You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Pizzagate - I finally took a deep look and I am disgusted! How can anyone not be outraged by this evidence?
Thanks for posting, that linked email was very clear! I was withholding judgment due to lack of time to investigate, now I lean toward believing there is something to it.
Don't believe everything you read on the internet. :)
Thanks for the powerful advice!
Lol!
Captain Obvious strikes again.
Thank you @dantheman! Yeah, when I saw that email, I was blown away! Also Clif and David's questions in their videos really got me thinking!
@dantheman Are you okay being downvoted for voicing a simple opinion that someone doesn't like? My Steem mood is sad today, and it has nothing to do with the price.
Bernie is as Bernie does. No point in getting upset over things I cannot change.
Yeah but someone like you has the power to win a flag war against him, which you could do to keep the platform open for free speech. Bernie is an enemy to freedom of speech and is actively hurting this platform.
Sadly, it impacts the platform, the experience of many. I understand not wasting energy on things you feel are out of your control. Thanks for the answer.
@dantheman You do realize that you are literally the only person who could change it?
Flagging, downvoting, stake based censorship and rep are actually your brain child. So yeah you could change it. Just sayin ;)
As for the email, those 3 kids are children of the campaign coordinators who had been on the road for awhile. They wanted their children at the party since it was close to home. Seriously use facebook, look it up. None of these people have private facebook profiles.
The ages are being called out so the recipient understands their baby sitting duties.
You're looking at parents making arrangements to ensure their kids are being watched and entertained while they work.
The email you guys are calling out as proof , is the most clear cut evidence against pizzagate's reality that I've seen so far.
Thanks for clearing that up. I'm back to neutral.
That could be true. I Just looked through all the facebook profiles but couldn't find anything about what you mentioned. Could you point me in the right direction?
also, what do you think about the stuff about Breitbart and Podesta and Hastert?
Here is a quick 2 minute mention about those subjects from Joe Rogan:
Hastert is being called a pedo but he's not. He's a gay man who hit on what 50 years ago would have been other adult gay men. He's 74 so you figure this is a sea change in his lifetime. But these are 16 to 18 year old young men. It's not even pederasty at that point since these guys have completed puberty. They were highschool wrestlers.
He did abuse his position to get them but it wasn't pedophilia and frankly you guys need to stop calling it that. It's a HUGE disservice to actual victims of real pedos.
The real problem here is that people are calling anyone attracted to a person younger than themselves "a pedo". I was at a bar the other day and a man in his 50s or 60s was hitting on a girl that was very clearly 25 or 26 and the guy I was with is "can you believe that dude, what a pedo!".
Pedo is exclusively being attracted to children who are prepubescent. This is abnormal because it confers no chance of procreative success. It damages the victim physically and mentally. This damage sets up a vicious cycle as victims grow up to become perpetrators themselves. In fact you'd be hard pressed to find a perp who wasn't a victim at one time. I think you'll also be hard pressed to find a victim who didn't become a perp later in life.
It is the damage, physical, mental and emotional that we abhor.
Being attracted to a post pubescent isn't any sort of "philia", it's how nature engineered us as a species and it's the secret to our success as a species. This is why we've survived everything nature has thrown at us since life began.
You best chances of reproductive success are going to be with a member of the opposite sex who has completed puberty. I hate to say it, but honestly age doesn't matter as much as maturity level. I've personally known married women that were 14 to 18 and it's not grooming, it's just cultural. They are wives and mothers. but you need to understand that this makes a lot of sense if the average life expectancy is 45 and huge numbers of women die in child birth.
So here is what I am getting at.
I don't know what Podesta did or did not do. We don't even know that what has leaked is legitimate.
We know what hastert did because he admitted it.
Breitbart died at the age of 43 of a heart attack from atherosclerosis. This means his arteries were hardened, this is a process that takes years to happen. Oddly enough Breitbart probably did die because he ate too much pizza.
Well guess what @DanTheMan, you don't have to speculate real or not. The smoking gun evidence was found and given to the Police on Day 1 of this scandal. There are four agencies investigating the connections, and once the New AG is in office, you will see arrests. I have personally seen the evidence and the emails to and from the Police on this. Soon anyone calling this "fake news" is going to be eating there own words.
I have been watching Pizzagate on and off over a little over a week. I figured if there was anything to it I could find something new within a few minutes. I decided to focus on Comet, which seemed an overlooked clue. Comets have heads and tails. So do sperm. Pretty tenuous. A comma even looks a little like a sperm. Still no big deal. However I discovered that the Comet Assay tests for DNA damage in {drumroll} .... SPERM! So clearly we have another little hint like these pervs can't stop themselves from dropping.
I just read the email too which is described as "one of the most damning pieces of evidence" and I must say that it is anything but "damning" or indeed is any "evidence" of anything.whatsoever. This could just as easily be read as a perfectly innocent email. I would suggest that any objective view of this email could not conclude it is "damning evidence" - you'd have to be operating some huge confirmation bias - where is there actually any evidence of a crime here - what evidence has actually been presented to you to lean one way or the other?
The only actual evidence I see here is of a sensationalist journalistic style, claiming falsely that an email constitutes "damning evidence" and such just sways me the other way......based on the actual evidence presented here.
They talk about kids in the pool as entertainment and mention their ages.
That and the fact the emails makes no sense as normal communication from my perspective.
I only said I went from neutral to leaning. I never drew a conclusion.
"They talk about kids and mention their ages" - Yes, they do. Can we agree that this is the only contentious/pertinent aspect of the email? If this is the case, then the only point I'm making is that in lack of any further supporting evidence, the email is inconclusive at best.
I mean any parent would describe watching their kids at play as quite entertaining in itself - it could be meant in all innocence. I'm not claiming everything is indeed all innocent, just that I have not been presented with anything convincing and certainly not anything that would constitute "evidence".
"That and the fact the emails makes no sense as normal communication from my perspective."
I think this particular one in isolation can do, though I've read a few other other things people have posted that seem to suggest there are code words being used between a group of people. The hypothesis has been that "pizza" related words are used to replace various paedophilia related preferences. If a number of these can be linked and the hypothesis presented clearly and convincingly, then maybe some actual progress can be made.
If it is then made clear to any reasonable person, that a code is indeed being used......then surely you would agree that sending end to end encrypted messages is no crime in itself.......lol
So, we would then have to show the coded messages were "pedo code" as opposed to say "drug code" or "weirdo code" ......in order to draw the actual ATTENTION of the wider populace.....the mainstream. This would then indicate reasonable grounds for a criminal investigation I think.
The larger point I would make here is that sensationalising things, claiming "damning evidence", claiming everything from Clinton to Obama to Jimmy Savile involvement and making claims of everything from pedo sign ping pong bats to ritualistic cannibalism, (all read about on Steemit) - does not serve the cause, nor do any potentially abused children any justice. This is my main issue with all this.
If anybody REALLY WAS trying to cover up any paedophile ring, the first thing they would do would start a media barrage of conspiracy theory linked articles to demean and diminish any legitimate inquiry, it would put off the mainstream wouldn't it? Now imagine mainstream media re-inforce the impression your hypothesis is associated with all kinds of crack pot conspiracy theorists......oh hang on they do.....lol
The fact that this could feasibly be a two pronged attack has now tweaked my interest.......be careful of the second prong.....
You cut my quote short there. You should add "that I have found" if you care at all about trying to be objective. My view, as is everyones, is subjective. By talking about our subjective view points, we can try to find objective truth. One of the most important aspects of communicating, in my opinion. Megan Kelly had the same effect on me that my post had on you. by not even asking any questions and assuming there is nothing to it and pushing it as fake news. That is what finally what made me take a deeper look.
There is no smoking gun yet, in my opinion.. These people are not completely brazen so they use codes. Why are all these powerful, busy people emailing each other about pizza? It is true that we don't know for sure yet what they are talking about. But to completely dismiss it, because we have not yet found the smoking gun, is dismissive and non productive.
It is also known that pedophiles use these terms. This makes these allegations worth looking into in my opinion. Also, it is much more interesting, if you actually look at all the stuff there is to look at. This stuff has been going on for a long time. To completely dismiss it because we don't have a smoking gun is exactly what someone that is doing that kind of stuff would want you to do. Thankfully that is not what everyone is doing. This is not going away. When I have more powerful evidence, I will share it, but by then you will be probably be aware of it , because we are not going to let this go until we get to the bottom of it. Everything will come to light eventually. I hope you share your opinion with me when that finally happens.
"You cut my quote short there. You should add "that I have found" if you care at all about trying to be objective."
Perhaps you could explain how this impacts objectivity, rather than just insinuate a lack of objectivity on my part. I would maintain that it makes absolutely no difference to what I said, nor twist what you said. It does not change the context nor impact objectivity whatsoever. I was quoting YOU, the author of the post I was commenting on, the opinion piece YOU wrote and just clarified again was merely subjective opinion - how does this impact objectivity?
"By talking about our subjective view points, we can try to find objective truth."
What?......maybe you could explain this reasoning a little clearer too, as it seems completely nonsensical to me. For example, what is the nicer colour - pink or blue?
You can talk about your subjective view points as long as you want, you will never find any objective truth this way. If something (anything) is subjective in nature, then you cannot make any objective conclusions about it.
"by not even asking any questions and assuming there is nothing to it and pushing it as fake news."
I haven't claimed you are reporting "fake news", you are not reporting any news at all - as you clarified yourself, you were writing an opinion piece on a subjective matter. I have also just asked you 2 questions, first to clarify where you see any lack of objectivity on my part and secondly, how you find objective truth from discussing matters of a subjective nature - let's see how you go on with those for starters.
"There is no smoking gun yet, in my opinion."
Nor mine, that is why I would not claim anything that can not be found to be objectively true as "damning evidence" as you did.
"But to completely dismiss it, because we have not yet found the smoking gun, is dismissive and non productive."
Yes, to dismiss it is dismissive.....lol. You also just (totally unfairly) dismissed my response to you as lacking objectivity - how productive is that?
I don't "completely dismiss " things because of the lack of a smoking gun, but because the so called subjective "evidence" presented so far is less than persuasive to me and presented (a lot of the time) with a lot of bells and whistles, false claims and sensationalist conspiracy theory type paranoid reasoning. This is what is off-putting to anybody such as myself. I'm not going to spend time watching bloody videos with pyramids, all seeing eyes and Masonic symbols plastered all over it, am I?
"Everything will come to light eventually. I hope you share your opinion with me when that finally happens."
This is when it will happen:
"When I have more powerful evidence".......