything.

We have some dodgy, no context video. Was it a performance, a parody, real? No idea.

And Art, I mean for sake sake, Art is always weird. But do we know if he liked it because of the message that we are attributing to it or the art itself? Does a white person liking Rap make them a black person?

My point is that this is being put out there as a massive scandal, proof of corruption, links to Clintons etc, but very little is actually being provided.

I certainly would not like to be caught up in such a witch hunt where pretty much anything can be said and if repeated enough time people simply accept it as truth coz 'the internet' said it.

I kind of agree but in saying that, why is nobody even entertaining an investigation?. I was all to easy to investigate Saville after he died yes??
It's common knowledge the dogs in the street knew what he was at, ah that's just Jimmy been jimmy!!! based on past and recent events, shouldn't this at the very least be explained??? Like, ok then, so what do you mean by PIZZA here lads??? I don't buy your white person liking rap thing though. Maybe you should write this.. does a white person liking RAP..E fantasy art , make him a rapist?? No it doesn't but I sure wouldn't leave him watching my kids at a slumber party, so there you go. Unsavoury aint the word for these two guys.

ScumLord

rusty cole wrote: »

I kind of agree but in saying that, why is nobody even entertaining an investigation?. I was all to easy to investigate Saville after he died yes??
It's common knowledge the dogs in the street knew what he was at, ah that's just Jimmy been jimmy!!!

I don't think that's true, the people in charge did a good job of hiding who he was. That Louis Theroux did a live in documentary with him and said at the time he didn't notice anything untowards. But when he went back and watched the videos after everything came out he said the warning signs were there, he just overlooked them, and the likes of Theroux would only love to break a scandal like that.

There has to be a valid reason for opening an investigation. People on the internet spit ball ideas all the time, then someone takes that spit balling and creates some mythology around it and eventually you end up with an entire story that's grown out of a few misinterpreted "facts".

The facts presented so far are in line with the "Obama is the devil" stuff that used picture of obama standing in front of a curtain that made him look like he had horns as evidense. It's from the same people who are promoting a theory that hollywood are all devil worshippers trying to start a new world order.

silverharp

From Scott Adams' Blog , smart cookie



http://blog.dilbert.com/post/153821538056/about-pizzagate

Scott Adams' Blog

About #Pizzagate

Posted November 29th, 2016 @ 9:44am in #Trump #pizzagate

If you aren’t following the dark corners of social media you might not know of something called Pizzagate. Snopes.com calls it a “detailed conspiracy theory.”

The basic idea is that a pizza parlor in Washington DC is alleged to be the center of a major child sex ring that involves top Democrats close to Hillary Clinton. I have labelled this story “not credible,” and that opinion is confusing people because there is a mountain of evidence supporting the allegations.

So let me tell you what a mountain of evidence is worth.

Mountain of Evidence Value = zero.

In the normal two-dimensional world in which we imagine we live, a mountain of evidence usually means something is true. So why am I looking at the same mountain of evidence as the believers in pizzagate and coming to an opposite conclusion?

The difference is that I understand what confirmation bias is and how powerful it can be. If you don’t have the same level of appreciation for the power of confirmation bias, a mountain of evidence looks like proof.

Here’s what I know that most of you do not: Confirmation bias looks EXACTLY LIKE a mountain of real evidence. And let me be super-clear here. When I say it looks exactly the same, I am not exaggerating. I mean there is no way to tell the difference.

That sounds crazy, right?

Suppose dozens of children started coming forth and detailing sex crimes in this particular pizza parlor. Would that prove it happened, or would I call that more confirmation bias?

I would call that more confirmation bias. In fact, the situation would be identical to the famous McMartin Preschool case in the eighties in which lots of kids made similar and untrue claims of abuse. We don’t have to wonder if a “mountain of evidence” including dozens of first-hand accounts can be false because we know it already happened. Moreover, cognitive scientists can tell you that this sort of massive mistake is more normal than you can imagine.

I want to be totally clear here that I’m not saying Pizzagate is false. I see the mountain of evidence too. And collectively it feels totally persuasive to me. It might even be true. I’m not debating the underlying truth of it. That part I don’t know. My point is that what you see as a mountain of evidence that can’t be wrong, I see as something that is far more likely to be confirmation bias. If I had to put a number on it, I’d say perhaps a 20-1 odds the Pizzagate story is false.

Let me put this in a more familiar context. Most of the Pizzagate believers are also Trump supporters it seems. And Trump supporters have watched first-hand as half the residents of the United States concluded that Trump was the next Hitler. Why do tens-of-millions of people believe such a preposterous thing?

It’s because there is a mountain of evidence to support the allegation. Case in point, just yesterday Trump suggested that perhaps flag burners should be punished. That’s clearly dictator talk! (Except that Hillary Clinton proposed that actual law in 2005.)

The argument for Trump being the next Hitler is built on the same type of confirmation bias as Pizzagate. Both allegations are supported by a mountain of evidence. But if you look at each piece of evidence in isolation, none are individually persuasive.

Let me summarize my point by saying that if you were not aware of the McMartin Preschool case you were also not intellectually equipped to judge the credibility of either Pizzagate or the Trump-is-Hitler idea.

People have asked me whether or not an understanding of how persuasion works can protect against unwanted influence. The quick answer is no. Persuasion typically works just as well when you see it coming and you know how it works. But in some specific cases a superior knowledge of cognitive phenomenon can help. This is one of those cases. If you know about the McMartin Preschool case, and you understand the real power of confirmation bias, you might have the tools to avoid believing in either Pizzagate or the likelihood of Trump turning into the next Hitler.

And now you have those tools.

silverharp

silverharp wrote: »

From Scott Adams' Blog , smart cookie



http://blog.dilbert.com/post/153821538056/about-pizzagate

ok soooooo basically you want us to use tools on some Mister mcmartin we never heard of, nor have any issue with? I see, would these tools be pitchfork related??? cos that sounds like witches talk to me buddy!!

you're in league with the satanists too!! burn em!!!!!

Psychedelic

The difficulty with this investigation is that any form of direct evidence would be images/videos of child pornography - not something that is going to get posted around the internet. We know these people use code language, so it's unlikely we will see communications that show them talking about these crimes literally.

The reason this investigation is being done by people online in the first place is because the authorities such as the FBI and Dept. of Justice have people involved in Pizzagate who are helping to stop any investigations.

I agree with some of the points raised here regarding the dangers of witch hunts and falsely accusing innocent people. At the same time that is not a reason to totally dismiss Pizzagate as just a conspiracy theory. Those who are skeptical are also helpful to the investigation, by bringing some balance. I honestly hope they are right and I am wrong.

Question for the skeptics: would you leave your kid alone in Comet Ping Pong?

Overheal

Most people wouldn't leave their kids alone pretty much anywhere in public.

Rainman16

Leroy42 wrote: »

Sorry, do you mean that this totally unsubstantiated story reminds you of that case where a father and mother after having their daughter killed were subjected to hate and trolling based on nothing more than a few unqualified theories which in the end turned out to be completely false.

You know, the case where the mother died without being formally apologies to, and which now has been shown to be have nothing to do with any members of the family.

Yeah, I suppose there are similarities alright

We clearly have 2 very different views on the story. I have no belief in the afterlife, but if hell does exist, It's too good a place for Patsy Ramsey.

Overheal

Overheal wrote: »

Most people wouldn't leave their kids alone pretty much anywhere in public.

Créche's are public, I think you know what he's asking. He didn't say alone as in out in the cold, he means in a would be adult supervised environment, ya know like say the wombles show or Jim'll fix it was??? you see what he's getting at???

it's a fair question no.

Titanucd

If someone got hold of my emails and started calling me a Pedo due to some mad code words I was using I would come out and explain what that code meant. I am of course assuming that the 'Handkerchief' and 'Pizza' and 'Haitian Pizza' are code. If they are not then these guys speak a very bizarre lingo.

So what are they code for? Something innocent? Something nefarious? I dont know. I dont know how anyone can say they know.

And now anecdote time! Listen up at the back....

Many moons ago I worked in a shop in Dublin. One of my colleagues and I developed a code to grade the appearance of women who came into the shop (Yeah Yeah sexist, pervert, worse than Hitler etc. we were young what can I say)

The code worked like this:

Very pretty= And why not indeed? (So we would work this into the conversation to let the other know what we thought of said female)
Pretty= Why not?
Reasonably pretty= Ah sure why not?

Yes yes juvenile and silly but you see we were juvenile and silly.

One day the manager cornered us both and demanded an explanation for us speaking in an obvious code. Before we could explain he gave us his own take on it. We were fiddling the till and the code was related to whether we were going to ring up the sale for less than the amount of cash we were given or whether we were going to use the old 'no sale' button to open the till and pretend to put the money in.

Now this was nonsense there was just no way would either of us do anything like this but unbeknown to us the till had been short a few quid every couple of days over the previous month so the manager became suspicious and started keeping an eye on all the staff, noticed our stupid code words put 2 and 2 together and 593.

We quickly explained our code and why we used it. He believed us, Told us we were morons and instructed us to stop. Later that same week he caught one of the other lads red handed.

So the moral of this story?

If you get accused of something that is infinitely worse than what you are doing you are better to explain what you were actually doing rather than staying silent.

The Podestas et al have not issued a single word in relation to this 'code' therefore people are rightly or wrongly taking this silence as an admission.

If they want this to go away they can just explain the 'code'

King Mob

Titanucd wrote: »

The Podestas et al have not issued a single word in relation to this 'code' therefore people are rightly or wrongly taking this silence as an admission.

If they want this to go away they can just explain the 'code'

But why would they do that? If they were talking in code, then they are talking about sensitive information. It could be legitimate, it could be illegitimate, but either way they gain nothing by explaining it.

First: It would expose what they are hiding in the first place.
Second: If it's less damning than what they are being accused of, then the people who are buying into this conspiracy theory aren't going to believe them.
Third: Even if they could explain it and have people believe it, how would it benefit them? They'd just have less people posting conspiracy hashtags at them. I doubt it's bothering them very much either way.

Titanucd

King Mob wrote: »

But why would they do that? If they were talking in code, then they are talking about sensitive information. It could be legitimate, it could be illegitimate, but either way they gain nothing by explaining it.

First: It would expose what they are hiding in the first place.
Second: If it's less damning than what they are being accused of, then the people who are buying into this conspiracy theory aren't going to believe them.
Third: Even if they could explain it and have people believe it, how would it benefit them? They'd just have less people posting conspiracy hashtags at them. I doubt it's bothering them very much either way.

Why would they do it?

To put the conspiracy to bed?

If they are talking about sensitive information (State secrets etc) then thats one thing. But really? you think its possible? The tone of the emails arent exactly serious or business like.

If they are genuinely innocent of these particular allegations it would make sense to blow the conspiracy out of the water.

You are right in one sense. If they have a more innocent explanation and they share this with the group it wont stop the hardcore accusers of claiming they are lying but I think the bulk of the people examining this would accept it and move on. There will always be those that just WANT to believe that the allegations are true and no amount of reasonable explanations will persuade them otherwise.

All I'm saying is that if it was me and I was accused of being a Pedo and it wasnt true and the entire case rested on some tenuous links to a few other people I would come out fighting. I would explain the 'code' in order to blow their 'findings' out of the water.

This Guy isnt exactly a workaday shmoe like me though so maybe he is doing something quietly in the background to exonerate himself.

You reckon the people involved arent bothered very much by the whole pizzagate thing? I disagree. I would imagine any human in the middle of this **** storm would be very concerned for themselves and their families particularly if the allegations are false.

King Mob

Titanucd wrote: »

If they are talking about sensitive information (State secrets etc) then thats one thing. But really? you think its possible? The tone of the emails arent exactly serious or business like.

It could be that it's state secrets. It could be that it is just their business ventures that could also be sensitive. Or it could be nothing.

I don't see why the tone would exclude these other possibilities, but then not the possibility being discussed in the conspiracy.

Titanucd wrote: »

You are right in one sense. If they have a more innocent explanation and they share this with the group it wont stop the hardcore accusers of claiming they are lying but I think the bulk of the people examining this would accept it and move on. There will always be those that just WANT to believe that the allegations are true and no amount of reasonable explanations will persuade them otherwise.

Given the really tenuous and silly stuff people have to buy into to get on board with the conspiracy, I don't think anyone who does buy it is interested in the reasonable explanation.
If people are willing to accept a reasonable explanation, then what's unacceptable about it being nothing more than conspiracy theorists leaping to huge silly conclusions based on poorly fact checked claims?

Titanucd wrote: »

You reckon the people involved arent bothered very much by the whole pizzagate thing? I disagree. I would imagine any human in the middle of this **** storm would be very concerned for themselves and their families particularly if the allegations are false.

But why would they be bothered? It's a **** storm on twitter and conspiracy sites. At best it's an amusing story about crazy conspiracy theorists to people in the mainstream media. To the vast majority of people, they'll either ignore it or forget about it in a week. To the people in their professional and social circles, it's a non-issue.

The only people who are bothered by it are folks like the owner of the restaurant who's getting harassed for this nonsense.

The Podesta brothers would gain nothing by addressing the whole thing. They'd only stand to make it worse and throw fuel on the fire.
And this is true even in the conspiracy is some how true.
Their best option is to laugh it off and wait for it to blow over.

Leroy42

There is a saying, 'when you are explaining you are losing.'

If they come out with a statement, do you not think that every word of that statement will be pulled apart. And if nothing can be found doing that, it turns to what they didn't say. So they end up having to make another statement, then another etc.

Or if they release a video, then body language will be torn apart. "Why was he sitting in front of a lamp/picture/bare wall" etc. How come his hair was cut before the video, look here's a picture of him two years ago with long air and now short hair. Is it because small boys tend to have short hair?

And if they get a lawyer to do it. Then, "well of course, couldn't face the music themselves. Everyone knows the legal profession is knee deep in it anyway. And why such legal answers. Hiding behind the law as usual"

Best to stay quite and let it pass,

If there are truth in the allegations then bring the evidence to the police and let them handle it.

Titanucd

Given the really tenuous and silly stuff people have to buy into to get on board with the conspiracy, I don't think anyone who does buy it is interested in the reasonable explanation.
If people are willing to accept a reasonable explanation, then what's unacceptable about it being nothing more than conspiracy theorists leaping to huge silly conclusions based on poorly fact checked claims?

Pretty sure if we were on boards 15 years ago discussing Jimmy Saville the same thing would have been said.

But why would they be bothered? It's a **** storm on twitter and conspiracy sites. At best it's an amusing story about crazy conspiracy theorists to people in the mainstream media. To the vast majority of people, they'll either ignore it or forget about it in a week. To the people in their professional and social circles, it's a non-issue.

Your last line there is something I hadnt considered. If his friends, acquaintances and professional peers dont buy it then I suppose he has nothing to worry about.

The only people who are bothered by it are folks like the owner of the restaurant who's getting harassed for this nonsense.

Yeah and his staff. Feel sorry for them. They wouldnt have the same experience of dealing with negative stuff as the Podesta lad would.

The Podesta brothers would gain nothing by addressing the whole thing. They'd only stand to make it worse and throw fuel on the fire.
And this is true even in the conspiracy is some how true.
Their best option is to laugh it off and wait for it to blow over

If as you say their friends, families and peers dont believe a word of it then you are correct.

That said should they not at least try and help out the comet pizza guys by making some sort of statement?

Leroy42

The Jimmy Saville thing has been brought up a few times.

It was terrible, a complete failure from top to bottom. Cover up and people actively ignoring what was going on either through naivety or malice.

But none of that means that this is true. none of that means we can simply ignore due process. Evidence must be obtained, investigated and charges put. Only after a trial can be say which is true.

Titanucd

Yes 'If you have to explain, You've lost'

While yourself and King Mob have given reasonable reasons why Podesta should keep his gob shut I believe this could be an easy slam dunk to debunk with a few well chosen words.

Of course the 'believers' will over analyse every syllable but people like me who are suspicious without being obsessed would just move right along when given a reasonably plausible explanation.

I watched the Richard D. Hall video the other day on The analysis of the Australian McCann interview by some american dude.

What a lot of twaddle. Spent more time sighing and rolling my eyes than anything else but yes there are people who will buy into it.

My (rather long winded) point is that I think there are people who never wear a tin foil hat looking at Podesta and his chums and thinking: 'Is this guy connected to pedophiles?'

A simple explanation will remove this suspicion. The people who will buy into the over analysis were never going to be swayed by facts anyway

King Mob

Titanucd wrote: »

If as you say their friends, families and peers dont believe a word of it then you are correct.

If the accusations are true, then most of his peers would seem to be involved in the conspiracy as it is.
If it's not and anyone who actually matters to them hears about it and actually gets concerned about it, then they could explain it to that person privately.

The guy who runs the pizza place is more concerned about dismissing and denying the accusations because his business in part depends on word of mouth. If people are telling the public that his restaurant is a den for paedophiles, then that directly damages his business. Even just the rumour is enough. And this is on top of the direct harassment he's getting.
I don't think that addressing it was his best option, as it will likely make it worse for him, but there's little else he can do.

Titanucd wrote: »

That said should they not at least try and help out the comet pizza guys by making some sort of statement?

Not sure why they would or how they could. Again, any statement they release will either have no effect on the people who are buying into enough to harass people, or the statement would make things much worse. And then there's still the negative impact the Podestas would draw onto themselves.
And this is assuming that they actually know about the pizza guy and the harassment in the first place. Could be they do and simply just don't care, which while cold, isn't illegal.

Of course, if the accusations are true, then they also again wouldn't care.

I don't think that they need to provide an explaination. I really don't think there's anything that needs to be explained given some of the tenuous dishonest/stupid connections I took to time to scrutinise.

Overheal

rusty cole wrote: »

Créche's are public, I think you know what he's asking. He didn't say alone as in out in the cold, he means in a would be adult supervised environment, ya know like say the wombles show or Jim'll fix it was??? you see what he's getting at???

it's a fair question no.

Well no, it's a pizza place not a daycare center.

yes 100% in agreement

Nidom

Okay so I think most of us are in agreement that the Podestas are weirdos to say the least. I'll leave it at that and come back to them again later. Also I apologise for the data dump previously, I realise that is not the way to go about things. What I find absolutely bizzare is how defensive people are about James Alefantis / Jimmy Comet. If anything, I believe he's the most suspicious link in all of this.

Allow me to set things straight, this isn't some "small town" local pizza shop owner, far from. He's one of the 50 most influential people in Washington. He has been to the White House on several occasions and is in both Hillary & Obama's circles. He's also the ex boyfriend of David Brock, CEO of Media Matters/Correct the Record. He supposedly blackmailed Brock and was awarded a $850,000 payout. Along with that, he's connected to Soros and has received over 20k from his PAC, American Bridge. If you're not familiar with the monster that is George Soros, you've a lot of homework to do.

Now, let's get to the really worrying stuff - his instagram account. For the record he does not have children.



Okay, a bit of a strange comment, but an anomaly right?

Nope.



But surely that's just some inappropriate joke surely? There can't be much more.

Wrong.



That's just a very small selection, I don't want to bombard people with them. The rest are equally if not more bizarre and the contexts of the posts and comment chains are also very weird. Alefantis does not have any children nor do his closest associates, but the photos seem to be a near constant assortment of different children of a variety of ages, intermingled between posts about gay bars, clubs, photos of common rape drugs, and piles of foreign currency. For more see here. To call these images "laughably innocuous" is beyond me.

I just don't understand it. I don't post photos of my kids, let alone anyone else's online - but yet the owner of the Comet Pizza seems to have an obsession with them and people just dismiss it. There's just so many odd things out of place with the story to write it off as confirmation bias. This is just the tip of the iceberg. But hey I'm a rational person, can anyone offer a plausible explanation for the dozens of weird photos? I just think this warrants further investigation.

I think this is a brilliant read for anyone doubting the legitimacy of the investigation.

I'd also like to remind people that government pedo rings aren't totally unheard of. There was the whole Westminster child abuse scandal a while back. Then just last week a massive ring was busted in Norway with politicians and police involved too. Oh and who can forget about Dojo Pizza earlier this year - the owner was arrested for creating CP, exploiting girls as young as 6 and human trafficking.

Now obviously none of these incidents confirm anything about this investigation. However, I don't think it's fair to claim the idea is completely ridiculous - it has happened before.

King Mob

Nidom wrote: »

Now, let's get to the really worrying stuff - his instagram account. For the record he does not have children.

But none of what you've posted or was in the big rant you copy pasted had anything at all suspicious, just the vague accusation of suspicious behaviour.
For example, all of your photos you posted just now are completely innocuous and hinge on this:

Nidom wrote: »

Alefantis does not have any children nor do his closest associates

According to who? What is this based on? Who counts as "closest associates"?
What about family members? Non-business friends who aren't in the public eye? Employees he's close with?

Why should we believe this claim and take it as a hard and fast truth when I've shown in this post that the author of the copy pasted summary is either less than thorough in his reporting, or less than honest?

Why do you thing that these photos are suspicious and what comments are you having difficulty understanding?

Nidom wrote: »

but the photos seem to be a near constant assortment of different children of a variety of ages, intermingled between posts about gay bars, clubs, photos of common rape drugs, and piles of foreign currency.

Well leaving aside the fact that the rape drug thing is a lie, what's suspicious about any of those things?
What's suspicious about having foreign currency?
What's wrong about going to gay bars and clubs and how does it indicate that he's involved with a paedophile sex ring?

Given that claim you copy pasted, as well as how the summary keeps bringing up his sexuality as if it makes him more suspicious, the whole thing smacks with homophobia.

Again, all of the photos are innocuous and are only suspicious because someone is trying to dishonestly frame them as such. Like for example:

Nidom wrote: »

I just don't understand it. I don't post photos of my kids, let alone anyone else's online - but yet the owner of the Comet Pizza seems to have an obsession with them and people just dismiss it.

You are trying to insinuate that this photo is him obsessing over children. But it's clearly not. It's a picture of an article from a paper about him and his restaurant. Why is that suspicious?

Nidom wrote: »

There's just so many odd things out of place with the story to write it off as confirmation bias. This is just the tip of the iceberg. But hey I'm a rational person, can anyone offer a plausible explanation for the dozens of weird photos? I just think this warrants further investigation.

No, it is confirmation bias on top of some one determined to make it look suspicious. But when you stop and actually look at it there's nothing there. A huge pile of evidence might look convincing, but it doesn't count for much when all of it crumbles with even a cursory look into the facts.

You say it's the tip of the iceberg, but it's not. All you've posted is the absolute best armchair detectives could find against this guy, and it's hilariously flimsy.

King Mob

King Mob wrote: »

But none of what you've posted or was in the big rant you copy pasted had anything at all suspicious, just the vague accusation of suspicious behaviour.
For example, all of your photos you posted just now are completely innocuous and hinge on this:


According to who? What is this based on? Who counts as "closest associates"?
What about family members? Non-business friends who aren't in the public eye? Employees he's close with?

Why should we believe this claim and take it as a hard and fast truth when I've shown in this post that the author of the copy pasted summary is either less than thorough in his reporting, or less than honest?

Why do you thing that these photos are suspicious and what comments are you having difficulty understanding?


Well leaving aside the fact that the rape drug thing is a lie, what's suspicious about any of those things?
What's suspicious about having foreign currency?
What's wrong about going to gay bars and clubs and how does it indicate that he's involved with a paedophile sex ring?

Given that claim you copy pasted, as well as how the summary keeps bringing up his sexuality as if it makes him more suspicious, the whole thing smacks with homophobia.

Again, all of the photos are innocuous and are only suspicious because someone is trying to dishonestly frame them as such. Like for example:

You are trying to insinuate that this photo is him obsessing over children. But it's clearly not. It's a picture of an article from a paper about him and his restaurant. Why is that suspicious?


No, it is confirmation bias on top of some one determined to make it look suspicious. But when you stop and actually look at it there's nothing there. A huge pile of evidence might look convincing, but it doesn't count for much when all of it crumbles with even a cursory look into the facts.

You say it's the tip of the iceberg, but it's not. All you've posted is the absolute best armchair detectives could find against this guy, and it's hilariously flimsy.

I don't think he indicated anything WRONG with going to Gay bars, so you seem a bit defensive there. He was commenting on how inappropriate photos of children are within the context of an adult conversation and/or forum, and he's right. I think you're trying to paint him as one who associates paedo's with Gay men, a common defensive reply from homophope card carriers. We're always on thin ice here so we should try stick to the discussion on the thread.

I agree with him, does that make me a homophobe??

Titanucd

Titanucd wrote: »

Yes 'If you have to explain, You've lost'

While yourself and King Mob have given reasonable reasons why Podesta should keep his gob shut I believe this could be an easy slam dunk to debunk with a few well chosen words.

Of course the 'believers' will over analyse every syllable but people like me who are suspicious without being obsessed would just move right along when given a reasonably plausible explanation.

I watched the Richard D. Hall video the other day on The analysis of the Australian McCann interview by some american dude.

What a lot of twaddle. Spent more time sighing and rolling my eyes than anything else but yes there are people who will buy into it.

My (rather long winded) point is that I think there are people who never wear a tin foil hat looking at Podesta and his chums and thinking: 'Is this guy connected to pedophiles?'

A simple explanation will remove this suspicion. The people who will buy into the over analysis were never going to be swayed by facts anyway

The reason I think he should explain is as follows.

That hankerchief mail? if it's coded (government secrets etc) why is it on an unprotected email, which itself would be a problem. If not, then what does it mean? put this to bed and you might have a case.

coincidences? creepy child abuse themed art hanging in your house! creepy child abuse art hanging in ping pong pizza! creepy child themes in twitter correspondence.. all parties conforming to the same themes at one point or another, is it a pattern or what's the reason behind it? end the speculation even if your "losing" as you explain. I agree art is subjective but this type of art is odd and does it say something about him being so proud of this same collection? there's something elitist and smug about having this as a talking point in national publications, I'm only referring to podesta here in this regard.

also it's all very well saying let the police handle the investigation but you're assuming they are going to do exactly that!! why is it when normal people ask questions or require explanations on a non main stream media fourm, they're branded fake or tinfoil wearing freaks??. well if this was investigated with the same vigour as trumps off mike pussy comments, then we might be getting somewhere!!! funny people say when you're explaining your losing, tump explained, and won!

It seems all things Hillary related are off limits but Trump supporters need to revert to dark web forums in order to discuss the potentially cruel and unusual
lifestyles of the rich and infamous.

King Mob

rusty cole wrote: »

I don't think he indicated anything WRONG with going to Gay bars, so you seem a bit defensive there. He was commenting on how inappropriate photos of children are within the context of an adult conversation and/or forum, and he's right. I think you're trying to paint him as one who associates paedo's with Gay men, a common defensive reply from homophope card carriers. We're always on thin ice here so we should try stick to the discussion on the thread.

I agree with him, does that make me a homophobe??

No, I'm not accusing anyone here of being a homophobe, but the rant he's copy pasting from absolutely does try to associate being gay with suspicious behavior and use it try and make him seem more seedy.

If it's a matter of just it being "adult forums" then why bring up the fact they are gay bars?
Why are shirtless men a big deal?
Why is going to gay bars lumped in with false accusations of having date rape drugs?

Why are these things then also lumped in with having foreign currency? Why would foreign currency be "adult"?

What the author of the stuff Nidom is copy pasting from is trying to do is lump these things together to make them seem seedy when they are very clearly not.

Having innocuous pictures of kids in your Instagram feed is not evidence that someone is a secret pedophile.
Do you think that any of the pictures show any kind of suspicious behaviour that's worth investigating?

Do you have any opinion on the sloppy/dishonest manner in which some of these pictures are being presented? Examples here: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=101806495&postcount=34

ScumLord

Nidom wrote: »

If you're not familiar with the monster that is George Soros, you've a lot of homework to do.

I'd never heard of George Soros, the first result on google when I put in his name is a snopes article "no, George Soros was not an SS officer in Nazi Germany". So I'd guess he's another poor fool being used as a character in a fantastic tail.

That's just a very small selection, I don't want to bombard people with them. The rest are equally if not more bizarre and the contexts of the posts and comment chains are also very weird. Alefantis does not have any children nor do his closest associates, but the photos seem to be a near constant assortment of different children of a variety of ages, intermingled between posts about gay bars, clubs, photos of common rape drugs, and piles of foreign currency. For more see here. To call these images "laughably innocuous" is beyond me.

I just don't understand it. I don't post photos of my kids, let alone anyone else's online - but yet the owner of the Comet Pizza seems to have an obsession with them and people just dismiss it.

I don't see anything untowards about those photos. Like you say you don't post pictures of other peoples children online, never shared a funny baby pic on facebook, I get at least one baby picture thrown at my facebook account every day. Just go over to cool vids and pics forum on this website and you'll find thousands of pictures of babies and kids. I shared a picture of a baby chair with shackles built into it with my brother in law, I think any parent would understand. Your describing common daily occurrences as something unusual.

There's just so many odd things out of place with the story to write it off as confirmation bias. This is just the tip of the iceberg. But hey I'm a rational person, can anyone offer a plausible explanation for the dozens of weird photos? I just think this warrants further investigation.

You're getting rational explanations, you just seem to want to find drama where there is none. Without posting a pile of photos can you post two that actually show something wrong? If these three are the best example then there's nothing to the photos.

I'd also like to remind people that government pedo rings aren't totally unheard of.

They're not, they're probably the most scary thing society can come up with today. Real rings need to be found and shut down. This whole thing is a slur campaign, it's tainted with anti Hillary rhetoric that shouldn't have anything to do with the story. I think this will gradually disapear as the people who started it move onto some new cause.

rusty cole wrote: »

coincidences? creepy child abuse themed art hanging in your house! creepy child abuse art hanging in ping pong pizza! creepy child themes in twitter correspondence..

What some people would call "creepy child abuse art", others would call "art". I didn't see anything abusive about the artists brought up in this thread. You may not get the art, which means it's hard for you to appreciate whats going on. I'm just not seeing what you're seeing in this "evidense". I think you're just reading way too much into things. If you took anybodies life time use of a social media tool and took posts out of context you could make someone appear to be anything you wanted.

also it's all very well saying let the police handle the investigation but you're assuming they are going to do exactly that!! why is it when normal people ask questions or require explanations on a non main stream media fourm, they're branded fake or tinfoil wearing freaks??.

People are trained to investigate, it's not a intuitive and common sense task. Theories like these show how people can run any with their own assumptions and fantasies and end up on the far side of the planet from the truth. You can tell yourself you're investigating this and doing research but you're not really. You're taking in a story from one source and ignoring anything that contradicts that story. You're bouncing from one biased site to another thinking your investigating alternative sources but your just confirming your bias.