The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 Aedon Cassiel Archive
Precedents for Pizzagate
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>
Marc Dutroux, Belgian pedophile, sadist, and serial killer with friends in high places
Marc Dutroux, Belgian pedophile, sadist, and serial killer with friends in high places

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New Reply
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

To reiterate a point that should be clear to the more astute reader, my goal in this series (part 1, part 2) has not been to defend “Pizzagate” as such. My goal has been to defend the people who want to investigate it against specific accusations levied against them by people who think Pizzagate has revealed no intriguing information at all—for a specific reason, which I will be honing in and focusing on much more directly in this closing entry.

Whereas the mainstream critics of Pizzagate would have you believe that the dividing line is between paranoid conspiracy theorist followers of “fake news” and level-headed people who follow trustworthy news sources and rely on cold, hard reason to determine the truth, my goal has been to show that—whatever is or is not happening with Pizzagate itself—thisframing of the issue is arrogant, insulting, and the product of extremely narrow tunnel vision.

When I have referred to what I see as the more compelling pieces of evidence uncovered by the crowd-sourced investigation into Pizzagate, my point has not been to use these to say “Pizzagate is true and every single person looking into it is a hero,” but to say “the people investigating it are not idiots, and the facts they’ve been uncovering are not all worthless. Reasonable people could very well look at this and think that it gives us reason to be concerned that there may be something behind it. And if the media is telling you only about the most bizarre, reaching accusations without telling you any of the more interesting points that have been uncovered (which it is), it is not doing its proper job.”

To those who think I am demonstrating an inclination towards conspiracy theories in this series, allow me to quote directly from the two previous essays:

The evidence [in Pizzagate] is of wildly varying levels of quality . . . [and much of it is] the pareidolia of “Jesus is appearing to me in my toast” . . . many of these claims arewild speculation over coincidences . . . Could [this evidence] have an innocent explanation? Sure, maybe. . . . some of the supposed “codewords” people have claimed to have identified in Pizzagate appear to be made up . . . Could all of this turn out to be nothing? Of course it could. . . . Have we identified [evidence of a high–level sex ring] here? Only time will tell. . . . Am I trying to make the argument that if one conspiracy theory is true, all the others must be, too? No . . .

Clearly, anyone who thinks my purpose in any of these essays has simply been to try to validate the truth of every conspiratorial speculation anyone has made around Pizzagate is not paying any attention to my actual words at all. They’ve completely missed the real point, and the problem is not that I haven’t expressed my argument clearly, because words can’t get much clearer than these.

However, I do want to dedicate this final entry to refining and adding bulk to a key step in the core of that argument: namely, the step that emphasizes that no matter how compelling any of the evidence that turns up in Pizzagate in particular may or may not be, we know that high-level sex abuse is in fact a thing that happens in the upper echelons of power, and we know that it gets covered up when it occurs, and we know that the media is often complicit in the cover-up as well. This is why I introduced my first entry to the series with a discussion of the Rotherham child abuse scandal, and the second entry to the series with a brief discussion of MK Ultra, a program that was publicly confirmed to have gone on for some twenty years and involved the highest halls of power subjecting innocent civilians and mentally disabled children to the worst kinds of psychological abuse and manipulation without consent before any public evidence ever even emerged. Part of the point in these examples is to demonstrate that the basic mistrust of our elitesthat people investigating Pizzagate are demonstrating is entirely justified by facts that are known.

Now, my other point in including these cases in the conversation is that there is a drasticdifference between someone who believes he has reason to think something has happened that is unprecedented—say, that there are aliens in Area 51—and someone who believes he has reason to think something has happened that we know for a fact has happened, and that we know for a fact continues to happen, where—if they had found evidence of it happening, it would indeed look very much like what they’ve found.

Imagine you are walking down the street in a quiet small town, and a stranger tells you that the way someone has his handkerchief stuffed into his pocket is a sign that he’s just killed someone. But you investigate that individual, and it turns out that he’s entirely clean and that the handkerchief has a perfectly innocent explanation. You might have valid grounds to infer that the accuser could just be a paranoid schizophrenic who sees demonic symbolism everywhere, even when none exists.

But if a detective is working in a gang-infested area, and he has identified people using handkerchiefs to signify that they’ve just killed members of rival gangs, and he tells you that he thinks the way a certain individual has a handkerchief stuffed in his pocket might be evidence he’s just killed someone, then even if you investigate that individual and he turns out to be innocent, it would not be legitimate to suspect the detective of insanity just because he got it wrong. In fact, the reasoning he followed would be entirely legitimate, even though he turned out to be wrong in this particular case.

Why? Because he would know that there are in fact gangs operating in this area, and he would know that they have in fact used handkerchiefs to signal their recent killings, and he would know that if indeed this were someone committing an act that he knows has occurred before and that he knows in fact continues to occur, then this is exactly what the evidence for it would look like.

The point of this analogy is not to say that everyone looking at Pizzagate is just like a detective—but it is to say that the upper levels of our government are a gang-infested area. And that is why I have entered the arena, not to say “Pizzagate is obviously real!!!” but to say “The people investigating Pizzagate do not deserve to be treated like kooks. They do not deserve to be called idiots or paranoid freaks. Because in fact even if they are wrong, the instincts they are demonstrating are clearly instincts our political situation calls for in general whether something is happening in this particular instance or not.”

If any compelling evidence were to come out of Pizzagate—and, as I have said in this series, I do think at least some of it is—who would catch on and express concern about it first? The record very clearly shows that it would not be the mainstream media. As the first article made a clear effort to point out, it was the far-Right blogosphere that caught wind of the Rotherham scandal well before the mainstream media did; and during his time at the BBC, Mark Thompson was credibly accused of lying to cover up evidence of the Jimmy Savile sex scandal. Jimmy Savile managed to abuse hundreds of young children, and associates and friends were accused of acting in complicity with the rapes and even sentenced for raping the very same victims. And that same Mark Thompson who helped cover up the Savile scandal now runs the New York Times which was so quick to dismiss Pizzagate in its entirety as a hoax as well.

Liberal feminists claim to be concerned about “rape culture” (on which, see my essay on “Diversity & The Rape of Justice”), yet we have actual hard solid evidence here of a “child rape culture” within the upper echelons of power—which targets young boys at least as often as young girls—and their voices can barely be heard, even as they heap scorn upon the “conspiracy theorists” in cases like this one. Yet, the evidence they want us to believe holds true for rape across society in general as a whole (where, generally, it doesn’t) actually does hold for child rape in positions of power.

In what follows, I’m simply going to give overviews of some known, documented cases of this in haphazard order. I’m going to set my search bar in the right direction, spend an hour or two compiling sources that stand out to me, and list everything I find simply from looking around for a few minutes. So this won’t even be anywhere near the most compelling research on the topic that I could do. The brevity of these research methods should only serve to highlight even more clearly how pervasive this problem really is, if I can find this much with so little effort. It also underscores the irresponsibility and dishonesty of the mainstream media, who either have not done even cursory investigation or are simply shills trying to cover up the truth.

In 2011,

The OIG conducted an investigation concerning allegations that an AUSA [Assistant United States Attorney under Eric Holder] was using his government computer to view inappropriate material on his government computer. The investigation determined that the AUSA routinely viewed adult content during official duty hours, and that there was at least one image of child pornography recovered on the AUSA’s government computer. The AUSA acknowledged that he had spent a significant amount of time each day viewing pornography. The U.S. Attorney’s Office [Eric Holder] declined prosecution.

Senator Chuck Grassley of Iowa sent a letter to Eric Holder asking why the lawyer was not punished, and why he remained on the taxpayer dime for at least two months after being caught. I was able to find a copy through the Internet Wayback machine.

In 2006, the DHS’s Department of Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE) ran an internationally cooperative investigation into the purchase of subscriptions of child pornography online. Code-named Project Flicker, the investigation uncovered the identities of 30,000 child porn subscribers in 132 different nations. Some 250 of these identities belonged to civilian and military employees of the U.S. Defense Department, who gave their real names and purchased the porn with government .mil email addresses—some with the highest security clearances available. In response, the Pentagon’s Department of Criminal Investigative Services (DCIS) cross-referenced ICE’s list with current employment roles and began a series of prosecutions.

A DCIS report from July 2010 shows that 30 of these individuals were investigated, despite uncovering a new total of 264 Defense employees and contractors who had purchased child pornography online. 13 had Top Secret security clearance. 8 had NATO Secret security clearance. 42 had Secret security clearance. 4 had Interim Secret security clearance. A total of 76 individuals had Secret security clearance or higher.

Yet, the investigations were halted entirely after only some 50 total names were investigated at all, and just 10 were prosecuted. A full 212 of the individuals on ICE’s list were never even given the most cursory investigation at all. (Note: The number 5200 keeps popping up in sources covering this—for instance, see here—and I’m not sure what that number is for: American subscribers? Pentagon email addresses that weren’t confirmed to have actually been used by Pentagon employees, but still may have been? I’ll leave it to anyone interested enough to pursue these individual leads to see if they can figure that out and get back to us.)

In 2011, the story resurfaced when Anderson Cooper covered it with (again) Senator Chuck Grassley on CNN. After this, the story appears to have sunk straight back down into the memory hole yet again. Neither Anderson Cooper nor CNN appear to have given a follow–up in the five years since the story of the failed investigation first aired—why not? And why wasn’t the first airing enough to lead to mass outrage and calls for action anyway? See here for another summary of the squashed investigation from 2014.

Here’s a headline from The Washington Times dated June 29, 1989: “Homosexual prostitution inquiry ensnares VIPs with Reagan, Bush.” From the article:

A homosexual prostitution ring is under investigation by federal and District authorities and includes among its clients key officials of the Reagan and Bush administrations, military officers, congressional aides and U.S. and foreign businessmen with close social ties to Washington’s political elite, documents obtained by The Washington Times reveal. One of the ring’s high-profile clients was so well-connected, in fact, that he could arrange a middle-of-the-night tour of the White House for his friends on Sunday, July 3, of last year. Among the six persons on the extraordinary 1 a.m. tour were two male prostitutes.

Can anyone find a follow-up clarifying what happened as a result of that investigation? I can’t find one here either, though once again I’d appreciate if someone else was able to.

In the infamous Jimmy Savile sex abuse scandal in Britain, we now know that Savile’s coworkers at the BBC knew that Savile was committing many of his sexual offenses right on BBC campuses. Paul Gamboccini, who worked next door to him, said “The expression which I came to associate with Savile’s sex partners was . . . the now politically incorrect ‘under-age subnormals’. He targeted the institutionalized, the hospitalized – and this was known. Why did Jimmy Savile go to hospitals? That’s where the patients were.”

Yet, the BBC’s official statement was that there was “no evidence” of misconduct, and they even dismissed claims that there was a cover-up. But now that Savile’s offenses have been confirmed, we know that indeed there was.

Significantly, victims claimed that Savile was not just an isolated abuser, but part of an organized—and Satanically-themed—ring.

And victims in the Jerry Sandusky case also claimed that Sandusky was not just an isolated abuser, but part of an organized ring, as well.

Come to think of it, it does make sense that if there were rings operating, they would have reason to designate “fallboys” to take the blame if enough evidence of abuse ever began to emerge (or perhaps they would end up choosing their fallboys in the moment, for whatever reason, to the same effect).

Many people refer to the so–called “Satanic Panic” from the late 80’s and early 90’s to claim that the probability of hysteria around false allegations is more likely, and an even greater threat to society, than actual ritualized sexual abuse. However, this appears to be rather convenient for actual pedophiles—because according to Kenneth Lanning, an FBI expert on both cult crime and child abuse, often child sex offenders “introduce occult into the abuse so the kids won’t be believed . . . That is their M.O. (mode of operation) . . . People are getting away with molesting children because we can’t prove there are satanic devil worshippers eating people. Pretty soon it becomes unprosecutable.”

The False Memory Syndrome Foundation gained prominence thanks in large part to the “Satanic Panic” (it’s members were even involved in the legal defense of individuals accused during the Satanic Panic). In 1993 Ralph Underwager, a key member of its “scientific advisory board”, was forced to resign after making the following statement in an interview with Paidika: The Journal of Pedophilia:

What I have been struck by as I have come to know more about and understand people who choose paedophilia is that they let themselves be too much defined by other people. That is usually an essentially negative definition. Paedophiles spend a lot of time and energy defending their choice. I don’t think that a paedophile needs to do that. Paedophiles can boldly and courageously affirm what they choose. They can say that what they want is to find the best way to love. I am also a theologian and as a theologian, I believe it is God’s will that there be closeness and intimacy, unity of the flesh, between people. A paedophile can say: “This closeness is possible for me within the choices that I’ve made.”

Paedophiles are too defensive. They go around saying, “You people out there are saying that what I choose is bad, that it’s no good. You’re putting me in prison, you’re doing all these terrible things to me. I have to define my love as being in some way or other illicit.” What I think is that paedophiles can make the assertion that the pursuit of intimacy and love is what they choose. With boldness, they can say, “I believe this is in fact part of God’s will.” They have the right to make these statements for themselves as personal choices. Now whether or not they can persuade other people they are right is another matter. (laughs)

Jennifer Freyd, daughter of the foundation’s founder Peter Freyd, continues to maintain that she was sexually abused by him, and has even published works on the topic of memories of child abuse herself. While the FMSF maintains that a full 65% of allegations of abuse are unsubstantiated, other research reported, for instance, in the Harvard Mental Health Letter finds that false abuse allegations by children “are rare, in the range of 2-8% of reported cases. False retractions of true complaints are far more common, especially when the victim is not sufficiently protected after disclosure and therefore succumbs to intimidation by the perpetrator or other family members who feel that they must preserve secrecy.”

And it bears remembering that not all accusations of institutionalized child sex abuse were bogus even during the very years of the “Satanic Panic” itself.

Throughout this series, I’ve mentioned the Franklin Scandal, at the center of which was Larry King—leader of the Black Republican Caucus, who sang the national anthem at the Republican convention in 1984, and worked heavily with a charity called Boys Town. I had planned to write a whole essay on this scandal, but having now read Nick Bryant’s book there is so much information that it’s hard to even fathom where to begin—and there’s a fine line between not giving enough compelling evidence and copying and pasting the entire book. So the best way to learn about this incident is to watch the Conspiracy of Silence documentary and then contact me at www.zombiemeditations.com if you need help obtaining a copy of Nick Bryant’s book.

The one most striking line of evidence in the case I will mention is this: the head of the investigative Franklin committee, Gary Carodori, was convinced that the victim’s allegations of rampant child abuse were true. You can see his interviews with the victims here. On the way to Chicago to reopen evidence, Carodori met an untimely death when his plane crashed, and his briefcase of evidence vanished without a trace. According to the Omaha World-Herald, investigators with the National Transportation Safety Board concluded that the “scattered wreckage pattern . . . certainly demonstrates that [the plane] did break up in flight,” which in other words means that it didn’t fall apart on impact because of a crash—the plane crashed because it fell apart.

State Sen. Loran Schmit of Bellwood, chairman of the Franklin legislative committee, told The Associated Press in Lincoln that he had no doubt there were people who wanted to see Caradori dead.

“They got their wish,” he said. “. . . The question to be answered is whether it was a coincidence.”

Schmit, himself a pilot with 40 years’ flying experience, stopped short of saying he thought Caradori’s plane was sabotaged, but he added in an interview with AP:

“A small plane is the perfect thing to use to get at someone. . . . They tend to burn when they crash, and things get burned, destroyed, scattered. You don’t need a bomb. A fuel line could be tampered with. Any number of possibilities are there.”

. . . Scott Caradori of Ralston told the World-Herald that his brother was a careful flier of more than 15 years who would not take chances, especially with his son on board, and had never had a mishap.

He said he did not rule out sabotage, given the nature of his brother’s work with the Franklin committee. “Our family received numerous threats over that, telling him to back off,” he said . . .

John DeCamp is the man who appears along with the victims in the Conspiracy of Silence documentary. He’s the author of The Franklin Coverup, the most thorough book on the Franklin case to appear in print before Nick Bryant’s more recently published update. DeCamp is a former state Senator, listed as one of eight ‘outstanding’ Vietnam veterans (he helped Operation Baby Lift, which evacuated thousands of Vietnamese children from the war-torn area), and now in his work as a lawyer has, among other things, provided legal representation to the children in the Columbine shooting.

Though Jerry Sandusky’s criminal trial did not begin until 2012, John DeCamp began discussing how he was contacted by victims and was linking the figures involved in the Franklin case to the sex abuse happening at Penn State all the way back in 2004.

“I had done something back then [when I wrote the original book on Franklin] linking the football coach [Jerry Sandusky] with Franklin . . . [and] I got call after call after call from Pennsylvania . . .”

Nick Bryant can also be heard discussing the links between the Franklin and Penn State abuses here, here, here, here, and here (part 1, part 2).

Speaking of Sandusky, few people are aware that Sandusky was actually first charged with sexual abuse of a minor all the way back in 1998. The Centre County’s District Attorney Ray Gricar at first refused to press charges. In 2005, Gricar disappeared under bizarre circumstances. “. . . After telling his girlfriend he was going for a drive . . . His body was never found, only his abandoned car and his laptop which had been tossed in the Susquehanna River in Pennsylvania without its hard drive.”

Then there’s the Dutroux Affair—a perfect example of the capacity of high–level pedophiles to destroy investigations by placing the right people in the right positions of power to protect themselves. In Belgium, a nation of just 10 million people, 350,000 people took to the streets in an event known as the White March to protest the handling of the case (in other words, that’s approximately 1 out of every 30 citizens of Belgium, including the elderly and children). Around 1995, multiple young girls began disappearing around the municipality of Bertrix. Headway in the investigation was finally made when a white van was reported that the police were able to trace back to Marc Dutroux. Marc Dutroux was a previously convicted pedophile who was released after serving just a third of his sentence despite the fact that his own mother had testified to the parole board that he would unquestionably offend again. Though unemployed and receiving welfare, Dutroux was able to live quite lavishly thanks to selling children—he owned seven homes, and used four of them as bases for kidnappings.

But the most disturbing part of this case isn’t even the offenses—it’s how deliberately inept the prosecution was. Police not only investigated Dutroux repeatedly without pressing charges, they even reported hearing voices —and accepted Dutroux’s story that the voices came from the street outside. They ignored a tip from an informant claiming Dutroux offered him thousands of dollars to participate in a kidnapping. They even sat on a video tape showing Dutroux building a makeshift dungeon in his basement, and could have saved the lives of the two girls who were then being tortured there had they acted on it.

Once the case was transferred from police to the courts, the initiative of lead prosecutor Jean-Marc Conorrette led to the rescue of two girls and the discovery of four bodies. Conorrette was inexplicably dumped from the case, and later broke down in tears in court describing the constant death threats he received while still on the case. Obviously there were other interested parties, some at least with influence in the government.

When a parliamentary panel revealed the names of 30 government officials who were complicit in hiding the misdeeds, none were punished. Nine police officers were eventually detained, but though a full 100 people in government, finance, and the media were accused of involvement, no one other than Dutroux ever made it to jail. (Edit 6:40PM EST 12/24: A friend with connections to intelligence agencies sent me a message in response to this article to tell me that that this post is a solid summary of the amount of coverup involved in the Dutroux Affair, despite the overall conspiratorial leanings of the site itself. He also tells me that the case of Peter Scully is one that’s too little known that has well–documented evidence of institutional involvement and cover–up.)

In Italy, Alfredo Ormanni who led an investigation into child porn claimed that a “paedophile lobby that acts in broad daylight and probably with the support, which”—he politely added—he “could consider unwitting, of certain political parties” was actively disrupting the efforts of his investigation.

In 1987, allegations of abuse involving dozens of children surfaced at the Presidio military base in San Francisco. The American Journal of Orthopsychiatry analyzed the victims, and claimed that:

The severity of the trauma for children at the Presidio was immediately manifest in clear cut symptoms. Before the abuse was exposed, parents had already noticed the following changes in their children: vaginal discharge, genital soreness, rashes, fear of the dark, sleep disturbances, nightmares, sexually provocative language, and sexually inappropriate behavior. In addition, the children were exhibiting other radical changes in behavior, including temper outbursts, sudden mood shifts, and poor impulse control. All these behavioral symptoms are to be expected in preschool children who have been molested.

Lt. Col. Michael Aquino, who ended up at the center of the investigation, had previously appeared on the Oprah Winfrey show to discuss his views on Satanism (Aquino founded a group called The Temple of Set). Records showed that the children were taken on unannounced trips outside the center.

One child positively identified Aquino and his wife, Lilith (known to the kids as ‘Mikey’ and ‘Shamby’), and was also able to identify the Aquinos’ private home and to describe with considerable accuracy the distinctively satanic interior décor of the house. The young witness claimed to have been photographed at the Aquinos’ home. On August 14, 1987, a search warrant was served on the house. Confiscated in the raid were numerous videotapes, photographs, photo albums, photographic negatives, cassette tapes, and name and address books. Also observed was what appeared to be a soundproof room.

Perhaps uncoincidentally, Cathy O’Brien—who claims to have been a victim of MK Ultra programming as a child, and who I mentioned in the second entry to the series—also claims Aquino was involved in her brainwashing. I have no idea whether O’Brien is a credible witness or not. But her allegations do line up with a striking amount of consistency with other evidence. Given Aquino’s known involvement in mind control programs—here is the full text of his “From PSYOP to Mind War”—this isn’t inherently implausible.

Nonetheless, the case was “quietly closed” after suspected offenders, including Aquino, were simply moved to different facilities

And yet again, the leads in these supposedly separate cases come full circle: Michael Aquino was also linked to the kidnapping of Johnny Gosch in the case of the Franklin scandal (according to an interview with the boy’s mother, Noreen Gosch).

I’m approaching 5000 words now, so I’m just going to dump some of the other mainstream–media headlines I found here without further elaboration.

  1. In the UK, MP Tom Watson confronts PM Cameron in Parliament with evidence of an elite pedophile ring at high levels (Video of speech).
  2. British pedophile ring ‘protected by Parliament and Downing Street’ (Belfast Telegraph)
  3. Panic among UK leaders as high-level pedophile network is covered up: BBC Newsnight program suspended for naming senior Conservative pedophile (The Guardian)
  4. Wikileaks cables reveal DynCorp employees purchased child prostitutes in Afghanistan and the US State Department helped cover it up (Huffington Post)
  5. Savile ‘had accomplice who would supply girls to sex ring inside BBC’ (The Sun)
  6. Jimmy Savile is the Tip of the Iceberg (This one is a blog, but it references several worthwhile mainstream sources)
  7. France’s most notorious serial killer has claimed that he murdered at least one victim on the orders of highly placed personalities in Toulouse because of a blackmail threat linked to sadomasochistic orgies involving politicians, judges and police. (The Guardian)
  8. Tebbit hints at sex abuse cover-up as pressure over missing files intensifies (The Guardian)
  9. My Name Is Anneke Lucas and I Was a Sex Slave to Europe’s Elite at Age 6 (Global Citizen)

For more sources like these, there are collections here and here and here — I share these with the caveat, as always, that I don’t necessarily endorse everything there, but I have found plenty that is useful within them.

To repeat the conclusion I reached earlier: child sex abuse is, without question, a rampant, institutional, and high-level phenomena. It occurs on a large scale in the highest levels of power—in the fields of entertainment, government, and law enforcement—and members of these rings have been well-known to gain handles on the relevant positions of power to ensure their actions are successfully covered up. Whether anything unique or original comes out of Pizzagate or not, then, my take is that the basic spirit of concern and distrust towards the elite halls of power that Pizzagaters have demonstrated is their general disposition is still far closer to the spirit of the truth than the basic attitude of dismissiveness that such a thing could even occur being demonstrated by those who find it too quick and easy to dismiss all of Pizzagate in its entirety as nothing more than a hoax—and I would stand by this statement even if it turned out that the latter were right.

Given that we know how rampant the problem of institutionalized child sex abuse in upper levels of power really is, with mounds of unquestioned public evidence stretching back decades across the world, the amount of evidence it takes to justify suspicion of people in positions of power drops.

But some question whether it is even appropriate to use words like “evidence” when speaking of cases like these in reference to Pizzagate. The answer is yes. Logicians call cases like this “background evidence,” which means facts that raise the prior probability that a thing being alleged could happen, by showing that it does happen, and therefore increasing the plausibility—to whatever extent—that it could have happened in this particular case. If things like Pizzagate have already happened, then Pizzagate is at least possibly true as well. If something is actual, that proves that things like it are possible and thus cannot be simply dismissed as impossible or implausible.

It is important to understand that “evidence” is not the same thing as “proof.” For example, if we know that a man molested every child he had prior to this one, that doesn’t prove that he molested this one. But we would absolutely be interested in knowing that in a court of law, and specifically it would count as “background evidence” that raises the prior probability that the claim that he molested this child could be true.

To continue the example, here’s what background evidence does: if we know the man has molested all of his previous children, then we are justified to give increased weight to whatever direct evidence exists indicating he may have molested this one. If we know the man has never molested a previous child, then we are justified to give less weight to whatever direct evidence exists indicating he may have molested this one.

On the other hand, if we knew the child had a history of lying for various reasons, that wouldn’t prove they were lying for those reasons this time too, but it would count as “background evidence”: relatively speaking, it would cause us to give less evidentiary weight to the child’s statements alone, if those were all we had as evidence.

If the father also molested every child he had previously, those two pieces of background evidence might basically cancel out. But if we knew the father had never molested any previous child (background evidence), and we knew the child had a strong history of lying about similar claims (background evidence), then the two facts put together would suddenly become enough to make a pretty compelling legal argument all by themselves, even though they have nothing to do with the specific facts at stake in this specific case, and they do nothing to deductively refute whatever claims against the father the child might have made.

In the real world, we often don’t have access to the kind of information we would need to deductively prove or refute things one way or another, so background evidence is sometimes the only evidence we have to go on, and it is in fact defined as a form of evidence (again, in court, if you knew that the child had previously made very similar lies and that the father had never molested a previous child, you would submit that information to the court “as evidence”).

So, whether or not we know high-level sex rings exist, and whether or now we know that they get covered up, influences how we ought to evaluate the evidentiary relevance of things we do or do not know when it comes to Pizzagate in particular. You might find similarities between the way people respond, or in the particular people taking the effort to respond, to Pizzagate and the way coverups of other cases took place.

For instance, if someone we now know was very active in denying allegations about a case that later turned out to be true is doing the same in Pizzagate (and for instance, Mark Thompson of the BBC was credibly accused of helping cover up the Savile scandal, and now runs the NYT), then we have evidence in the form of recognizing that what’s in front of us fits a certain pattern. Previous cases establish the “patterns” that take place when one thing or another happen, and therefore influence how we ought to interpret the patterns we see in front of us in a given case. If the patterns start to match, then that qualifies as evidence.

So, do high-level sex trafficking rings or organized forms of pedophilia exist in upper levels of government? How prevalent does it appear to be? As best we can tell, how many of them are there? How do things tend to go at first when they’re exposed? Can we confirm with prior evidence that they can be and are successfully covered up? All of this directly influences the likelihood that Pizzagate could be on to something. The more prevalent these things are, the less overwhelming the direct evidence needs to be to justify concern. The less prevalent they are, the more overwhelming it needs to be. Just like the history of how many previous children a man has molested influences how we evaluate the evidence at play when someone claims he’s molesting this one: if he’s never done anything of the sort, you’re going to need a lot of evidence before you take the accusation seriously. If you know that he’s even had a history of glancing at child porn, the more of that kind of background evidence you get, the less direct evidence you need to say that the accusation that he molested this child should be taken seriously.

Thus, to close, there are two responses we could take to someone who has latched on to a particular claim involving child sex abuse that turns out not to be accurate: First, we can call them paranoid idiots and move on with our day, conveniently forgetting about all of the rampant evil that does in fact exist, comforted by the fact that we could shut someone up for making us feel uncomfortable—because, after all, it turns out they actually were wrong about this particular claim. This appears to be the standard mainstream approach. Second, we can appreciate the basic human concern that motivates their interest in the subject and point them in the direction of better evidence for the very thing they’re ultimately concerned about, because the basic thing they are concerned about—institutionalized child sex abuse in upper reaches of power—absolutely is, in fact, real, whether they have the exact details right or not.

The dry intelligence of skeptics is utterly and entirely useless if it isn’t paired with a natural human drive to care. But the passion of the concerned just might be invaluable if only it can be paired with a more accurate picture of the facts. And this is the basic reason why some people have misread the intentions behind this series, even despite the clarity of my direct words stating that—again:

The evidence [in Pizzagate] is of wildly varying levels of quality . . . [and much of it is] the pareidolia of “Jesus is appearing to me in my toast” . . . many of these claims are wild speculation over coincidences . . . Could [this evidence] have an innocent explanation? Sure, maybe. . . . some of the supposed “codewords” people have claimed to have identified in Pizzagate appear to be made up . . . Could all of this turn out to be nothing? Of course it could. . . . Have we identified [evidence of a high–level sex ring] here? Only time will tell. . . . Am I trying to make the argument that if one conspiracy theory is true, all the others must be, too? No . . .

I have found it less important to address myself in tone to the dry intelligence of dispassionate skeptics than to the passion of the concerned, because theirs is the only energy that even expresses the desire to do something about what is, one way or another, a real, serious, and massive problem. Only for those who have it within them by nature to recognize that there are problems, untrustworthy elites, and a need to take some kind of action is there any purpose in discussing where to aim.

Additional “Pizzagate” videos by “Reality Calls” vlogger.

https://youtu.be/gsAmSqMgbsU

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oA2BocJLGb8

https://realitycallsshow.com/banned-from-youtube-james-alefantis-instagram-account-images-pizzagate/

(Republished from Counter-Currents Publishing by permission of author or representative)
 
Of Related Interest
shutterstock_529840039
Further Thoughts on Reclaiming Reality
Hide 263 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
    []
  1. Stogumber says:

    As a “precedent for Pizzagate” we shouldn’t ignore France, in our case the killing of Joseph Doucé under an enquiry about a pedophile network. There is, among others, a book by Bernard Violet “Mort d’un prêtre …” (Violet. as a Communist, looks mostly for Catholic and neo-nazi angles, but includes high political connections.)

    Read More
    • Replies: @AnonyBelge
    A woman who was caught up as a child in the vicious pedophile ring of Belgium has come forward to tell her story of terrible abuse, and how she survived.

    High-class pedophilia is a fact, not a theory and this has been known for a long time, in spite of how much in denial the masses want to remain.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4136536/Former-child-sex-slave-sold-Belgian-recalls-abuse.html

    https://www.globalcitizen.org/en/content/anneke-lucass-harrowing-tale-of-sex-trafficking-am/

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zQFOrwyFopA
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
    AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
    These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
    Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
    Sharing Comment via Twitter
    /article/precedents-for-pizzagate/#comment-1706027
    More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  2. Good piece. Pity though that you cannot read Dutch. Since 2007, investigative journalist Micha Kat has been covering a paedophile ring involving the former Queen’s husband (Claus), the highest civil servant in the Justice Department (all denunciations against him have been systematically shelved), government ministers, mayors, provincial governors, judges, prosecutors, journalists, etc. (www.klokkenluideronline.is, http://www.revolutionaironline.com). Kat now lives in exile in Ireland.

    Another very influential Dutch-language website has been covering an international paedophile ring operating in Portugal (Estoril), Britain and the Channel Islands (orphanage on Jersey), and the Netherlands. See the series “Van Estoril naar Zandvoort” (www.stelling.nl)

    Search for “Joris Demmink”, but please do not just rely on Google.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  3. Agent76 says:

    Dec 26, 2016 REALITY CALLS: THE HORRIBLE TRUTH Podesta

    Tara from the REALITY CALLS You Tube channel joins me to discuss the horrible truth.

    COMET PIZZA HIDDEN ROOMS | DINNER EXPERIENCE

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  4. Dan Hayes says:

    I have read this essay with much interest. But always in the back of my mind are the
    American sex-abuse witch hunts of the 1980s which have been chronicled by Dorothy Rabinowitz of the Wall Street Journal. This work earned her a Pulitzer Prize.

    Rabinowitz has also very movingly described the ordeal of Father MacRae, a priest (most probably) falsely accused of sex crimes.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Eagle Eye
    Read Dorothy Rabinowitz' careful coverage of this since the 1990s and found it persuasive at the time. She is likely right about some of the cases she documented.

    However, in view of later revelations of ORGANIZED abuse and high-level cover-ups (Marc Dutroux, Haut de La Garenne (Jersey), Kincora, Ted Heath, Jimmy Savile, Kampusch and similar cases in other countries), it no longer seems self-evident that testimony of Satanic rituals, underground tunnels etc. is ipso facto not credible and that such testimony should AUTOMATICALLY be regarded as tainting OTHER testimony by an alleged victim.

    Satanic rituals have been practiced and documented by practitioners and chroniclers since the Middle Ages - "spirit cooking" certainly has some characteristics of those earlier rituals. Similarly, secret underground rooms and passages have been found in many historic buildings and are a staple of all sorts of fiction. It would be remarkable if man's age-old predilection for secret spaces had suddenly ceased in the modern age.

    UK lawyer and publicist Michael Shrimpton (whatever one may think if his broader theories, e.g. German secret services have infiltrated UK government) makes the eminently reasonable point that a practicing pedophile whose face is known through television and other media MUST KILL any children he/she uses for sexual gratification lest the victim expose the perpetrator. Rumors of children from the Haut de la Garenne children's home on the Isle of Jersey being conveyed for one-way trips onto Ted Heath's yacht Morning Cloud are at least logically consistent with this basic logic and would also account for what appears to be a relative paucity of remains around the Garenne premises.
    , @FKA Max

    Rabinowitz has also very movingly described the ordeal of Father MacRae, a priest (most probably) falsely accused of sex crimes.
     
    Mr. Hayes,

    you might be interested to read this article:

    Rev. Gordon MacRae: Priest Allowed to Work with Youth Five Years


    By Katherine McQuaid
    Union Leader
    March 4, 2003

    Church officials allowed Rev. Gordon MacRae to continue ministering to children for five years after they found out he had sexually assaulted a 13-year-old boy. And at least seven more boys have said they were victimized by MacRae during that time, according to investigative files released by the New Hampshire Attorney General’s Office yesterday. [...]

    In an interview with detectives last year, the boy’s counselor, Judith K. Patterson, said at the time she reported the abuse she was told by Catholic Charities director Fr. John P. Quinn that Bishop Odore Gendron would report the “delicate” case directly to the Department of Welfare commissioner.

    The Department of Welfare was notified, and a report was filed with the Attorney General’s Office and later with the Cheshire County Attorney’s Office, but MacRae was never prosecuted.

    “. . . since Father MacRae is receiving counseling and is being strictly monitored, I do not plan to take any further action at this time unless I hear further from (the Department for Children and Youth Services) or Rev. Quinn,” wrote Cheshire County Attorney Edward O’Brien to Deputy Attorney General Peter Mosseau on Jan. 13, 1984.

    The attorney general’s report said the Division of Welfare relied on what it was told by Quinn, and never conducted an independent investigation into the allegations.
     
    - http://www.bishop-accountability.org/news/2003_03_04_McQuaid_RevGordon.htm

    This is a highly interesting and insightful talk, I discovered yesterday:

    Child Sexual Abuse and the Catholic Church: An Irish Disease and or Global Phenomenon

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uJxZvUI697k

    Published on Mar 26, 2014

    Journalist Patsy McGarry, of The Irish Times explores the politics, perceptions, and uniquely Irish aspects of the clergy sexual abuse scandal in Ireland. McGarry has reported extensively on the Catholic Church's response to various child sexual abuse scandals as documented by the Ferns, Ryan, and Murphy reports.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  5. headrick says:

    Good people can’t follow this stuff because it is poisonous even to get anywhere near it to examine the evidence. This will probably never get traction. Maybe just take exact content from the podesta e-mails, with the bizzare nature of it all, and ask Podesta publically to explain what the hell he was talking about. Maybe then evidence that this argot was common in pedo circles, be specific and date the evicence to make sure it did not postdate the emails. Just that- no more. And the silence from Podesta and the media will be enough to get the message to people. Maybe that is all that can be done.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  6. There is no substitute for the protection of a child offered by the existence of adult male relatives who would clearly act to destroy anyone who preyed or attempted to prey on their child/family member.

    As our political systems openly fail their first priority, we inevitably slide back toward DIY justice. We are well on our way to a rejection of relying on the state to provide order, so dysfunctional has it become.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Eagle Eye
    The most significant "adult male relatives" missing in almost all these cases are FATHERS. Uncles etc. are generally at best part-time father figures.

    Unrelated males such as mothers' boyfriends and stepfathers are much more likely to be perpetrators, often tacitly tolerated by the mother. Of course, there are also many cases of exemplary stepfathers whose presence may even be better for the children than that of the bio-dads they replace.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  7. annamaria says:

    “…during his time at the BBC, Mark Thompson was credibly accused of lying to cover up evidence of the Jimmy Savile sex scandal. Jimmy Savile managed to abuse hundreds of young children, and associates and friends were accused of acting in complicity with the rapes and even sentenced for raping the very same victims. And that same Mark Thompson who helped cover up the Savile scandal now runs the New York Times which was so quick to dismiss Pizzagate in its entirety as a hoax as well.”
    Sounds as if Mark Thompson is a Putin’s mole planted into the New York Times to undermine American values. And who was a powerful promoter of the notorious Mark Thompson? There are certainly some well-known names that are associated with Mark Thompson’e elevation to the position of the NYT boss. Some powerful pedophiles?

    The bloody habits of the high-level pedophiles in the US/EU make it easer to understand the ongoing wars during which the multitude of children have been maimed and shredded to bits by the superior US- and EU-made WMD –– to pornographic delight of the warmongering subhumans in the highest echelons of the US government and international war profiteers.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  8. Many people refer to the so–called “Satanic Panic” from the late 80’s and early 90’s to claim that the probability of hysteria around false allegations is more likely, and an even greater threat to society, than actual ritualized sexual abuse.

    What’s instructive to me is how differently the press and the government are behaving with Pizzagate as opposed to the trials of the 80s. Remember the McMartin daycare center? Those poor people were dragged through the ringer for years, despite the fact that the evidence against them seemed so flimsy–mostly ‘recovered memory’. In retrospect, it’s obvious that the McMartins just didn’t golf with the right people.

    But now, with Pizzagate, there’s a decided lack of interest on the part of the press, and even a desire to censor or ban any discussion of it on the internet. Could it be because so many of the individuals said to be involved clearly have friends in high places?

    My thanks to Aedon for another very thoughtful piece.

    Read More
    • Agree: Dan Hayes
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  9. Renoman says:

    My God man spit it out! Are you getting paid by the word or what?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  10. Eagle Eye says:
    @Dan Hayes
    I have read this essay with much interest. But always in the back of my mind are the
    American sex-abuse witch hunts of the 1980s which have been chronicled by Dorothy Rabinowitz of the Wall Street Journal. This work earned her a Pulitzer Prize.

    Rabinowitz has also very movingly described the ordeal of Father MacRae, a priest (most probably) falsely accused of sex crimes.

    Read Dorothy Rabinowitz’ careful coverage of this since the 1990s and found it persuasive at the time. She is likely right about some of the cases she documented.

    However, in view of later revelations of ORGANIZED abuse and high-level cover-ups (Marc Dutroux, Haut de La Garenne (Jersey), Kincora, Ted Heath, Jimmy Savile, Kampusch and similar cases in other countries), it no longer seems self-evident that testimony of Satanic rituals, underground tunnels etc. is ipso facto not credible and that such testimony should AUTOMATICALLY be regarded as tainting OTHER testimony by an alleged victim.

    Satanic rituals have been practiced and documented by practitioners and chroniclers since the Middle Ages – “spirit cooking” certainly has some characteristics of those earlier rituals. Similarly, secret underground rooms and passages have been found in many historic buildings and are a staple of all sorts of fiction. It would be remarkable if man’s age-old predilection for secret spaces had suddenly ceased in the modern age.

    UK lawyer and publicist Michael Shrimpton (whatever one may think if his broader theories, e.g. German secret services have infiltrated UK government) makes the eminently reasonable point that a practicing pedophile whose face is known through television and other media MUST KILL any children he/she uses for sexual gratification lest the victim expose the perpetrator. Rumors of children from the Haut de la Garenne children’s home on the Isle of Jersey being conveyed for one-way trips onto Ted Heath’s yacht Morning Cloud are at least logically consistent with this basic logic and would also account for what appears to be a relative paucity of remains around the Garenne premises.

    Read More
    • Agree: Dan Hayes
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  11. J1234 says:

    A fantastic article, and one that I’m generally on board with, not because I tend to buy into conspiracy theories (I usually avoid them), but because I had the dubious privilege of working for Franklin Credit Union for a couple of months back when I lived in Omaha in the early 1980′s. I had no inkling of illegal activity at Franklin at the time, but it was a very weird place to w0rk in other ways. And that’s why I quit after such a short time. I was never contacted by authorities concerning the case in the late 1980′s, I presume because my involvement was so limited. Needless to say, I never did anything illegal, or was asked to.

    Larry King, the flamboyant (and almost certainly gay or bi-sexual) Franklin leader, had a purposeless entourage following him around almost all of the time. They weren’t hired bodyguards or ghetto thug friends, but were employees of the credit union, as I recall. And they did little more than open doors or run petty errands for him…and possibly other things of a sexual nature. No, I couldn’t prove the sexual nature stuff, but when Larry asked me to be a part of this group, I quit immediately.

    King was idealized by the Left as a successful black (he wasn’t) and lifted up by the Right as a black Republican, so he received no meaningful scrutiny from anyone. Say what you want about Warren Buffett, he smelled that rat a mile away, and didn’t invest a dime in the business that promoted itself as a charity. When I mentioned in a meeting that I knew a member of the Buffett family, Larry (and other’s) response was that I could use my connection as a means to get the reluctant Buffett to invest some money, but I declined, and I’m sure that didn’t set well them.

    As to the child/sex abuse, I had no idea it was going on at the time, but I’m convinced it happened in retrospect, and also convinced that there was a massive (and successful) coverup about it. Again, I had no direct evidence the abuse occurred, but shortly after I quit, a family member gave me info about Omaha World Herald leader Harold Anderson, a prominent community figure back then who had close connections with Franklin (and was on it’s board, as I recall.) My family member had an acquaintance who cleaned Anderson’s home regularly, and in the course of her job, found a sizable stash of child porn that he tried to keep hidden. Keep in mind, I was informed of this years before the Franklin scandal broke.

    Anderson controlled public discourse about most everything in Omaha at the time, as his paper was the only game in town, and the local TV stations were all about weather and traffic and not much else of any substance. He shut down the investigation likely because he and the police chief at the time were both involved in the abuse.

    I can’t recall the exact chronology, but I remember that Franklin investigator John DeCamp was accused of having improper encounters with his own children. It was a big story in town back then. If this happened after his involvement in the Franklin investigation, it’s likely that Anderson and others put together a story about DeCamp that would serve as a warning to others who would investigate Franklin. What DeCamp had done was marry an Asian woman, and the family took baths together in a hot tub at the insistence of his wife because it was part of her culture. I certainly wouldn’t take baths with my family, but this surely a case of the media portraying something that it wasn’t whatever the motivation.

    As to Caradori, I’m not convinced that an assassination happened. Same with Vince Foster and the Clintons. Like I said, I’m not prone to conspiracy stuff, it should never be deemed beyond the realm of investigation or scrutiny. Not in a free and open society, anyway.

    Read More
    • Replies: @neprof
    Something was very wrong in Omaha at the time. Most who cared are dead, including former CIA Director William Colby. FWIW, Harold Anderson and G.H.W Bush were friends.

    http://davidshurter.com/?page_id=1134
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  12. Eagle Eye says:
    @dc.sunsets
    There is no substitute for the protection of a child offered by the existence of adult male relatives who would clearly act to destroy anyone who preyed or attempted to prey on their child/family member.

    As our political systems openly fail their first priority, we inevitably slide back toward DIY justice. We are well on our way to a rejection of relying on the state to provide order, so dysfunctional has it become.

    The most significant “adult male relatives” missing in almost all these cases are FATHERS. Uncles etc. are generally at best part-time father figures.

    Unrelated males such as mothers’ boyfriends and stepfathers are much more likely to be perpetrators, often tacitly tolerated by the mother. Of course, there are also many cases of exemplary stepfathers whose presence may even be better for the children than that of the bio-dads they replace.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  13. Junior says:

    GREAT articles, Mr. Cassiel!

    Just saw a post above commenting about the length of the article being too long, but I think that it is absolutely needed to take people through a step by step process of examples to show people that not only are these absolutely disgusting practices occuring in the highest levels of our government but that they have occurred MANY times before and been covered up by an absolutely complicit corrupted system that is driven by it. You don’t get ANYWHERE in a filthy corrupted system unless they have the dirt on you to control you. That is a FACT.

    The biggest hurdle faced in trying to do something about it is making people aware that true evil, such as this, actually exists. If, as they say, the greatest trick the devil ever pulled was making people believe that he doesn’t exist, then one of the greatest things we can do is to try to shine a light on him and his ilk. Gotta start somewhere.

    Kudos to you for trying to light a candle instead of just cursing the darkness.

    I think that another good addendum to the article would be highlighting the case of what Sibel Edmonds has to say about the Denis Hastert case in which she says that the House Speaker’s actions were well known to the FBI for years and that no real consequences would occur and why. It gives a great example of how these things are used for blackmail and control of our goverment then squashed from public awareness by a complicit media and complicit judicial system.

    From Philip Giraldi’s piece in TAC:

    Edmonds, an FBI translator who revealed large-scale corruption throughout the government, has received multiple gag orders under the State Secrets Act. She has nevertheless persevered in spite of concerns that she would be prosecuted and possibly imprisoned.
    The scope of the corruption allegedly involved bribery of senior government officials and congressmen, arranging for export licenses to countries that were embargoed, and the exposure of classified information. Edmonds has been questioned by a congressional committee, by individual congressmen and staffers, as well as by the FBI inspector general, and her information was found to be “credible,” “serious,” and “warrant[ing] a thorough and careful review.” She also provided interviews for “60 Minutes” and Vanity Fair, both of which were able to confirm key elements of her story.

    Edmonds described her work on Turkish-language transcripts of investigations relating to Hastert covering the period 1996 until January 2003, elaborating on the possibility of blackmail. She recalled that Hastert “used the townhouse [in Chicago] that was not his residence for certain not very morally accepted activities. Now, whether that was being used as blackmail I don’t know, but the fact that foreign entities [Turkey and Israel] knew about this, in fact, they sometimes participated in some of those not maybe morally well activities in that particular townhouse that was supposed to be an office, not a house, residence at certain hours, certain days, evenings of the week. So I can’t say if that was used as blackmail or not, but certain activities they would share. They were known.”

    Fast forward to the Dennis Hastert case making the rounds today, which focuses on relatively minor federal banking laws and ignores the other evidence that has been collected by the FBI on Hastert for the past 20 years. One has to ask, “Why Hastert and why now?”, but there does not seem to be a simple answer. It might be little more than the result of frustrated FBI investigators demanding that some action be taken.

    Edmonds, for her part, has described how the Hastert case has been ignored by the media and has predicted that it would eventually be made to go away by the government. Indeed, legal action following up on the original indictment has been delayed through postponement after postponement and more recently sidetracked into a plea bargain that will allow the former congressman to plead guilty to reduced charges while at the same time sealing forever the unsavory details linked to his being blackmailed.

    Hastert and his lawyers understand that they are well placed to effectively threaten the government prosecutors because Hastert knows where a lot of bodies are buried, metaphorically speaking. By demanding that the investigative files on him—which could include reports of illegal activity by a broad range of former officials—be released as part of his defense, he can force the government to drop or mitigate the charges against him.

    Glenn Greenwald writes that “Those with political and financial clout are routinely allowed to break the law with no legal repercussions whatsoever. Often they need not even exploit their access to superior lawyers because they don’t see the inside of a courtroom in the first place—not even when they get caught in the most egregious criminality.” There is a particular irony here: criminals in high office may avoid punishment through their willingness to implicate their peers who are engaged in much the same practices, in effect blackmailing the government to leave them alone or face the consequences. That is what the Dennis Hastert story appears to be all about.

    http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/how-a-plea-deal-for-hastert-may-hide-the-truth/

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu
    “Why Hastert and why now?” - payback for the impeachment.

    It cannot be excluded that the reason Hastert presided over the impeachment was a black mail.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  14. Skeptikal says:

    “and members of these rings have been well-known to gain handles on the relevant positions of power to ensure their actions are successfully covered up. ”

    Pedophiles have been shown to be quite “creative” in the ways they get access to children (for example, by marrying and producing children).
    I think it is reasonable to expect the same level of “creativity” when it comes to covering their tracks—after all, if caught they game is up and they cannot follow their compulsion. So it makes sense that pedophiles would make a point of choosing careers where they cannot can manipulate cover-ups, just as they make personal (and career) decisions that ensure access to chidren.

    Interview the Podestas now in both the Pizzagate and Madeleine McCann cases!!
    It might also be interesting to present the Pizzagate information to the McCanns and see if it rings any bells with them as to who—or the type of person who—might have been zeroing in on their daughter.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Seamus Padraig

    It might also be interesting to present the Pizzagate information to the McCanns and see if it rings any bells with them as to who—or the type of person who—might have been zeroing in on their daughter.
     
    That's a great idea! I wonder why it hasn't been done already. As I recall, when the McCann case originally broke, the parents themselves were being treated as suspects. I bet they'd love their revenge.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  15. utu says:
    @Junior
    GREAT articles, Mr. Cassiel!

    Just saw a post above commenting about the length of the article being too long, but I think that it is absolutely needed to take people through a step by step process of examples to show people that not only are these absolutely disgusting practices occuring in the highest levels of our government but that they have occurred MANY times before and been covered up by an absolutely complicit corrupted system that is driven by it. You don't get ANYWHERE in a filthy corrupted system unless they have the dirt on you to control you. That is a FACT.

    The biggest hurdle faced in trying to do something about it is making people aware that true evil, such as this, actually exists. If, as they say, the greatest trick the devil ever pulled was making people believe that he doesn't exist, then one of the greatest things we can do is to try to shine a light on him and his ilk. Gotta start somewhere.

    Kudos to you for trying to light a candle instead of just cursing the darkness.

    I think that another good addendum to the article would be highlighting the case of what Sibel Edmonds has to say about the Denis Hastert case in which she says that the House Speaker's actions were well known to the FBI for years and that no real consequences would occur and why. It gives a great example of how these things are used for blackmail and control of our goverment then squashed from public awareness by a complicit media and complicit judicial system.

    From Philip Giraldi's piece in TAC:

    Edmonds, an FBI translator who revealed large-scale corruption throughout the government, has received multiple gag orders under the State Secrets Act. She has nevertheless persevered in spite of concerns that she would be prosecuted and possibly imprisoned.
    The scope of the corruption allegedly involved bribery of senior government officials and congressmen, arranging for export licenses to countries that were embargoed, and the exposure of classified information. Edmonds has been questioned by a congressional committee, by individual congressmen and staffers, as well as by the FBI inspector general, and her information was found to be “credible,” “serious,” and “warrant[ing] a thorough and careful review.” She also provided interviews for “60 Minutes” and Vanity Fair, both of which were able to confirm key elements of her story.

     


    Edmonds described her work on Turkish-language transcripts of investigations relating to Hastert covering the period 1996 until January 2003, elaborating on the possibility of blackmail. She recalled that Hastert “used the townhouse [in Chicago] that was not his residence for certain not very morally accepted activities. Now, whether that was being used as blackmail I don’t know, but the fact that foreign entities [Turkey and Israel] knew about this, in fact, they sometimes participated in some of those not maybe morally well activities in that particular townhouse that was supposed to be an office, not a house, residence at certain hours, certain days, evenings of the week. So I can’t say if that was used as blackmail or not, but certain activities they would share. They were known.”

     


    Fast forward to the Dennis Hastert case making the rounds today, which focuses on relatively minor federal banking laws and ignores the other evidence that has been collected by the FBI on Hastert for the past 20 years. One has to ask, “Why Hastert and why now?”, but there does not seem to be a simple answer. It might be little more than the result of frustrated FBI investigators demanding that some action be taken.
     

    Edmonds, for her part, has described how the Hastert case has been ignored by the media and has predicted that it would eventually be made to go away by the government. Indeed, legal action following up on the original indictment has been delayed through postponement after postponement and more recently sidetracked into a plea bargain that will allow the former congressman to plead guilty to reduced charges while at the same time sealing forever the unsavory details linked to his being blackmailed.
     

    Hastert and his lawyers understand that they are well placed to effectively threaten the government prosecutors because Hastert knows where a lot of bodies are buried, metaphorically speaking. By demanding that the investigative files on him—which could include reports of illegal activity by a broad range of former officials—be released as part of his defense, he can force the government to drop or mitigate the charges against him.
     

    Glenn Greenwald writes that “Those with political and financial clout are routinely allowed to break the law with no legal repercussions whatsoever. Often they need not even exploit their access to superior lawyers because they don’t see the inside of a courtroom in the first place—not even when they get caught in the most egregious criminality.” There is a particular irony here: criminals in high office may avoid punishment through their willingness to implicate their peers who are engaged in much the same practices, in effect blackmailing the government to leave them alone or face the consequences. That is what the Dennis Hastert story appears to be all about.
     
    http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/how-a-plea-deal-for-hastert-may-hide-the-truth/

    “Why Hastert and why now?” – payback for the impeachment.

    It cannot be excluded that the reason Hastert presided over the impeachment was a black mail.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  16. The corporate media’s “nothing to see here” refusal to pull back the curtain, or to even acknowledge the curtain on this is telling.

    While, we’ve come to expect/accept high levels of corruption, missing children, and creeps in high places, if true, this is the stuff that revolutions are made of. To paraphrase an earlier elite “Let them eat Pizza”.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  17. RodW says:

    I just started watching #PizzaGate BANNED From YouTube.

    Near the beginning, it shows a censored photo of a Jeff Koons porn/art picture in the Whitney Museum of American Art, which the narrator claims shows “a grown man penetrating a probably three or four year old girl”. She then wonders what the hashtag #jeffkoons could possibly mean, commenting that it could refer to the black man shown in the picture. For those who are too ignorant or incurious to know or find out for themselves, the image shows the artist Jeff Koons having sex with his then wife, an adult pornstar.

    Cassiel claims that the Pizzagate ‘evidence’ is “of wildly varying levels of quality”. Well, no it isn’t. It’s all of this level of ‘quality’. It doesn’t meet any evidentiary standard at all, but Cassiel nevertheless tries to make a no smoke without a fire argument out of it anyway (that’s what all his fancy talk about preponderance of evidence is).

    When someone persistently makes and posts videos like this, full of obviously unsubstantiable claims, it isn’t harmless. It’s deliberately malicious, and it should be treated as such. It can’t be pardoned by saying “Oh, but this a bleeding heart that cares about the wellbeing of children” as Cassiel does.

    By all means go out and find and punish people who prey on children. But stop closing your eyes to obvious wrongdoing by another species of weirdo.

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu
    I agree. I am surprised that the author disseminates videos that clearly were made by morons. Youtube is full of them.
    , @Ron Unz

    For those who are too ignorant or incurious to know or find out for themselves, the image shows the artist Jeff Koons having sex with his then wife, an adult pornstar.When someone persistently makes and posts videos like this, full of obviously unsubstantiable claims, it isn’t harmless....It’s deliberately malicious, and it should be treated as such.
     
    I really don't agree with that verdict.

    As far as I know, "Reality Calls" is just some girl in England who's gotten involved in investigating the alleged "Pizzagate" scandal, and produces videos on the subject. She doesn't exactly have the resources of a team of NYT journalists, let alone the FBI.

    I'd be the first to admit that some of her charges seem implausible, or likely due to a misunderstanding of the evidence. But a good fraction of the "evidence" she presents makes me very, very suspicious about the case and the way it's being totally ignored by the MSM.

    For example, it seems pretty likely that lots of those Podesta emails bizarrely referring to food are using code words for something else, and it's been strongly alleged that those exact code words are commonly used in pedophile circles. So why doesn't the MSM just ask Podesta about those very strange emails and whether they were actually all about "pizza" and "hot dogs."

    Or consider that one of the Podestas supposedly was a great fan of art work depicting children in their underwear, sometimes looking like they were being held captive, sometimes looking like they were dead. That's obviously not illegal, but doesn't it make you wonder a little?

    And how did that pizza guy get named one of the fifty most influential people in DC, far ahead of hundreds of Congressmen, Senators, Justices, and lobbyists? Was his pizza really that good?

    There seems to be a *gigantic* amount of highly-suspicious circumstantial evidence of something very odd going on. And it's even more odd that the MSM has zero interest in investigating. Which is why we need to rely on some girl doing videos in England....
    , @FKA Max
    Who Was the Umbrella Man? | JFK Assassination Documentary | The New York Times
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yznRGS9f-jI

    Published on Nov 20, 2013

    In 2011, on the anniversary of the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, Errol Morris explored the story behind the one man seen standing under an open black umbrella at the site.

    But stop closing your eyes to obvious wrongdoing by another species of weirdo.
     
    Weirdos, hysterics and opportunists just come with the territory/are part of the package.

    It is a two/multiple-front war...

    One of the pieces of evidence in the Pizzagate scandal, which threw me for a loop, was Andrew Breitbart’s tweet from 2011 about John Podesta. I did not understand its original/proper context, and so I interpreted it to be a very credible piece of evidence, which it is not really, as I found out.

    I think what we are witnessing in the case of Pizzagate is a collaboration of right-wing “moral entrepreneurs” (with whom I had not been that familiar with before, and who most likely and ironically were empowered and inspired by feminist, left-wing moral entrepreneurs’ trumped-up claims about child sexual abuse) and right-wing “conspiracy entrepreneurs ” ( e.g. Infowars.com et al., with whom I am personally very familiar with).

    This very good article puts Andrew Breitbart’s tweet about John Podesta in perspective and in its proper context:

    About that Podesta ‘underage sex-slaves’ Tweet from Andrew Breitbart


    Nefarious operators on the Internet (as well as some innocent, misinformed individuals) have been freaking out over a Tweet from the late Andrew Breitbart connecting John Podesta to a “underage sex slave” operation.


    How prog-guru John Podesta isn’t household name as world class underage sex slave op cover-upperer defending unspeakable dregs escapes me.

    — AndrewBreitbart (@AndrewBreitbart) February 4, 2011
     
    [...]

    There are tons of websites who make a lot of money doing pretty odious things. [...]

    However, because of the confusion over this Tweet, I think some context and an explanation is called for. And, for some reason, Breitbart News has not stepped up and delivered it themselves. (I searched, if they have, I will update this column post haste.)

    [...] - http://hotair.com/archives/2016/12/05/about-that-andrew-breitbart-tweet-about-podesta-and-underage-sex-slaves/

    I am still sitting on the fence about Pizzagate, but one thing is crystal clear to me, and that is, that if “moral entrepreneurs” and “conspiracy entrepreneurs”, be they of the right-wing or left-wing persuasion, get involved in debates and investigations, these usually turn irrational, disingenuous, and hysterical fast.
     
    - http://www.unz.com/article/pizzagate/#comment-1685910
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  18. BB753 says:

    Excellent! Please note the correct spelling : “Jean-Marc Connerotte” not
    “Conorrette “. The Dutroux affair is unfortunately still largely obscure in America, though it was a huge scandal in the European media at the time and very revealing of how pedophile rings work.

    https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean-Marc_Connerotte

    Read More
    • Replies: @annamaria
    Thank you for the link. Here is another source, in English: http://www.wikileaks-forum.com/belgium/358/belgian-pedophile-trafficking-ring-and-alleged-cover-up-marc-dutroux-and-nihoul/15315/
    "Marc Dutroux is a Belgian convicted pedophile rapist and (serial?) killer, now confined to prison for life. What is strange is that there were numerous allegations of a network/ring, with elite people in Belgium, even in France and the Netherlands alleged to be perpetrators (witnesses and others allege). The Belgian police and judicial authorities made many, many "blunders" in investigations (as well as not investigating incriminating and obvious leads, evidence, etc, such as hairs not being tested, DNA results not being shown, tip offs ignored by police, judges and others who were investigating a possible ring were sacked, as well as more than twenty witnesses and other informants who died mysteriously right before going forward with evidence; one person who was officially labeled as dying from a heart attack was in fact shown to have been poisoned, others threatened with murders and "accidents", lots of witnesses committing "suicide", all right before giving evidence to police). The investigative judge, Connerotte, who rescued two of the raped girls who were kidnapped by Dutroux and his accomplices, was sacked because he believed there was a gang or mafia related pedophile ring that reached high levels of elite. Lots of evidence and facts point that there is a pedophile ring, with Michel Nihoul being a possible ringleader. Nihoul and others have enjoyed a lot of protection from the government...."

    Compare this affair with the the US-orchestrated hunt on Assange
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  19. utu says:
    @RodW
    I just started watching #PizzaGate BANNED From YouTube.

    Near the beginning, it shows a censored photo of a Jeff Koons porn/art picture in the Whitney Museum of American Art, which the narrator claims shows "a grown man penetrating a probably three or four year old girl". She then wonders what the hashtag #jeffkoons could possibly mean, commenting that it could refer to the black man shown in the picture. For those who are too ignorant or incurious to know or find out for themselves, the image shows the artist Jeff Koons having sex with his then wife, an adult pornstar.

    Cassiel claims that the Pizzagate 'evidence' is "of wildly varying levels of quality". Well, no it isn't. It's all of this level of 'quality'. It doesn't meet any evidentiary standard at all, but Cassiel nevertheless tries to make a no smoke without a fire argument out of it anyway (that's what all his fancy talk about preponderance of evidence is).

    When someone persistently makes and posts videos like this, full of obviously unsubstantiable claims, it isn't harmless. It's deliberately malicious, and it should be treated as such. It can't be pardoned by saying "Oh, but this a bleeding heart that cares about the wellbeing of children" as Cassiel does.

    By all means go out and find and punish people who prey on children. But stop closing your eyes to obvious wrongdoing by another species of weirdo.

    I agree. I am surprised that the author disseminates videos that clearly were made by morons. Youtube is full of them.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  20. In Massachusetts not too long ago, people made their careers on allegedly believing and promoting such stories, lives were destroyed and people went to prison. Some are still forbidden to discuss the case by penalty of future imprisonment.

    Fells Acres school.

    Remember the elephant stabbed to death in the ‘Magic Room’ by Tookie? The tunnels under the school where children were murdered by the paedophile ring, which included teachers, cops and politicians? The rest of the sordid (and false) details brought out at the trials?

    Later MA Attorney General Martha Coakley along with thousands of other citizens sure did, and she made a career out of the elephant in the magic room.

    http://www.cyberussr.com/hcunn/witch/felpress1.html

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  21. neprof says:
    @J1234
    A fantastic article, and one that I'm generally on board with, not because I tend to buy into conspiracy theories (I usually avoid them), but because I had the dubious privilege of working for Franklin Credit Union for a couple of months back when I lived in Omaha in the early 1980's. I had no inkling of illegal activity at Franklin at the time, but it was a very weird place to w0rk in other ways. And that's why I quit after such a short time. I was never contacted by authorities concerning the case in the late 1980's, I presume because my involvement was so limited. Needless to say, I never did anything illegal, or was asked to.

    Larry King, the flamboyant (and almost certainly gay or bi-sexual) Franklin leader, had a purposeless entourage following him around almost all of the time. They weren't hired bodyguards or ghetto thug friends, but were employees of the credit union, as I recall. And they did little more than open doors or run petty errands for him...and possibly other things of a sexual nature. No, I couldn't prove the sexual nature stuff, but when Larry asked me to be a part of this group, I quit immediately.

    King was idealized by the Left as a successful black (he wasn't) and lifted up by the Right as a black Republican, so he received no meaningful scrutiny from anyone. Say what you want about Warren Buffett, he smelled that rat a mile away, and didn't invest a dime in the business that promoted itself as a charity. When I mentioned in a meeting that I knew a member of the Buffett family, Larry (and other's) response was that I could use my connection as a means to get the reluctant Buffett to invest some money, but I declined, and I'm sure that didn't set well them.

    As to the child/sex abuse, I had no idea it was going on at the time, but I'm convinced it happened in retrospect, and also convinced that there was a massive (and successful) coverup about it. Again, I had no direct evidence the abuse occurred, but shortly after I quit, a family member gave me info about Omaha World Herald leader Harold Anderson, a prominent community figure back then who had close connections with Franklin (and was on it's board, as I recall.) My family member had an acquaintance who cleaned Anderson's home regularly, and in the course of her job, found a sizable stash of child porn that he tried to keep hidden. Keep in mind, I was informed of this years before the Franklin scandal broke.

    Anderson controlled public discourse about most everything in Omaha at the time, as his paper was the only game in town, and the local TV stations were all about weather and traffic and not much else of any substance. He shut down the investigation likely because he and the police chief at the time were both involved in the abuse.

    I can't recall the exact chronology, but I remember that Franklin investigator John DeCamp was accused of having improper encounters with his own children. It was a big story in town back then. If this happened after his involvement in the Franklin investigation, it's likely that Anderson and others put together a story about DeCamp that would serve as a warning to others who would investigate Franklin. What DeCamp had done was marry an Asian woman, and the family took baths together in a hot tub at the insistence of his wife because it was part of her culture. I certainly wouldn't take baths with my family, but this surely a case of the media portraying something that it wasn't whatever the motivation.

    As to Caradori, I'm not convinced that an assassination happened. Same with Vince Foster and the Clintons. Like I said, I'm not prone to conspiracy stuff, it should never be deemed beyond the realm of investigation or scrutiny. Not in a free and open society, anyway.

    Something was very wrong in Omaha at the time. Most who cared are dead, including former CIA Director William Colby. FWIW, Harold Anderson and G.H.W Bush were friends.

    http://davidshurter.com/?page_id=1134

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  22. Sam J. says:

    I wouldn’t believe children 100% in anything they said but a lot of these cases they say are made up by the children have solid evidence backing them up. In the Presidio case, “…At least four children contracted chlamydia…”. You don’t that from fairy-tales.

    http://articles.latimes.com/1987-08-11/news/mn-846_1_child-molestation

    Some other things you didn’t mention. When Gary Carodori’s plane blew up thousands of child pornography pictures rained down from the sky. All picked up by the FBI and taken where????? Carodori called the people who hired him to do the investigation and told them he had pictures of children with politicians and influential people before he got on his plane. On the same case kids from the Franklin case said they were taken to the same house that was involved with the Washington scandal you write about. They were taken by investigators and identified the same house. The guy that owned the house told others he worked with the CIA and after the scandal started he conveniently committed suicide.

    Here’s another that the investigation was stopped by the CIA.

    There’s lots and lots and lots of these. Their used to be survivors. My guess is they kill them all now so there’s no witnesses. Let me ask you all a question. Do you believe that someone can be mind controlled to kill themselves? Watch this video and freak out. Look how quickly they switch from seduction to trying to kill themselves.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  23. Junior says:

    “News is what somebody somewhere wants to suppress; all the rest is advertising.” – Lord Northcliffe

    Thought I’d share one of my favorite new songs by Payday Monsanto on Pizzagate and the “fake news” meme.

    These pedophiles need to get a new code
    Their whole network is about to implode
    The FBI hasn’t been doin their jobs
    Citizen Journalists have been makin them look like some slobs
    “Fake news” is the meme you’re presented with
    Pizzagate is the main reason they invented it
    To tackle the facts, they just don’t have the temperament
    The media is teeming with some low-lifes and degenerates
    Covering up pedophile sex slave rings
    Believe me, sweetie, Mr. Payday don’t just say things
    It’s so institutionalized, they ain’t ashamed of it
    So profoundly normalized, they make a game of it
    You surely can’t believe these reprobates of Hell
    Why the f*ck would the DOJ investigate itself?
    My only goal is to make you recognize the proof
    Cuz I weaponize the truth when I step inside a booth

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  24. Harry106 says:

    EagleEye said:
    “Read Dorothy Rabinowitz’ careful coverage of this since the 1990s and found it persuasive at the time. She is likely right about some of the cases she documented”
    Also Dan Hayes expressed a similar thought.
    I also read her articles at the time, but was undecided. Medical evidence showed someone molested those children, and I didn’t believe all of the examining doctors caught hysteria.
    When this Epstein and pizzagate business came up, I naturally went back to review the McMartin case. In the intervening years, where had opinion settled? I found the official story, per Wikipedia, is the McMartin case was all hysteria incited by a crazy Mom and insurance-money-grubbing unethical therapists. I also learned that at the same time Rabinowitz at WSJ was exposing this, the Wash Post, LA Times, NY Times and others all ran feature exposes of the injustice done to the purported abusers.
    But if you search hard, you find a much smaller set of documents. These documents attest to an alternate reality that is very disturbing. Elements of this alternate reality include:
    - The tunnels and the underground room which the children all described were found, filled in, after the trials were over, by a meticulously scientific consulting archeologist. You can find his report online. And see this link: https://ritualabuse.us/ritualabuse/articles/the-dark-tunnels-of-mcmartin-dr-roland-c-summit-journal-of-psychohistory/
    - Mysterious deaths of people associated with this case abound. Ask yourself how many people you know have died mysteriously.
    - The DA office and the police sabotaged the prosecution. And they didn’t follow obvious leads. For example, they never seriously looked for the tunnels. They never tried to find the houses the kids were taken to. They never went after the pediatricians who, assuming the abuse was real, were either part of the ring or criminally incompetent. (Parents were told bleeding from the anus, vaginal discomfort,etc, were nothing to worry about.)
    You can compare the pros and cons of these two narratives yourself. Dig into the documents and see which reality you believe.
    Balancing the opposing arguments, I’ve made my decision. A great evil walks this land. We the people have our teeth into pizzagate, and like an American pit bull, aren’t going to let go.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  25. @Skeptikal
    "and members of these rings have been well-known to gain handles on the relevant positions of power to ensure their actions are successfully covered up. "

    Pedophiles have been shown to be quite "creative" in the ways they get access to children (for example, by marrying and producing children).
    I think it is reasonable to expect the same level of "creativity" when it comes to covering their tracks---after all, if caught they game is up and they cannot follow their compulsion. So it makes sense that pedophiles would make a point of choosing careers where they cannot can manipulate cover-ups, just as they make personal (and career) decisions that ensure access to chidren.

    Interview the Podestas now in both the Pizzagate and Madeleine McCann cases!!
    It might also be interesting to present the Pizzagate information to the McCanns and see if it rings any bells with them as to who---or the type of person who---might have been zeroing in on their daughter.

    It might also be interesting to present the Pizzagate information to the McCanns and see if it rings any bells with them as to who—or the type of person who—might have been zeroing in on their daughter.

    That’s a great idea! I wonder why it hasn’t been done already. As I recall, when the McCann case originally broke, the parents themselves were being treated as suspects. I bet they’d love their revenge.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  26. Ron Unz says:
    @RodW
    I just started watching #PizzaGate BANNED From YouTube.

    Near the beginning, it shows a censored photo of a Jeff Koons porn/art picture in the Whitney Museum of American Art, which the narrator claims shows "a grown man penetrating a probably three or four year old girl". She then wonders what the hashtag #jeffkoons could possibly mean, commenting that it could refer to the black man shown in the picture. For those who are too ignorant or incurious to know or find out for themselves, the image shows the artist Jeff Koons having sex with his then wife, an adult pornstar.

    Cassiel claims that the Pizzagate 'evidence' is "of wildly varying levels of quality". Well, no it isn't. It's all of this level of 'quality'. It doesn't meet any evidentiary standard at all, but Cassiel nevertheless tries to make a no smoke without a fire argument out of it anyway (that's what all his fancy talk about preponderance of evidence is).

    When someone persistently makes and posts videos like this, full of obviously unsubstantiable claims, it isn't harmless. It's deliberately malicious, and it should be treated as such. It can't be pardoned by saying "Oh, but this a bleeding heart that cares about the wellbeing of children" as Cassiel does.

    By all means go out and find and punish people who prey on children. But stop closing your eyes to obvious wrongdoing by another species of weirdo.

    For those who are too ignorant or incurious to know or find out for themselves, the image shows the artist Jeff Koons having sex with his then wife, an adult pornstar.When someone persistently makes and posts videos like this, full of obviously unsubstantiable claims, it isn’t harmless….It’s deliberately malicious, and it should be treated as such.

    I really don’t agree with that verdict.

    As far as I know, “Reality Calls” is just some girl in England who’s gotten involved in investigating the alleged “Pizzagate” scandal, and produces videos on the subject. She doesn’t exactly have the resources of a team of NYT journalists, let alone the FBI.

    I’d be the first to admit that some of her charges seem implausible, or likely due to a misunderstanding of the evidence. But a good fraction of the “evidence” she presents makes me very, very suspicious about the case and the way it’s being totally ignored by the MSM.

    For example, it seems pretty likely that lots of those Podesta emails bizarrely referring to food are using code words for something else, and it’s been strongly alleged that those exact code words are commonly used in pedophile circles. So why doesn’t the MSM just ask Podesta about those very strange emails and whether they were actually all about “pizza” and “hot dogs.”

    Or consider that one of the Podestas supposedly was a great fan of art work depicting children in their underwear, sometimes looking like they were being held captive, sometimes looking like they were dead. That’s obviously not illegal, but doesn’t it make you wonder a little?

    And how did that pizza guy get named one of the fifty most influential people in DC, far ahead of hundreds of Congressmen, Senators, Justices, and lobbyists? Was his pizza really that good?

    There seems to be a *gigantic* amount of highly-suspicious circumstantial evidence of something very odd going on. And it’s even more odd that the MSM has zero interest in investigating. Which is why we need to rely on some girl doing videos in England….

    Read More
    • Replies: @FKA Max
    Another aspect of the weird obsession and seemingly endless enthusiasm of political, etc. power players with especially modern ``art,'' is the following:

    Valuable as Art, but Priceless as a Tool to Launder Money

    http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/13/arts/design/art-proves-attractive-refuge-for-money-launderers.html


    Law enforcement officials in the United States and abroad say “Hannibal” is just one of thousands of valuable artworks being used by criminals to hide illicit profits and illegally transfer assets around the globe. As other traditional money-laundering techniques have come under closer scrutiny, smugglers, drug traffickers, arms dealers and the like have increasingly turned to the famously opaque art market, officials say.

    It is hard to imagine a business more custom-made for money laundering, with million-dollar sales conducted in secrecy and with virtually no oversight. What this means in practical terms is that “you can have a transaction where the seller is listed as ‘private collection’ and the buyer is listed as ‘private collection,’ ” said Sharon Cohen Levin, chief of the asset forfeiture unit of the United States attorney’s office in Manhattan. “In any other business, no one would be able to get away with this.”
     

    Art Basel events are conveniently located in Hong Kong and Miami, providing easy access for ``Golden Triangle'' [ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_Triangle_(Southeast_Asia) ] and South American narcotics growers and dealers to launder their ill-gotten gains:

    Art Basel is an international art fair with four shows staged annually in Basel, Switzerland; Miami Beach, Florida; the Wynwood Art District in Miami, Florida; and Hong Kong, China.
     
    - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Art_Basel

    Even if it turns out in the end, that the Podestas are not pedophiles, etc., at a minimum the possibility that the disturbing artwork they are collecting is a scheme to launder their ill-gotten political lobbying gains, etc., should be looked into and investigated by the authorities, in my humble opinion. There is definitely something fishy going on here...

    Miami’s extravagant Art Basel reflects the new economics of art

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j9avbAqXi2U

    , @RodW
    Thanks for the response Ron.

    When I was a kid, a friend and I found a scrap of notepaper in the playground at primary school, with diagrams and strange drawings on it. It was next to a locked pavilion with frosted windows, which we found significant. When we peered through the crack under the door, we could see that somebody had done a tidy shit in the middle of the floor, which gave off a horrible smell. We spent the lunch period playing detective, looking for the crime for which we decided the paper and the turd were evidence. We even interviewed some other kids and an adult playground supervisor. Her evasion and dismissiveness was particularly suggestive of guilt.

    This is actually true - I recalled it with amused embarrassment when I started looking into Pizzagate for myself. The 'evidence' doesn't seem any more solid or plausible than what we invented in the playground at primary school.

    This guy does a good preliminary job of answering the questions you raise about Pizzagate.
    https://youtu.be/2OrX0U4qwTM

    I'm perfectly willing to believe that the political and business circles of Western nations are full of perverts and psychopaths. It seems self-evident. But in terms of the specifics of any crimes they may commit, better evidence is required than what's being offered in Pizzagate. And of course, great big grab-bags of obviously fake evidence such as the snippet I identified will tend to obscure and discredit whatever real evidence might be found.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  27. El Dato says:

    And that same Mark Thompson who helped cover up the Savile scandal now runs the New York Times which was so quick to dismiss Pizzagate in its entirety as a hoax as well.

    Jeebus what. Is this true?

    I also remember the Dutroux thing from Belgium. It was really bizarre, like watching paranoid Hollywood shit, but Belgium is bizzare, politicial tunnels of utter corruption are leading everywhere. The open question is now: if the people in high places can’t get their fix from the usual provider, what will they do? Afaik, nothing of equal levels of depravity has happened since.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  28. FKA Max says:
    @Ron Unz

    For those who are too ignorant or incurious to know or find out for themselves, the image shows the artist Jeff Koons having sex with his then wife, an adult pornstar.When someone persistently makes and posts videos like this, full of obviously unsubstantiable claims, it isn’t harmless....It’s deliberately malicious, and it should be treated as such.
     
    I really don't agree with that verdict.

    As far as I know, "Reality Calls" is just some girl in England who's gotten involved in investigating the alleged "Pizzagate" scandal, and produces videos on the subject. She doesn't exactly have the resources of a team of NYT journalists, let alone the FBI.

    I'd be the first to admit that some of her charges seem implausible, or likely due to a misunderstanding of the evidence. But a good fraction of the "evidence" she presents makes me very, very suspicious about the case and the way it's being totally ignored by the MSM.

    For example, it seems pretty likely that lots of those Podesta emails bizarrely referring to food are using code words for something else, and it's been strongly alleged that those exact code words are commonly used in pedophile circles. So why doesn't the MSM just ask Podesta about those very strange emails and whether they were actually all about "pizza" and "hot dogs."

    Or consider that one of the Podestas supposedly was a great fan of art work depicting children in their underwear, sometimes looking like they were being held captive, sometimes looking like they were dead. That's obviously not illegal, but doesn't it make you wonder a little?

    And how did that pizza guy get named one of the fifty most influential people in DC, far ahead of hundreds of Congressmen, Senators, Justices, and lobbyists? Was his pizza really that good?

    There seems to be a *gigantic* amount of highly-suspicious circumstantial evidence of something very odd going on. And it's even more odd that the MSM has zero interest in investigating. Which is why we need to rely on some girl doing videos in England....

    Another aspect of the weird obsession and seemingly endless enthusiasm of political, etc. power players with especially modern “art,” is the following:

    Valuable as Art, but Priceless as a Tool to Launder Money

    http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/13/arts/design/art-proves-attractive-refuge-for-money-launderers.html

    Law enforcement officials in the United States and abroad say “Hannibal” is just one of thousands of valuable artworks being used by criminals to hide illicit profits and illegally transfer assets around the globe. As other traditional money-laundering techniques have come under closer scrutiny, smugglers, drug traffickers, arms dealers and the like have increasingly turned to the famously opaque art market, officials say.

    It is hard to imagine a business more custom-made for money laundering, with million-dollar sales conducted in secrecy and with virtually no oversight. What this means in practical terms is that “you can have a transaction where the seller is listed as ‘private collection’ and the buyer is listed as ‘private collection,’ ” said Sharon Cohen Levin, chief of the asset forfeiture unit of the United States attorney’s office in Manhattan. “In any other business, no one would be able to get away with this.”

    Art Basel events are conveniently located in Hong Kong and Miami, providing easy access for “Golden Triangle” (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_Triangle_(Southeast_Asia) ] and South American narcotics growers and dealers to launder their ill-gotten gains:

    Art Basel is an international art fair with four shows staged annually in Basel, Switzerland; Miami Beach, Florida; the Wynwood Art District in Miami, Florida; and Hong Kong, China.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Art_Basel

    Even if it turns out in the end, that the Podestas are not pedophiles, etc., at a minimum the possibility that the disturbing artwork they are collecting is a scheme to launder their ill-gotten political lobbying gains, etc., should be looked into and investigated by the authorities, in my humble opinion. There is definitely something fishy going on here…

    Miami’s extravagant Art Basel reflects the new economics of art

    Read More
    • Replies: @Skeptikal
    Interesting. And don't forget, in addition to the money-laundering potential, the tax-escaping potential of all the rich folks' educational or is it propaganda or ego-stoking etc. use of their art collections.
    See (just one random example):
    https://rfc.museum/about-us

    I wonder whether this Mera Rubell has dual Israeli-American citizenship . . .
    , @Junior
    In regards to the Art Basel Show and money laundering, I noticed in that video you posted that the sponsor of that Art Basel show is the Swiss Bank UBS.

    If UBS is involved, you can bet your bottom dollar that money is being laundered.

    UBS, whose origins date back to 1854, has often been embroiled in scandal, according to research by Phil Mattera of Good Jobs First. In an online profile of the bank, Mattera lists a 1988 controversy over money laundering of $1 billion by a Turkish-Lebanese drug ring; business activities in apartheid South Africa and with Nazi Germany. Among dozens of fines and financial settlements over fraud allegations, UBS has paid out $1.5 billion over the foreign exchange rate rigging scandal, $208 million for its role in financing Parmalat, the Italian dairly company charged with fraud and $150 million for its sale of auction-rate securities in the U.S.
     
    http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=16096
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  29. annamaria says:
    @BB753
    Excellent! Please note the correct spelling : "Jean-Marc Connerotte" not
    "Conorrette ". The Dutroux affair is unfortunately still largely obscure in America, though it was a huge scandal in the European media at the time and very revealing of how pedophile rings work.
    https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean-Marc_Connerotte

    Thank you for the link. Here is another source, in English: http://www.wikileaks-forum.com/belgium/358/belgian-pedophile-trafficking-ring-and-alleged-cover-up-marc-dutroux-and-nihoul/15315/
    “Marc Dutroux is a Belgian convicted pedophile rapist and (serial?) killer, now confined to prison for life. What is strange is that there were numerous allegations of a network/ring, with elite people in Belgium, even in France and the Netherlands alleged to be perpetrators (witnesses and others allege). The Belgian police and judicial authorities made many, many “blunders” in investigations (as well as not investigating incriminating and obvious leads, evidence, etc, such as hairs not being tested, DNA results not being shown, tip offs ignored by police, judges and others who were investigating a possible ring were sacked, as well as more than twenty witnesses and other informants who died mysteriously right before going forward with evidence; one person who was officially labeled as dying from a heart attack was in fact shown to have been poisoned, others threatened with murders and “accidents”, lots of witnesses committing “suicide”, all right before giving evidence to police). The investigative judge, Connerotte, who rescued two of the raped girls who were kidnapped by Dutroux and his accomplices, was sacked because he believed there was a gang or mafia related pedophile ring that reached high levels of elite. Lots of evidence and facts point that there is a pedophile ring, with Michel Nihoul being a possible ringleader. Nihoul and others have enjoyed a lot of protection from the government….”

    Compare this affair with the the US-orchestrated hunt on Assange

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  30. Skeptikal says:
    @FKA Max
    Another aspect of the weird obsession and seemingly endless enthusiasm of political, etc. power players with especially modern ``art,'' is the following:

    Valuable as Art, but Priceless as a Tool to Launder Money

    http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/13/arts/design/art-proves-attractive-refuge-for-money-launderers.html


    Law enforcement officials in the United States and abroad say “Hannibal” is just one of thousands of valuable artworks being used by criminals to hide illicit profits and illegally transfer assets around the globe. As other traditional money-laundering techniques have come under closer scrutiny, smugglers, drug traffickers, arms dealers and the like have increasingly turned to the famously opaque art market, officials say.

    It is hard to imagine a business more custom-made for money laundering, with million-dollar sales conducted in secrecy and with virtually no oversight. What this means in practical terms is that “you can have a transaction where the seller is listed as ‘private collection’ and the buyer is listed as ‘private collection,’ ” said Sharon Cohen Levin, chief of the asset forfeiture unit of the United States attorney’s office in Manhattan. “In any other business, no one would be able to get away with this.”
     

    Art Basel events are conveniently located in Hong Kong and Miami, providing easy access for ``Golden Triangle'' [ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_Triangle_(Southeast_Asia) ] and South American narcotics growers and dealers to launder their ill-gotten gains:

    Art Basel is an international art fair with four shows staged annually in Basel, Switzerland; Miami Beach, Florida; the Wynwood Art District in Miami, Florida; and Hong Kong, China.
     
    - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Art_Basel

    Even if it turns out in the end, that the Podestas are not pedophiles, etc., at a minimum the possibility that the disturbing artwork they are collecting is a scheme to launder their ill-gotten political lobbying gains, etc., should be looked into and investigated by the authorities, in my humble opinion. There is definitely something fishy going on here...

    Miami’s extravagant Art Basel reflects the new economics of art

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j9avbAqXi2U

    Interesting. And don’t forget, in addition to the money-laundering potential, the tax-escaping potential of all the rich folks’ educational or is it propaganda or ego-stoking etc. use of their art collections.
    See (just one random example):

    https://rfc.museum/about-us

    I wonder whether this Mera Rubell has dual Israeli-American citizenship . . .

    Read More
    • Replies: @FKA Max
    Israel Becomes Major Hub in the International Cocaine Trade, Abuse Rising
    http://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/1.553277


    When “black money” on such a monstrous scale is being circulated around the world, it invariably attracts the major crime organizations, including those in Israel. “There are Israeli crime organizations that have joined forces with the world’s major drug cartels,” says a member of the intelligence network of the Israel Police. “Criminals are measured by their ability to traffic huge quantities of drugs and today there are several Israeli criminals who can traffic impressive quantities around the world. Israeli drug criminals have a good reputation in the world because they meet several of the criteria in the field and because Israelis have global connections.

    The fact that a number of Israeli criminals have immigrated to other countries can be a boon to their drug business. “Israeli criminals never touch the drugs they traffic,” the police official continues, “they merely serve as middlemen. They open a ‘cashbox,’ namely, a shipping container holding several hundred kilograms of cocaine and they know how to find investors to fund the shipment.”
     
    Drug money saved banks in global crisis, claims UN advisor

    https://www.theguardian.com/global/2009/dec/13/drug-money-banks-saved-un-cfief-claims

    Drugs money worth billions of dollars kept the financial system afloat at the height of the global crisis, the United Nations' drugs and crime tsar has told the Observer.

    Antonio Maria Costa, head of the UN Office on Drugs and Crime, said he has seen evidence that the proceeds of organised crime were "the only liquid investment capital" available to some banks on the brink of collapse last year. He said that a majority of the $352bn (£216bn) of drugs profits was absorbed into the economic system as a result.
     
    Drug dealing/use is the other explanation for the Podesta pizza/pasta, etc. email code language.

    Sometimes/often pedophilia (advocacy) and substance abuse go hand in hand though. Volker Beck is an example of that, and coincidentally he also happens to be somewhat of a John Podesta look-alike:

    Greens politician Volker Beck caught with crystal meth

    http://www.dw.com/en/greens-politician-volker-beck-caught-with-crystal-meth/a-19087851

    The Green politician said he would resign from several of his posts in the Bundestag, including his postings as spokesman for internal and religious affairs, as well as from his role as Chair of the German-Israeli Parliamentary Friendship Group.

    The 55-year-old Beck, who did not give up his parliamentary mandate, has served in the Bundestag since 1994 and from 2002 to 2013 was the Greens' parliamentary group leader. In 2013, he raised a furor in Germany when he called for decriminalizing sexual contact with children.
     

    Since at least 2001, Cohn-Bendit has been accused of defending paedophilia during the 1970s. This controversy re-surfaced in 2013: as Cohn-Bendit received the Theodor Heuss Prize, there was a rally by anti-paedophilia activists. The president of Germany's Federal Constitutional Court cited the book as grounds for his refusal to give the speech at the awards ceremony.[12] The affair triggered wider research into the pro-pedophilia activism which prevailed in the German Green Party (without direct involvement on the part of Cohn-Bendit) well into the 1980s.[12]
     
    - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_Cohn-Bendit#On_paedophilia

    Again, this type of (criminal) behavior and personality (disorder) goes back to my comments about the connection between pedophilia and psychopathy on Mr. Cassiel's first Pizzagate article: ``Psychopathy in the Pedophile'' http://www.unz.com/article/pizzagate/#comment-1673588
    and
    ``Psychopathy among pedophilic and nonpedophilic child molesters.'' http://www.unz.com/article/pizzagate/#comment-1674224

    Fr. Marcial Maciel, Pedophile, Psychopath, and Legion of Christ Founder http://www.unz.com/article/pizzagate/#comment-1676150

    During his life, Maciel was the focus of several investigations of his behavior. There were allegations of drug abuse , for which he was investigated in 1956; he was hospitalised for morphine addiction.[15] He was also investigated for allegedly sexually abusing children. He was returned as head of the Congregation.
     
    - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcial_Maciel#Drug_addiction
    , @FKA Max

    And don’t forget, in addition to the money-laundering potential, the tax-escaping potential of all the rich folks’ educational or is it propaganda or ego-st[r]oking etc. use of their art collections.
     
    Yes,

    Heather Podesta [ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heather_Podesta ] spoke at this year's Art Basel about exactly that:

    Salon | Art Market Talk | Post-Election Art Market

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FRIKBWwesQY

    Published on Dec 14, 2016
    Heather Podesta, Founder and CEO, Heather Podesta + Partners, Washington D.C.; Daniel H. Sallick, Chairman, Hirshhorn Museum and Sculpture Garden, Founder and Partner, Subject Matter, Washington D.C.
    Moderator: Josh Baer, Advisor and Publisher, Baer Faxt, New York
    Date: Friday, December 2, 2016, 1pm to 2pm
    Filmed on site at Art Basel in Miami Beach 2016
     

    The couple’s shared occupation is now at issue in the divorce. In the filing, Tony Podesta makes the case that he is responsible for his wife’s current success by schooling her in the lobbying business and introducing her to his network of high-profile contacts. The filing claims that her salary before their marriage was $55,000, and that she now earns “many millions” annually. “Ms. Podesta’s career has risen meteorically since the parties’ marriage, with Mr. Podesta’s assistance and connections,” according to the document.
     
    - https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/reliable-source/wp/2014/04/03/tony-podesta-divorce-filing-wife-heather-podesta-tried-to-embarrass-and-harass/
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  31. Whatever the case of PizzaGate, it certainly is a gift for the MSM which was exposed as being so untrusted during this election season. This is their revenge against the new, alternative media that they are so threatened with. All the “Ministry of Truth” censorship, watch-dog, fake news, talk is the real fallout from this case. Steve Bannon is in a position to advise President elect Trump about the real agenda behind this exploitation of the PizzaGate affair. Hopefully his Breitbart tenure will motivate him to motivate Trump to stop any attempts to stifle a free and open media.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  32. FKA Max says:
    @Skeptikal
    Interesting. And don't forget, in addition to the money-laundering potential, the tax-escaping potential of all the rich folks' educational or is it propaganda or ego-stoking etc. use of their art collections.
    See (just one random example):
    https://rfc.museum/about-us

    I wonder whether this Mera Rubell has dual Israeli-American citizenship . . .

    Israel Becomes Major Hub in the International Cocaine Trade, Abuse Rising

    http://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/1.553277

    When “black money” on such a monstrous scale is being circulated around the world, it invariably attracts the major crime organizations, including those in Israel. “There are Israeli crime organizations that have joined forces with the world’s major drug cartels,” says a member of the intelligence network of the Israel Police. “Criminals are measured by their ability to traffic huge quantities of drugs and today there are several Israeli criminals who can traffic impressive quantities around the world. Israeli drug criminals have a good reputation in the world because they meet several of the criteria in the field and because Israelis have global connections.

    The fact that a number of Israeli criminals have immigrated to other countries can be a boon to their drug business. “Israeli criminals never touch the drugs they traffic,” the police official continues, “they merely serve as middlemen. They open a ‘cashbox,’ namely, a shipping container holding several hundred kilograms of cocaine and they know how to find investors to fund the shipment.”

    Drug money saved banks in global crisis, claims UN advisor

    https://www.theguardian.com/global/2009/dec/13/drug-money-banks-saved-un-cfief-claims

    Drugs money worth billions of dollars kept the financial system afloat at the height of the global crisis, the United Nations’ drugs and crime tsar has told the Observer.

    Antonio Maria Costa, head of the UN Office on Drugs and Crime, said he has seen evidence that the proceeds of organised crime were “the only liquid investment capital” available to some banks on the brink of collapse last year. He said that a majority of the $352bn (£216bn) of drugs profits was absorbed into the economic system as a result.

    Drug dealing/use is the other explanation for the Podesta pizza/pasta, etc. email code language.

    Sometimes/often pedophilia (advocacy) and substance abuse go hand in hand though. Volker Beck is an example of that, and coincidentally he also happens to be somewhat of a John Podesta look-alike:

    Greens politician Volker Beck caught with crystal meth

    http://www.dw.com/en/greens-politician-volker-beck-caught-with-crystal-meth/a-19087851

    The Green politician said he would resign from several of his posts in the Bundestag, including his postings as spokesman for internal and religious affairs, as well as from his role as Chair of the German-Israeli Parliamentary Friendship Group.

    The 55-year-old Beck, who did not give up his parliamentary mandate, has served in the Bundestag since 1994 and from 2002 to 2013 was the Greens’ parliamentary group leader. In 2013, he raised a furor in Germany when he called for decriminalizing sexual contact with children.

    Since at least 2001, Cohn-Bendit has been accused of defending paedophilia during the 1970s. This controversy re-surfaced in 2013: as Cohn-Bendit received the Theodor Heuss Prize, there was a rally by anti-paedophilia activists. The president of Germany’s Federal Constitutional Court cited the book as grounds for his refusal to give the speech at the awards ceremony.[12] The affair triggered wider research into the pro-pedophilia activism which prevailed in the German Green Party (without direct involvement on the part of Cohn-Bendit) well into the 1980s.[12]

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_Cohn-Bendit#On_paedophilia

    Again, this type of (criminal) behavior and personality (disorder) goes back to my comments about the connection between pedophilia and psychopathy on Mr. Cassiel’s first Pizzagate article: “Psychopathy in the Pedophile” http://www.unz.com/article/pizzagate/#comment-1673588
    and
    “Psychopathy among pedophilic and nonpedophilic child molesters.” http://www.unz.com/article/pizzagate/#comment-1674224

    Fr. Marcial Maciel, Pedophile, Psychopath, and Legion of Christ Founder http://www.unz.com/article/pizzagate/#comment-1676150

    During his life, Maciel was the focus of several investigations of his behavior. There were allegations of drug abuse , for which he was investigated in 1956; he was hospitalised for morphine addiction.[15] He was also investigated for allegedly sexually abusing children. He was returned as head of the Congregation.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcial_Maciel#Drug_addiction

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  33. RodW says:
    @Ron Unz

    For those who are too ignorant or incurious to know or find out for themselves, the image shows the artist Jeff Koons having sex with his then wife, an adult pornstar.When someone persistently makes and posts videos like this, full of obviously unsubstantiable claims, it isn’t harmless....It’s deliberately malicious, and it should be treated as such.
     
    I really don't agree with that verdict.

    As far as I know, "Reality Calls" is just some girl in England who's gotten involved in investigating the alleged "Pizzagate" scandal, and produces videos on the subject. She doesn't exactly have the resources of a team of NYT journalists, let alone the FBI.

    I'd be the first to admit that some of her charges seem implausible, or likely due to a misunderstanding of the evidence. But a good fraction of the "evidence" she presents makes me very, very suspicious about the case and the way it's being totally ignored by the MSM.

    For example, it seems pretty likely that lots of those Podesta emails bizarrely referring to food are using code words for something else, and it's been strongly alleged that those exact code words are commonly used in pedophile circles. So why doesn't the MSM just ask Podesta about those very strange emails and whether they were actually all about "pizza" and "hot dogs."

    Or consider that one of the Podestas supposedly was a great fan of art work depicting children in their underwear, sometimes looking like they were being held captive, sometimes looking like they were dead. That's obviously not illegal, but doesn't it make you wonder a little?

    And how did that pizza guy get named one of the fifty most influential people in DC, far ahead of hundreds of Congressmen, Senators, Justices, and lobbyists? Was his pizza really that good?

    There seems to be a *gigantic* amount of highly-suspicious circumstantial evidence of something very odd going on. And it's even more odd that the MSM has zero interest in investigating. Which is why we need to rely on some girl doing videos in England....

    Thanks for the response Ron.

    When I was a kid, a friend and I found a scrap of notepaper in the playground at primary school, with diagrams and strange drawings on it. It was next to a locked pavilion with frosted windows, which we found significant. When we peered through the crack under the door, we could see that somebody had done a tidy shit in the middle of the floor, which gave off a horrible smell. We spent the lunch period playing detective, looking for the crime for which we decided the paper and the turd were evidence. We even interviewed some other kids and an adult playground supervisor. Her evasion and dismissiveness was particularly suggestive of guilt.

    This is actually true – I recalled it with amused embarrassment when I started looking into Pizzagate for myself. The ‘evidence’ doesn’t seem any more solid or plausible than what we invented in the playground at primary school.

    This guy does a good preliminary job of answering the questions you raise about Pizzagate.

    I’m perfectly willing to believe that the political and business circles of Western nations are full of perverts and psychopaths. It seems self-evident. But in terms of the specifics of any crimes they may commit, better evidence is required than what’s being offered in Pizzagate. And of course, great big grab-bags of obviously fake evidence such as the snippet I identified will tend to obscure and discredit whatever real evidence might be found.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Eagle Eye
    The "nothing to see here" brigade once again resorts to INTENTIONAL misdirection by pretending that well-founded public suspicion and demands for real investigations are tantamount to a criminal conviction by a government that in a civilized society should require a high standard of proof, due process, etc.

    In fact, NONE of those suspected of involvement are facing criminal proceedings at present. Nobody risks being sentenced to prison or death at this point. Thus, implied appeals to due process are misplaced and cynically exploit casual readers' sense of justice.

    As a POLITICAL matter, voters and citizens are well within their rights making decisions based on ALL relevant factors and observations, however tenuous, including the fact that John Podesta and those around them were obviously HIDING SOMETHING, and even more importantly (as Ron Unz has reminded us) the amazing worldwide efforts to HUSH UP what at present seems like a scandal affecting only a few second-tier political players.

    Years of revelations in countries such as the UK, Belgium, Western Australia etc. have established beyond a shadow of a doubt that pedophile rings reaching to the highest tiers of governments existed in those countries for decades and likely remain in operation.

    As a matter of political DYNAMICS, given the well-known importance of blackmail in high-level politics, ADDICTION to illegal acts as in the case of pedophilia is the ideal "handle" to enable powerful forces to control their placemen in positions of power, whether in parliament (Congress), the Executive, the Courts, the media, business, churches, etc.

    Strange coincidences abound: for example, British Prime Minister Tony Blair abruptly announced his resignation a mere seven days after the disappearance of 4 year old Madeleine McCann in Portugal.

    The disclosure of Pizzagate must have intensified quiet but serious investigations of strange goings-on in many other countries and - particularly - in supra-national organizations such as the UN, EU, and many others.

    , @Beefcake the Mighty
    What the hell does taking a crap in a shed at school many years ago have to do with the topic at hand?
    , @jtgw
    I don't get the point you're making with your story about the locked shed and the pile of shit. Are you saying that you suspected the playground supervisor but it turned out to be someone else? If the mystery was never resolved, how does that help us understand Pizzagate?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  34. Sputnik says:

    In one sitting, I just read all 3 parts. the 5000 words in part three didn’t faze this guy.

    Excellent outlay. Outstanding work.

    If you haven’t already, go to davesweb.cnchost.com and git yosef a copy of his book, “Born to Kill”. Some of the finest, painstaking research in book form on the subject, with pedophilia laced throughout. His “Laurel Canyon” is also essential reading thereafter — and best only thereafter, for reasons which will become clear in the process — but it’s not quite on topic. Thing is, Laurel Canyon will totally roto-rooter your concept of popular culture in the last half of the last century. Mind boggling.

    Btw, after the Sandusky scandal broke, I kept waiting for a certain other shoe to drop, and drop it did. I don’t remember the name of the University president who also lost his job as a result, but I definitely remember seeing a news report that he’d immediately gone to work for?—

    the CIA.

    In what capacity?

    Oh, no, no— that’s top secret, doncha know. Serious!

    Read More
    • Replies: @Sam J.
    "...the University president who also lost his job as a result, but I definitely remember seeing a news report that he’d immediately gone to work for?—

    the CIA..."

    Wow. That's really interesting. I looked this up and found,"...His lawyer confirms to the Loop that Spanier is working on a part-time consulting basis for a “top-secret” agency on national security issues. But the gig is so hush-hush, he couldn’t even tell his attorneys the name of the agency...". Now exactly what skills does a college President have in this capacity?

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/in-the-loop/post/graham-spaniers-gig-as-a-federal-worker-is-a-mystery/2012/07/26/gJQAbAx5BX_blog.html

    Of course...he's Jewish. Why am I not surprised.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  35. Eagle Eye says:
    @RodW
    Thanks for the response Ron.

    When I was a kid, a friend and I found a scrap of notepaper in the playground at primary school, with diagrams and strange drawings on it. It was next to a locked pavilion with frosted windows, which we found significant. When we peered through the crack under the door, we could see that somebody had done a tidy shit in the middle of the floor, which gave off a horrible smell. We spent the lunch period playing detective, looking for the crime for which we decided the paper and the turd were evidence. We even interviewed some other kids and an adult playground supervisor. Her evasion and dismissiveness was particularly suggestive of guilt.

    This is actually true - I recalled it with amused embarrassment when I started looking into Pizzagate for myself. The 'evidence' doesn't seem any more solid or plausible than what we invented in the playground at primary school.

    This guy does a good preliminary job of answering the questions you raise about Pizzagate.
    https://youtu.be/2OrX0U4qwTM

    I'm perfectly willing to believe that the political and business circles of Western nations are full of perverts and psychopaths. It seems self-evident. But in terms of the specifics of any crimes they may commit, better evidence is required than what's being offered in Pizzagate. And of course, great big grab-bags of obviously fake evidence such as the snippet I identified will tend to obscure and discredit whatever real evidence might be found.

    The “nothing to see here” brigade once again resorts to INTENTIONAL misdirection by pretending that well-founded public suspicion and demands for real investigations are tantamount to a criminal conviction by a government that in a civilized society should require a high standard of proof, due process, etc.

    In fact, NONE of those suspected of involvement are facing criminal proceedings at present. Nobody risks being sentenced to prison or death at this point. Thus, implied appeals to due process are misplaced and cynically exploit casual readers’ sense of justice.

    As a POLITICAL matter, voters and citizens are well within their rights making decisions based on ALL relevant factors and observations, however tenuous, including the fact that John Podesta and those around them were obviously HIDING SOMETHING, and even more importantly (as Ron Unz has reminded us) the amazing worldwide efforts to HUSH UP what at present seems like a scandal affecting only a few second-tier political players.

    Years of revelations in countries such as the UK, Belgium, Western Australia etc. have established beyond a shadow of a doubt that pedophile rings reaching to the highest tiers of governments existed in those countries for decades and likely remain in operation.

    As a matter of political DYNAMICS, given the well-known importance of blackmail in high-level politics, ADDICTION to illegal acts as in the case of pedophilia is the ideal “handle” to enable powerful forces to control their placemen in positions of power, whether in parliament (Congress), the Executive, the Courts, the media, business, churches, etc.

    Strange coincidences abound: for example, British Prime Minister Tony Blair abruptly announced his resignation a mere seven days after the disappearance of 4 year old Madeleine McCann in Portugal.

    The disclosure of Pizzagate must have intensified quiet but serious investigations of strange goings-on in many other countries and – particularly – in supra-national organizations such as the UN, EU, and many others.

    Read More
    • Replies: @RodW

    The “nothing to see here” brigade once again resorts to INTENTIONAL misdirection by pretending that well-founded public suspicion and demands for real investigations are tantamount to a criminal conviction by a government that in a civilized society should require a high standard of proof, due process, etc.
     
    A brigade of one, who believes merely that evidence has to pass a few simple tests, such as does the evidence include any easily refutable claims? Is the evidence relevant to any putative crime? Is there evidence of a crime?

    There's no misdirection or pretense from me. There is however plenty of misdirection and pretense in the claims made about Pizzagate. Even the crimes and the victims are totally putative. If there isn't even any evidence of a crime, any suspicions can't be considered well-founded.

    And you can SHOUT all you LIKE, but it doesn't make your CASE any more PERSUASIVE.

    Again, I'll state the obvious: if you want to find real criminals, join me and other skeptics in insisting that evidence passes at least a few tests of rigour.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  36. Erebus says:

    When somebody as famous/infamous and as well connected as Erik Prince is on the record saying what he says in this interview, one is compelled to look past the smoke.

    http://www.breitbart.com/radio/2016/11/04/erik-prince-nypd-ready-make-arrests-weiner-case/

    Yeah, I know who he is. Aside from that, he’s also one of the few people who could hope to stay alive after saying something like what he says in this interview.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Sam J.
    Looking at the link you posted,"...“They found State Department emails. They found a lot of other really damning criminal information, including money laundering, including the fact that Hillary went to this sex island with convicted pedophile Jeffrey Epstein. Bill Clinton went there more than 20 times. Hillary Clinton went there at least six times,” he said..."

    Maybe that's Clinton family bonding.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  37. @RodW
    Thanks for the response Ron.

    When I was a kid, a friend and I found a scrap of notepaper in the playground at primary school, with diagrams and strange drawings on it. It was next to a locked pavilion with frosted windows, which we found significant. When we peered through the crack under the door, we could see that somebody had done a tidy shit in the middle of the floor, which gave off a horrible smell. We spent the lunch period playing detective, looking for the crime for which we decided the paper and the turd were evidence. We even interviewed some other kids and an adult playground supervisor. Her evasion and dismissiveness was particularly suggestive of guilt.

    This is actually true - I recalled it with amused embarrassment when I started looking into Pizzagate for myself. The 'evidence' doesn't seem any more solid or plausible than what we invented in the playground at primary school.

    This guy does a good preliminary job of answering the questions you raise about Pizzagate.
    https://youtu.be/2OrX0U4qwTM

    I'm perfectly willing to believe that the political and business circles of Western nations are full of perverts and psychopaths. It seems self-evident. But in terms of the specifics of any crimes they may commit, better evidence is required than what's being offered in Pizzagate. And of course, great big grab-bags of obviously fake evidence such as the snippet I identified will tend to obscure and discredit whatever real evidence might be found.

    What the hell does taking a crap in a shed at school many years ago have to do with the topic at hand?

    Read More
    • Replies: @RodW
    The shed was locked. We were outside the shed.

    You can't even get something as simple as that straight. And you want to persecute some potentially innocent people on the grounds of your worthless intuition and your inability to grasp simple details?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  38. RodW says:
    @Eagle Eye
    The "nothing to see here" brigade once again resorts to INTENTIONAL misdirection by pretending that well-founded public suspicion and demands for real investigations are tantamount to a criminal conviction by a government that in a civilized society should require a high standard of proof, due process, etc.

    In fact, NONE of those suspected of involvement are facing criminal proceedings at present. Nobody risks being sentenced to prison or death at this point. Thus, implied appeals to due process are misplaced and cynically exploit casual readers' sense of justice.

    As a POLITICAL matter, voters and citizens are well within their rights making decisions based on ALL relevant factors and observations, however tenuous, including the fact that John Podesta and those around them were obviously HIDING SOMETHING, and even more importantly (as Ron Unz has reminded us) the amazing worldwide efforts to HUSH UP what at present seems like a scandal affecting only a few second-tier political players.

    Years of revelations in countries such as the UK, Belgium, Western Australia etc. have established beyond a shadow of a doubt that pedophile rings reaching to the highest tiers of governments existed in those countries for decades and likely remain in operation.

    As a matter of political DYNAMICS, given the well-known importance of blackmail in high-level politics, ADDICTION to illegal acts as in the case of pedophilia is the ideal "handle" to enable powerful forces to control their placemen in positions of power, whether in parliament (Congress), the Executive, the Courts, the media, business, churches, etc.

    Strange coincidences abound: for example, British Prime Minister Tony Blair abruptly announced his resignation a mere seven days after the disappearance of 4 year old Madeleine McCann in Portugal.

    The disclosure of Pizzagate must have intensified quiet but serious investigations of strange goings-on in many other countries and - particularly - in supra-national organizations such as the UN, EU, and many others.

    The “nothing to see here” brigade once again resorts to INTENTIONAL misdirection by pretending that well-founded public suspicion and demands for real investigations are tantamount to a criminal conviction by a government that in a civilized society should require a high standard of proof, due process, etc.

    A brigade of one, who believes merely that evidence has to pass a few simple tests, such as does the evidence include any easily refutable claims? Is the evidence relevant to any putative crime? Is there evidence of a crime?

    There’s no misdirection or pretense from me. There is however plenty of misdirection and pretense in the claims made about Pizzagate. Even the crimes and the victims are totally putative. If there isn’t even any evidence of a crime, any suspicions can’t be considered well-founded.

    And you can SHOUT all you LIKE, but it doesn’t make your CASE any more PERSUASIVE.

    Again, I’ll state the obvious: if you want to find real criminals, join me and other skeptics in insisting that evidence passes at least a few tests of rigour.

    Read More
    • Replies: @jtgw
    The evidence is indeed thin and circumstantial. However, given the magnitude of the suggested crimes, in a just society it would at least merit investigation. It's possible the investigation would not lead to charges, let alone convictions, but the point is that the media and justice system aren't even trying. E.g. how hard would it be to just ask the Podestas what they were talking about? Just simple efforts like that?

    The bar for trusting politicians should be really low. So even if they're just vague suspicions that something bad is going on, that's enough to concern me and to subject everything they say and do to extreme scrutiny.
    , @Seamus Padraig

    Even the crimes and the victims are totally putative. If there isn’t even any evidence of a crime, any suspicions can’t be considered well-founded.
     
    There's at least one known missing person case under discussion here, and that's the case of Madeleine McCann. She was abducted in Portugal in 2007, and the police sketch of the suspects really does look a lot like Podesta brothers, who are known to have been in Portugal at the time, as they have a friend who owns a mansion there.
    , @Eagle Eye
    QUOTE: "if you want to find real criminals ... insist[] that evidence passes at least a few tests of rigour."

    MISDIRECTION again, and the spelling of "rigor" with a superfluous U does not rectify the logical flaw.

    To FIND a criminal, one does NOT confine oneself to "evidence" that passes any "tests of rigor" (or even rigour). A policeman's mere hunch, "didn't like his shifty look," etc. may well trigger an investigation that may (or may not) lead to the discovery of evidence admissible in a court of law. The logic of the investigative process mandates that everything and anything be investigated and considered. Many leads will turn out to have been false, and information obtained will often turn out to be irrelevant, false or misleading. Per aspera ad astra.

    It is only in a criminal trial that as a matter of policy we REFRAIN from relying on various types of perfectly helpful evidence such as hearsay statements. The aim is to provide extra assurance that only the truly guilty are convicted. In other words, our legal system intentionally tilts the balance in favor of the accused by IGNORING GOOD EVIDENCE. The result - quite intentional - is that we let many guilty accused walk.

    In this public discussion, we want to know first of all WHAT IS GOING ON in politics at the highest level. What exactly do the bizarre emails mean? At this exploratory stage, insisting on "rigor" (or "rigour") would effectively mean not following leads a few of which may lead closer to the truth. The real aim of talking points insisting on "rigor" is to FORECLOSE INVESTIGATION and DISTRACT ATTENTION through appeals to pseudo-logic and a belief in due process that is quite misplaced at this stage.

    , @Skeptikal
    "A brigade of one, who believes merely that evidence has to pass a few simple tests, "

    We haven't gotten anywhere near the "evidence" stage.
    The point of an investigation is to gather evidence and evaluate it.
    As others on this and the other Pizzagate thread have clarified.
    As far as is known by the public, no investigation has as yet been undertaken.
    If an investigation is under way, the point of it is most likely to find evidence and then destroy it.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  39. RodW says:
    @Beefcake the Mighty
    What the hell does taking a crap in a shed at school many years ago have to do with the topic at hand?

    The shed was locked. We were outside the shed.

    You can’t even get something as simple as that straight. And you want to persecute some potentially innocent people on the grounds of your worthless intuition and your inability to grasp simple details?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Beefcake the Mighty
    You protest far too much.
    , @Skeptikal
    I see no relevance of the out house anecdote to Pizzagate.
    , @Sam J.
    We get it. You're saying children are shit in a shed.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  40. @RodW
    The shed was locked. We were outside the shed.

    You can't even get something as simple as that straight. And you want to persecute some potentially innocent people on the grounds of your worthless intuition and your inability to grasp simple details?

    You protest far too much.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Eagle Eye
    QUOTE: "You protest far too much."

    Indeed. During the election campaign, one saw whole legions of paid posters of varying degrees of sophistication, each running through a subset of talking points they had all been given to work from.

    Presumably they have a roster based on first names - A - K post talking points 1, 3, 5 and 10. L - S post talking points 2, 4, 5 and 9. T - Z post talking points 1, 7 and 8.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  41. jtgw says:
    @RodW
    Thanks for the response Ron.

    When I was a kid, a friend and I found a scrap of notepaper in the playground at primary school, with diagrams and strange drawings on it. It was next to a locked pavilion with frosted windows, which we found significant. When we peered through the crack under the door, we could see that somebody had done a tidy shit in the middle of the floor, which gave off a horrible smell. We spent the lunch period playing detective, looking for the crime for which we decided the paper and the turd were evidence. We even interviewed some other kids and an adult playground supervisor. Her evasion and dismissiveness was particularly suggestive of guilt.

    This is actually true - I recalled it with amused embarrassment when I started looking into Pizzagate for myself. The 'evidence' doesn't seem any more solid or plausible than what we invented in the playground at primary school.

    This guy does a good preliminary job of answering the questions you raise about Pizzagate.
    https://youtu.be/2OrX0U4qwTM

    I'm perfectly willing to believe that the political and business circles of Western nations are full of perverts and psychopaths. It seems self-evident. But in terms of the specifics of any crimes they may commit, better evidence is required than what's being offered in Pizzagate. And of course, great big grab-bags of obviously fake evidence such as the snippet I identified will tend to obscure and discredit whatever real evidence might be found.

    I don’t get the point you’re making with your story about the locked shed and the pile of shit. Are you saying that you suspected the playground supervisor but it turned out to be someone else? If the mystery was never resolved, how does that help us understand Pizzagate?

    Read More
    • Replies: @art guerrilla
    thanks, starting to think rodw is a pedo apologist, but it quite possible he is just a jerk... his turd of a story was pointless, much like the rest of his argumentation...
    i am not ready to fall on one side or another on this issue, but rodw just seems like a pedantic dick...
    , @RodW
    It's just an analogy about the relationship between evidence and crime. As a kid, I found some interesting apparent anomalies and I posited that they were evidence of a crime, which I then investigated, causing trouble to some unrelated people. The 'investigators' of Pizzagate are doing much the same thing. My investigation only lasted an hour, and did no harm, but Pizzagate has gone on for a while and it just muddies the water surrounding the real scandals of Podesta and his operation.

    Anyway, I'm getting bored talking to people with no interest in facts and basic integrity.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  42. jtgw says:
    @RodW

    The “nothing to see here” brigade once again resorts to INTENTIONAL misdirection by pretending that well-founded public suspicion and demands for real investigations are tantamount to a criminal conviction by a government that in a civilized society should require a high standard of proof, due process, etc.
     
    A brigade of one, who believes merely that evidence has to pass a few simple tests, such as does the evidence include any easily refutable claims? Is the evidence relevant to any putative crime? Is there evidence of a crime?

    There's no misdirection or pretense from me. There is however plenty of misdirection and pretense in the claims made about Pizzagate. Even the crimes and the victims are totally putative. If there isn't even any evidence of a crime, any suspicions can't be considered well-founded.

    And you can SHOUT all you LIKE, but it doesn't make your CASE any more PERSUASIVE.

    Again, I'll state the obvious: if you want to find real criminals, join me and other skeptics in insisting that evidence passes at least a few tests of rigour.

    The evidence is indeed thin and circumstantial. However, given the magnitude of the suggested crimes, in a just society it would at least merit investigation. It’s possible the investigation would not lead to charges, let alone convictions, but the point is that the media and justice system aren’t even trying. E.g. how hard would it be to just ask the Podestas what they were talking about? Just simple efforts like that?

    The bar for trusting politicians should be really low. So even if they’re just vague suspicions that something bad is going on, that’s enough to concern me and to subject everything they say and do to extreme scrutiny.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  43. Gladstone says: • Website

    Control of media, control of law enforcement and control of courts comprise the cover-up trifecta. When alternative and non-professional media expose the crime, it would seem then that the art of misdirection kicks in. Is false information, sensationalized to appear as the smoking gun, planted as bait to discredit the alt-media outlets involved? Now that the entire narrative regarding The Official Truth in these and other events is no longer controlled, has a pivot been made to simply flood the arena with junk information? It’s as if those involved still smugly sneer, “go ahead, look all you want. You’ll never figure it out.”

    Read More
    • Replies: @RodW
    "Is false information, sensationalized to appear as the smoking gun, planted as bait to discredit the alt-media outlets involved?"

    Alt-media discredits itself when its participants trade happily in undigested nonsense. It makes itself easy to ignore, which is a shame because an effective counterweight to the Pravda media is certainly required. Ron Unz's series of articles generally contain information that appears to be true. This Pizzagate thing is full of information that plainly isn't true, and yet instead of acknowledging what isn't true, we have people praising it as a great first step in the process of winnowing, as if farmers add a bit of leaf mould from the woods to the harvest before they start removing the chaff.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  44. @RodW

    The “nothing to see here” brigade once again resorts to INTENTIONAL misdirection by pretending that well-founded public suspicion and demands for real investigations are tantamount to a criminal conviction by a government that in a civilized society should require a high standard of proof, due process, etc.
     
    A brigade of one, who believes merely that evidence has to pass a few simple tests, such as does the evidence include any easily refutable claims? Is the evidence relevant to any putative crime? Is there evidence of a crime?

    There's no misdirection or pretense from me. There is however plenty of misdirection and pretense in the claims made about Pizzagate. Even the crimes and the victims are totally putative. If there isn't even any evidence of a crime, any suspicions can't be considered well-founded.

    And you can SHOUT all you LIKE, but it doesn't make your CASE any more PERSUASIVE.

    Again, I'll state the obvious: if you want to find real criminals, join me and other skeptics in insisting that evidence passes at least a few tests of rigour.

    Even the crimes and the victims are totally putative. If there isn’t even any evidence of a crime, any suspicions can’t be considered well-founded.

    There’s at least one known missing person case under discussion here, and that’s the case of Madeleine McCann. She was abducted in Portugal in 2007, and the police sketch of the suspects really does look a lot like Podesta brothers, who are known to have been in Portugal at the time, as they have a friend who owns a mansion there.

    Read More
    • Replies: @RodW
    Just another idiotic claim that doesn't bear scrutiny.

    Just consider for a moment the possibility that you, and the bloke who wrote this article, and the girl who makes all those videos, and Ron Unz are actually more evil than John Podesta, because you think you have some sort of right to trade in completely unfounded but very damaging allegations, where any rebuttal is taken as proof of involvement.
    , @Cochore
    The Podestas friend who owned the mansion in Portugal was Sir Clement Freud, about whom it was posthumously revealed in 2010 that he was a prolific paedophile.

    The alarming thing is that Clement Freud even befriended the McCanns after their daughter had gone missing.
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3643373/PICTURED-sinister-holiday-villa-paedophile-MP-Clement-Freud-hosted-McCanns-weeks-Madeleine-vanished.html
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  45. Eagle Eye says:
    @RodW

    The “nothing to see here” brigade once again resorts to INTENTIONAL misdirection by pretending that well-founded public suspicion and demands for real investigations are tantamount to a criminal conviction by a government that in a civilized society should require a high standard of proof, due process, etc.
     
    A brigade of one, who believes merely that evidence has to pass a few simple tests, such as does the evidence include any easily refutable claims? Is the evidence relevant to any putative crime? Is there evidence of a crime?

    There's no misdirection or pretense from me. There is however plenty of misdirection and pretense in the claims made about Pizzagate. Even the crimes and the victims are totally putative. If there isn't even any evidence of a crime, any suspicions can't be considered well-founded.

    And you can SHOUT all you LIKE, but it doesn't make your CASE any more PERSUASIVE.

    Again, I'll state the obvious: if you want to find real criminals, join me and other skeptics in insisting that evidence passes at least a few tests of rigour.

    QUOTE: “if you want to find real criminals … insist[] that evidence passes at least a few tests of rigour.”

    MISDIRECTION again, and the spelling of “rigor” with a superfluous U does not rectify the logical flaw.

    To FIND a criminal, one does NOT confine oneself to “evidence” that passes any “tests of rigor” (or even rigour). A policeman’s mere hunch, “didn’t like his shifty look,” etc. may well trigger an investigation that may (or may not) lead to the discovery of evidence admissible in a court of law. The logic of the investigative process mandates that everything and anything be investigated and considered. Many leads will turn out to have been false, and information obtained will often turn out to be irrelevant, false or misleading. Per aspera ad astra.

    It is only in a criminal trial that as a matter of policy we REFRAIN from relying on various types of perfectly helpful evidence such as hearsay statements. The aim is to provide extra assurance that only the truly guilty are convicted. In other words, our legal system intentionally tilts the balance in favor of the accused by IGNORING GOOD EVIDENCE. The result – quite intentional – is that we let many guilty accused walk.

    In this public discussion, we want to know first of all WHAT IS GOING ON in politics at the highest level. What exactly do the bizarre emails mean? At this exploratory stage, insisting on “rigor” (or “rigour”) would effectively mean not following leads a few of which may lead closer to the truth. The real aim of talking points insisting on “rigor” is to FORECLOSE INVESTIGATION and DISTRACT ATTENTION through appeals to pseudo-logic and a belief in due process that is quite misplaced at this stage.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  46. Skeptikal says:
    @RodW

    The “nothing to see here” brigade once again resorts to INTENTIONAL misdirection by pretending that well-founded public suspicion and demands for real investigations are tantamount to a criminal conviction by a government that in a civilized society should require a high standard of proof, due process, etc.
     
    A brigade of one, who believes merely that evidence has to pass a few simple tests, such as does the evidence include any easily refutable claims? Is the evidence relevant to any putative crime? Is there evidence of a crime?

    There's no misdirection or pretense from me. There is however plenty of misdirection and pretense in the claims made about Pizzagate. Even the crimes and the victims are totally putative. If there isn't even any evidence of a crime, any suspicions can't be considered well-founded.

    And you can SHOUT all you LIKE, but it doesn't make your CASE any more PERSUASIVE.

    Again, I'll state the obvious: if you want to find real criminals, join me and other skeptics in insisting that evidence passes at least a few tests of rigour.

    “A brigade of one, who believes merely that evidence has to pass a few simple tests, ”

    We haven’t gotten anywhere near the “evidence” stage.
    The point of an investigation is to gather evidence and evaluate it.
    As others on this and the other Pizzagate thread have clarified.
    As far as is known by the public, no investigation has as yet been undertaken.
    If an investigation is under way, the point of it is most likely to find evidence and then destroy it.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  47. Skeptikal says:
    @RodW
    The shed was locked. We were outside the shed.

    You can't even get something as simple as that straight. And you want to persecute some potentially innocent people on the grounds of your worthless intuition and your inability to grasp simple details?

    I see no relevance of the out house anecdote to Pizzagate.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  48. @jtgw
    I don't get the point you're making with your story about the locked shed and the pile of shit. Are you saying that you suspected the playground supervisor but it turned out to be someone else? If the mystery was never resolved, how does that help us understand Pizzagate?

    thanks, starting to think rodw is a pedo apologist, but it quite possible he is just a jerk… his turd of a story was pointless, much like the rest of his argumentation…
    i am not ready to fall on one side or another on this issue, but rodw just seems like a pedantic dick…

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  49. Eagle Eye says:
    @Beefcake the Mighty
    You protest far too much.

    QUOTE: “You protest far too much.”

    Indeed. During the election campaign, one saw whole legions of paid posters of varying degrees of sophistication, each running through a subset of talking points they had all been given to work from.

    Presumably they have a roster based on first names – A – K post talking points 1, 3, 5 and 10. L – S post talking points 2, 4, 5 and 9. T – Z post talking points 1, 7 and 8.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  50. FKA Max says: • Website
    @Dan Hayes
    I have read this essay with much interest. But always in the back of my mind are the
    American sex-abuse witch hunts of the 1980s which have been chronicled by Dorothy Rabinowitz of the Wall Street Journal. This work earned her a Pulitzer Prize.

    Rabinowitz has also very movingly described the ordeal of Father MacRae, a priest (most probably) falsely accused of sex crimes.

    Rabinowitz has also very movingly described the ordeal of Father MacRae, a priest (most probably) falsely accused of sex crimes.

    Mr. Hayes,

    you might be interested to read this article:

    Rev. Gordon MacRae: Priest Allowed to Work with Youth Five Years

    By Katherine McQuaid
    Union Leader
    March 4, 2003

    Church officials allowed Rev. Gordon MacRae to continue ministering to children for five years after they found out he had sexually assaulted a 13-year-old boy. And at least seven more boys have said they were victimized by MacRae during that time, according to investigative files released by the New Hampshire Attorney General’s Office yesterday. [...]

    In an interview with detectives last year, the boy’s counselor, Judith K. Patterson, said at the time she reported the abuse she was told by Catholic Charities director Fr. John P. Quinn that Bishop Odore Gendron would report the “delicate” case directly to the Department of Welfare commissioner.

    The Department of Welfare was notified, and a report was filed with the Attorney General’s Office and later with the Cheshire County Attorney’s Office, but MacRae was never prosecuted.

    “. . . since Father MacRae is receiving counseling and is being strictly monitored, I do not plan to take any further action at this time unless I hear further from (the Department for Children and Youth Services) or Rev. Quinn,” wrote Cheshire County Attorney Edward O’Brien to Deputy Attorney General Peter Mosseau on Jan. 13, 1984.

    The attorney general’s report said the Division of Welfare relied on what it was told by Quinn, and never conducted an independent investigation into the allegations.

    http://www.bishop-accountability.org/news/2003_03_04_McQuaid_RevGordon.htm

    This is a highly interesting and insightful talk, I discovered yesterday:

    Child Sexual Abuse and the Catholic Church: An Irish Disease and or Global Phenomenon

    Published on Mar 26, 2014

    Journalist Patsy McGarry, of The Irish Times explores the politics, perceptions, and uniquely Irish aspects of the clergy sexual abuse scandal in Ireland. McGarry has reported extensively on the Catholic Church’s response to various child sexual abuse scandals as documented by the Ferns, Ryan, and Murphy reports.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  51. RodW says:
    @Gladstone
    Control of media, control of law enforcement and control of courts comprise the cover-up trifecta. When alternative and non-professional media expose the crime, it would seem then that the art of misdirection kicks in. Is false information, sensationalized to appear as the smoking gun, planted as bait to discredit the alt-media outlets involved? Now that the entire narrative regarding The Official Truth in these and other events is no longer controlled, has a pivot been made to simply flood the arena with junk information? It's as if those involved still smugly sneer, "go ahead, look all you want. You'll never figure it out."

    “Is false information, sensationalized to appear as the smoking gun, planted as bait to discredit the alt-media outlets involved?”

    Alt-media discredits itself when its participants trade happily in undigested nonsense. It makes itself easy to ignore, which is a shame because an effective counterweight to the Pravda media is certainly required. Ron Unz’s series of articles generally contain information that appears to be true. This Pizzagate thing is full of information that plainly isn’t true, and yet instead of acknowledging what isn’t true, we have people praising it as a great first step in the process of winnowing, as if farmers add a bit of leaf mould from the woods to the harvest before they start removing the chaff.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Sam J.
    "...This Pizzagate thing is full of information that plainly isn’t true..."

    Uhh.....what isn't true? All pizzagate info is based on coded, or appearing to be, cracked emails that seem to correspond to child abuse. That the people involved have weird freaky child pictures and say weird pedoish things is also part of it. By correlation, same thing they do by capturing peoples cell phone numbers, locations, etc., etc. in law enforcement, people have concluded that children are probably being prostituted or abused. Nothing untrue about this. The conclusions may be wrong but not untrue.
    , @Ron Unz

    It makes itself easy to ignore, which is a shame because an effective counterweight to the Pravda media is certainly required. Ron Unz’s series of articles generally contain information that appears to be true.
     
    Well, here's the thing to consider. It seems to me that the main argument against the reality of the Pizzagate scandal is that the entire MSM is ignoring or pooh-poohing it.

    But you yourself concede that the very long list of scandals I present in my American Pravda series is based upon reasonably solid evidence. And all those other gigantic scandals have also been totally ignored or pooh-poohed by the same MSM. So why should we take the MSM seriously about Pizzagate?

    I certainly haven't investigated it myself, but offhand there seems to be a huge mountain of circumstantial evidence in support, and no substantial arguments that I can see against it. Just yelling "Fake News!" or "it's crazy!" isn't very persuasive. And if those are the main arguments being made by the opponents who've supposedly examined the evidence, isn't that rather telling?

    I remember reading that when circumstantial evidence pointed to Bernie Madoff running a Ponzi Scheme and the SEC gingerly interviewed him, he intimidated the SEC investigators by his very angry and outraged responses, so they backed off and let him continue swindling people for another decade or so.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  52. RodW says:
    @Seamus Padraig

    Even the crimes and the victims are totally putative. If there isn’t even any evidence of a crime, any suspicions can’t be considered well-founded.
     
    There's at least one known missing person case under discussion here, and that's the case of Madeleine McCann. She was abducted in Portugal in 2007, and the police sketch of the suspects really does look a lot like Podesta brothers, who are known to have been in Portugal at the time, as they have a friend who owns a mansion there.

    Just another idiotic claim that doesn’t bear scrutiny.

    Just consider for a moment the possibility that you, and the bloke who wrote this article, and the girl who makes all those videos, and Ron Unz are actually more evil than John Podesta, because you think you have some sort of right to trade in completely unfounded but very damaging allegations, where any rebuttal is taken as proof of involvement.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Eagle Eye
    RodW QUOTE: "you think you have some sort of right to trade in completely unfounded but very damaging allegations ..."

    Yep, we do have that inherent right here in the U.S., confirmed by something known as the First Amendment (try looking it up, but may be censored by your local Internet provider).

    By contrast, the dictatorships in Europe, Asia and beyond would never allow mere subjects to make "allegations" about their betters in government, PR firms, and government-sanctioned "foundations." Simply can't have that, you see.

    , @Seamus Padraig

    Just consider for a moment the possibility that you, and the bloke who wrote this article, and the girl who makes all those videos, and Ron Unz are actually more evil than John Podesta, because you think you have some sort of right to trade in completely unfounded but very damaging allegations, where any rebuttal is taken as proof of involvement.
     
    "Where any rebuttal is taken as proof of involvement"? Please tell me who is accusing you here of personal involvement in the Pizzagate affair? I certainly am not.

    And some people call us paranoiacs!

    I think I am going to cut off my discussion with 'RodW' now, since he is being hysterical and willfully obtuse.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  53. Skeptikal says:

    “where any rebuttal is taken as proof of involvement.”

    What “rebuttals” are these?

    “This Pizzagate thing is full of information that plainly isn’t true,”

    Which part is “plainly not true,” pray tell?
    Of course some speculations are probably dead ends/untrue.
    But how does one establish this? There are plenty of leads to follow up here.
    Telephone records, interviews, travel records, the efits, etc.
    One really gets tired of repeating these very obvious points!

    Read More
    • Replies: @RodW
    I've given examples of patently false, made-up accusations in my earlier comments. You can also easily find effective rebuttals of bullshit like the efits online (yes on Snopes, where they have the same queer understanding of the meaning of 'evidence' that I apparently have).

    And if you can't be bothered to look at the evidence critically, while claiming that Podesta is a murderer, then you're an evil slanderer. Just remember that.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  54. RodW says:
    @Skeptikal
    "where any rebuttal is taken as proof of involvement."

    What "rebuttals" are these?

    "This Pizzagate thing is full of information that plainly isn’t true,"

    Which part is "plainly not true," pray tell?
    Of course some speculations are probably dead ends/untrue.
    But how does one establish this? There are plenty of leads to follow up here.
    Telephone records, interviews, travel records, the efits, etc.
    One really gets tired of repeating these very obvious points!

    I’ve given examples of patently false, made-up accusations in my earlier comments. You can also easily find effective rebuttals of bullshit like the efits online (yes on Snopes, where they have the same queer understanding of the meaning of ‘evidence’ that I apparently have).

    And if you can’t be bothered to look at the evidence critically, while claiming that Podesta is a murderer, then you’re an evil slanderer. Just remember that.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Beefcake the Mighty
    Interesting how you've mustered so much outrage in defense of a political fixer like Podesta.

    He's clearly speaking in code in these emails. He could easily dispel suspicion by explaining what, exactly, he's referring to. That he hasn't is quite revealing (and in implicating the Russians as the alleged source of the leaks, he's affirmed the veracity of these emails).
    , @Eagle Eye
    WOW! SNOTS.COM has posted "rebuttals"! (Or "rebuuttals" in RodW's patented extra-U spelling).

    To half-witted, smirking Puffington Host readers, a "rebuttal" (or even better, "debunking") on SNOTS.COM is, of course, the equivalent of a papal encyclical that preempts all heretical thoughts by the faithful. Heretics failing to signal fervent obeisance to SNOTS.COM "rebuttals" must, of course, be burnt at the stake forthwith lest their slander blemish the reputation of the clergy.

    Meanwhile, here on unz.com, inquiring minds still want to know what "Herb" was talking about when he asked John Podesta: "Ps. Do you think I’ll do better playing dominos on cheese than on pasta?"

    , @annamaria
    "...if you can’t be bothered to look at the evidence critically..."

    You mean, the readers should follow the New York Times' line and dismiss any "unfounded accusations," a la Mark Thompson (CEO of The NYT Company), the weasel that fought diligently to protect Jimmy Savile and to cover Jimmy's jolly deeds with children?
    Mark Thompson "was credibly accused of lying to cover up evidence of the Jimmy Savile sex scandal. Jimmy Savile managed to abuse hundreds of young children, and associates and friends were accused of acting in complicity with the rapes and even sentenced for raping the very same victims. And that same Mark Thompson who helped cover up the Savile scandal now runs the New York Times which was so quick to dismiss Pizzagate in its entirety as a hoax as well."
    This alone should put Pizzagate into focus of public attention.
    Perhaps you also need to read carefully this report: http://www.wikileaks-forum.com/belgium/358/belgian-pedophile-trafficking-ring-and-alleged-cover-up-marc-dutroux-and-nihoul/15315/

    , @Skeptikal
    RodW:
    You make up "evil shit" against other commenters in every single one of your comments.
    Your "shit slinging" technique is to piggyback your "evil shit" on reasonable comments and then throw the whole mess back at the commenter and try to make *your shit* stick to the other person.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  55. Junior says:
    @FKA Max
    Another aspect of the weird obsession and seemingly endless enthusiasm of political, etc. power players with especially modern ``art,'' is the following:

    Valuable as Art, but Priceless as a Tool to Launder Money

    http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/13/arts/design/art-proves-attractive-refuge-for-money-launderers.html


    Law enforcement officials in the United States and abroad say “Hannibal” is just one of thousands of valuable artworks being used by criminals to hide illicit profits and illegally transfer assets around the globe. As other traditional money-laundering techniques have come under closer scrutiny, smugglers, drug traffickers, arms dealers and the like have increasingly turned to the famously opaque art market, officials say.

    It is hard to imagine a business more custom-made for money laundering, with million-dollar sales conducted in secrecy and with virtually no oversight. What this means in practical terms is that “you can have a transaction where the seller is listed as ‘private collection’ and the buyer is listed as ‘private collection,’ ” said Sharon Cohen Levin, chief of the asset forfeiture unit of the United States attorney’s office in Manhattan. “In any other business, no one would be able to get away with this.”
     

    Art Basel events are conveniently located in Hong Kong and Miami, providing easy access for ``Golden Triangle'' [ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_Triangle_(Southeast_Asia) ] and South American narcotics growers and dealers to launder their ill-gotten gains:

    Art Basel is an international art fair with four shows staged annually in Basel, Switzerland; Miami Beach, Florida; the Wynwood Art District in Miami, Florida; and Hong Kong, China.
     
    - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Art_Basel

    Even if it turns out in the end, that the Podestas are not pedophiles, etc., at a minimum the possibility that the disturbing artwork they are collecting is a scheme to launder their ill-gotten political lobbying gains, etc., should be looked into and investigated by the authorities, in my humble opinion. There is definitely something fishy going on here...

    Miami’s extravagant Art Basel reflects the new economics of art

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j9avbAqXi2U

    In regards to the Art Basel Show and money laundering, I noticed in that video you posted that the sponsor of that Art Basel show is the Swiss Bank UBS.

    If UBS is involved, you can bet your bottom dollar that money is being laundered.

    UBS, whose origins date back to 1854, has often been embroiled in scandal, according to research by Phil Mattera of Good Jobs First. In an online profile of the bank, Mattera lists a 1988 controversy over money laundering of $1 billion by a Turkish-Lebanese drug ring; business activities in apartheid South Africa and with Nazi Germany. Among dozens of fines and financial settlements over fraud allegations, UBS has paid out $1.5 billion over the foreign exchange rate rigging scandal, $208 million for its role in financing Parmalat, the Italian dairly company charged with fraud and $150 million for its sale of auction-rate securities in the U.S.

    http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=16096

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  56. @RodW
    I've given examples of patently false, made-up accusations in my earlier comments. You can also easily find effective rebuttals of bullshit like the efits online (yes on Snopes, where they have the same queer understanding of the meaning of 'evidence' that I apparently have).

    And if you can't be bothered to look at the evidence critically, while claiming that Podesta is a murderer, then you're an evil slanderer. Just remember that.

    Interesting how you’ve mustered so much outrage in defense of a political fixer like Podesta.

    He’s clearly speaking in code in these emails. He could easily dispel suspicion by explaining what, exactly, he’s referring to. That he hasn’t is quite revealing (and in implicating the Russians as the alleged source of the leaks, he’s affirmed the veracity of these emails).

    Read More
    • Replies: @RodW
    It's really got nothing to do with Podesta. I hate the man. I'm just trying to get you and the other people here to understand that if you will keep regurgitating obviously false information, there's no reason to take you or the original claimants seriously.

    If you want to know if Podesta was really using code (I'd like to know), and if so what the code indicates, we'd all get much closer to finding out if we dropped all of the lurid, debunkable accusations against him, and simply persuaded journalists of integrity to pursue the matter. But by saying that the efits in the McCann case match the Podestas and other nonsense, you make it simple to dismiss the whole matter out of hand.

    And when I mentioned 'right', obviously I was talking about a moral right, not a legal right.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  57. Eagle Eye says:
    @RodW
    I've given examples of patently false, made-up accusations in my earlier comments. You can also easily find effective rebuttals of bullshit like the efits online (yes on Snopes, where they have the same queer understanding of the meaning of 'evidence' that I apparently have).

    And if you can't be bothered to look at the evidence critically, while claiming that Podesta is a murderer, then you're an evil slanderer. Just remember that.

    WOW! SNOTS.COM has posted “rebuttals”! (Or “rebuuttals” in RodW’s patented extra-U spelling).

    To half-witted, smirking Puffington Host readers, a “rebuttal” (or even better, “debunking”) on SNOTS.COM is, of course, the equivalent of a papal encyclical that preempts all heretical thoughts by the faithful. Heretics failing to signal fervent obeisance to SNOTS.COM “rebuttals” must, of course, be burnt at the stake forthwith lest their slander blemish the reputation of the clergy.

    Meanwhile, here on unz.com, inquiring minds still want to know what “Herb” was talking about when he asked John Podesta: “Ps. Do you think I’ll do better playing dominos on cheese than on pasta?”

    Read More
    • Replies: @RodW
    Have you ever heard of 'British English'? I'm English, so I use it. We put u in certain words. Get over it.

    Snopes isn't the equivalent of a papal encyclical that preempts all heretical thoughts by the faithful. Quite the opposite. It presents verifiable information and logical argument that can be used for determining the veracity or otherwise of various claims. Its methodology is based on the scientific method, which has proved its usefulness in a great many cases, although these days, it's falling out of fashion to everyone's detriment.

    Meanwhile, here on unz.com, inquiring minds still want to know what “Herb” was talking about when he asked John Podesta: “Ps. Do you think I’ll do better playing dominos on cheese than on pasta?”
     
    Yes, me included. But claiming that Podesta wears sticking plaster on his finger because he keeps cutting it open, when Podesta doesn't actually wear sticking plaster on his finger, isn't the best way to go about discovering what that sentence means. Is it now?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  58. Eagle Eye says:
    @RodW
    Just another idiotic claim that doesn't bear scrutiny.

    Just consider for a moment the possibility that you, and the bloke who wrote this article, and the girl who makes all those videos, and Ron Unz are actually more evil than John Podesta, because you think you have some sort of right to trade in completely unfounded but very damaging allegations, where any rebuttal is taken as proof of involvement.

    RodW QUOTE: “you think you have some sort of right to trade in completely unfounded but very damaging allegations …”

    Yep, we do have that inherent right here in the U.S., confirmed by something known as the First Amendment (try looking it up, but may be censored by your local Internet provider).

    By contrast, the dictatorships in Europe, Asia and beyond would never allow mere subjects to make “allegations” about their betters in government, PR firms, and government-sanctioned “foundations.” Simply can’t have that, you see.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  59. Sam J. says:
    @Sputnik
    In one sitting, I just read all 3 parts. the 5000 words in part three didn't faze this guy.

    Excellent outlay. Outstanding work.

    If you haven't already, go to davesweb.cnchost.com and git yosef a copy of his book, "Born to Kill". Some of the finest, painstaking research in book form on the subject, with pedophilia laced throughout. His "Laurel Canyon" is also essential reading thereafter -- and best only thereafter, for reasons which will become clear in the process -- but it's not quite on topic. Thing is, Laurel Canyon will totally roto-rooter your concept of popular culture in the last half of the last century. Mind boggling.

    Btw, after the Sandusky scandal broke, I kept waiting for a certain other shoe to drop, and drop it did. I don't remember the name of the University president who also lost his job as a result, but I definitely remember seeing a news report that he'd immediately gone to work for?---

    the CIA.

    In what capacity?

    Oh, no, no--- that's top secret, doncha know. Serious!

    “…the University president who also lost his job as a result, but I definitely remember seeing a news report that he’d immediately gone to work for?—

    the CIA…”

    Wow. That’s really interesting. I looked this up and found,”…His lawyer confirms to the Loop that Spanier is working on a part-time consulting basis for a “top-secret” agency on national security issues. But the gig is so hush-hush, he couldn’t even tell his attorneys the name of the agency…”. Now exactly what skills does a college President have in this capacity?

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/in-the-loop/post/graham-spaniers-gig-as-a-federal-worker-is-a-mystery/2012/07/26/gJQAbAx5BX_blog.html

    Of course…he’s Jewish. Why am I not surprised.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  60. Sam J. says:
    @Erebus
    When somebody as famous/infamous and as well connected as Erik Prince is on the record saying what he says in this interview, one is compelled to look past the smoke.
    http://www.breitbart.com/radio/2016/11/04/erik-prince-nypd-ready-make-arrests-weiner-case/

    Yeah, I know who he is. Aside from that, he's also one of the few people who could hope to stay alive after saying something like what he says in this interview.

    Looking at the link you posted,”…“They found State Department emails. They found a lot of other really damning criminal information, including money laundering, including the fact that Hillary went to this sex island with convicted pedophile Jeffrey Epstein. Bill Clinton went there more than 20 times. Hillary Clinton went there at least six times,” he said…”

    Maybe that’s Clinton family bonding.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  61. Sam J. says:
    @RodW
    The shed was locked. We were outside the shed.

    You can't even get something as simple as that straight. And you want to persecute some potentially innocent people on the grounds of your worthless intuition and your inability to grasp simple details?

    We get it. You’re saying children are shit in a shed.

    Read More
    • LOL: Seamus Padraig
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  62. RodW says:
    @Beefcake the Mighty
    Interesting how you've mustered so much outrage in defense of a political fixer like Podesta.

    He's clearly speaking in code in these emails. He could easily dispel suspicion by explaining what, exactly, he's referring to. That he hasn't is quite revealing (and in implicating the Russians as the alleged source of the leaks, he's affirmed the veracity of these emails).

    It’s really got nothing to do with Podesta. I hate the man. I’m just trying to get you and the other people here to understand that if you will keep regurgitating obviously false information, there’s no reason to take you or the original claimants seriously.

    If you want to know if Podesta was really using code (I’d like to know), and if so what the code indicates, we’d all get much closer to finding out if we dropped all of the lurid, debunkable accusations against him, and simply persuaded journalists of integrity to pursue the matter. But by saying that the efits in the McCann case match the Podestas and other nonsense, you make it simple to dismiss the whole matter out of hand.

    And when I mentioned ‘right’, obviously I was talking about a moral right, not a legal right.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Beefcake the Mighty
    Hmm, what "false information" have I been regurgitating here? I've simply noted your suspicious selective outrage, I guess that's enough to get me lumped in the ranks of the deplorables.

    Again, it is PODESTA himself who could resolve this issue by explaining what his obvious code phrases mean (well, obvious to everyone but you, apparently). Put simply, apparatchiks and minions of the US Imperium do not deserve the concern you're showing them here.
    , @Eagle Eye
    Got it.

    WRod is ordering us uppity Americans rednecks to respect their betters and to:

    (1) "drop[] all of the lurid, debunkable [sic *] accusations against [Podesta.]"

    (2) relegate all further investigation to establishment "journalists of integrity to pursue the matter" as the final and exclusive truth-finding tribunal.

    (3) move along, nothing to see here.

    * "Debunkable" apparently means that WRod decides that he COULD "debunk" the item, but we will have to take his and his patrons' word for it since they won't share the sordid details with mere mortals.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  63. Sam J. says:
    @RodW
    "Is false information, sensationalized to appear as the smoking gun, planted as bait to discredit the alt-media outlets involved?"

    Alt-media discredits itself when its participants trade happily in undigested nonsense. It makes itself easy to ignore, which is a shame because an effective counterweight to the Pravda media is certainly required. Ron Unz's series of articles generally contain information that appears to be true. This Pizzagate thing is full of information that plainly isn't true, and yet instead of acknowledging what isn't true, we have people praising it as a great first step in the process of winnowing, as if farmers add a bit of leaf mould from the woods to the harvest before they start removing the chaff.

    “…This Pizzagate thing is full of information that plainly isn’t true…”

    Uhh…..what isn’t true? All pizzagate info is based on coded, or appearing to be, cracked emails that seem to correspond to child abuse. That the people involved have weird freaky child pictures and say weird pedoish things is also part of it. By correlation, same thing they do by capturing peoples cell phone numbers, locations, etc., etc. in law enforcement, people have concluded that children are probably being prostituted or abused. Nothing untrue about this. The conclusions may be wrong but not untrue.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  64. RodW says:
    @Eagle Eye
    WOW! SNOTS.COM has posted "rebuttals"! (Or "rebuuttals" in RodW's patented extra-U spelling).

    To half-witted, smirking Puffington Host readers, a "rebuttal" (or even better, "debunking") on SNOTS.COM is, of course, the equivalent of a papal encyclical that preempts all heretical thoughts by the faithful. Heretics failing to signal fervent obeisance to SNOTS.COM "rebuttals" must, of course, be burnt at the stake forthwith lest their slander blemish the reputation of the clergy.

    Meanwhile, here on unz.com, inquiring minds still want to know what "Herb" was talking about when he asked John Podesta: "Ps. Do you think I’ll do better playing dominos on cheese than on pasta?"

    Have you ever heard of ‘British English’? I’m English, so I use it. We put u in certain words. Get over it.

    Snopes isn’t the equivalent of a papal encyclical that preempts all heretical thoughts by the faithful. Quite the opposite. It presents verifiable information and logical argument that can be used for determining the veracity or otherwise of various claims. Its methodology is based on the scientific method, which has proved its usefulness in a great many cases, although these days, it’s falling out of fashion to everyone’s detriment.

    Meanwhile, here on unz.com, inquiring minds still want to know what “Herb” was talking about when he asked John Podesta: “Ps. Do you think I’ll do better playing dominos on cheese than on pasta?”

    Yes, me included. But claiming that Podesta wears sticking plaster on his finger because he keeps cutting it open, when Podesta doesn’t actually wear sticking plaster on his finger, isn’t the best way to go about discovering what that sentence means. Is it now?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  65. annamaria says:
    @RodW
    I've given examples of patently false, made-up accusations in my earlier comments. You can also easily find effective rebuttals of bullshit like the efits online (yes on Snopes, where they have the same queer understanding of the meaning of 'evidence' that I apparently have).

    And if you can't be bothered to look at the evidence critically, while claiming that Podesta is a murderer, then you're an evil slanderer. Just remember that.

    “…if you can’t be bothered to look at the evidence critically…”

    You mean, the readers should follow the New York Times’ line and dismiss any “unfounded accusations,” a la Mark Thompson (CEO of The NYT Company), the weasel that fought diligently to protect Jimmy Savile and to cover Jimmy’s jolly deeds with children?
    Mark Thompson “was credibly accused of lying to cover up evidence of the Jimmy Savile sex scandal. Jimmy Savile managed to abuse hundreds of young children, and associates and friends were accused of acting in complicity with the rapes and even sentenced for raping the very same victims. And that same Mark Thompson who helped cover up the Savile scandal now runs the New York Times which was so quick to dismiss Pizzagate in its entirety as a hoax as well.”
    This alone should put Pizzagate into focus of public attention.
    Perhaps you also need to read carefully this report: http://www.wikileaks-forum.com/belgium/358/belgian-pedophile-trafficking-ring-and-alleged-cover-up-marc-dutroux-and-nihoul/15315/

    Read More
    • Replies: @RodW
    The Savile thing was a different matter. There, the problem was that a lot of good sound evidence from many credible people was ignored out of bias in favour of a working-class man who had joined the Establishment and was engaged in conspicuous charities. I'm not aware that Savile was subject to totally unverifiable claims - correct me if I'm wrong.
    , @Eagle Eye
    Thanks for the interesting link.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  66. RodW says:
    @jtgw
    I don't get the point you're making with your story about the locked shed and the pile of shit. Are you saying that you suspected the playground supervisor but it turned out to be someone else? If the mystery was never resolved, how does that help us understand Pizzagate?

    It’s just an analogy about the relationship between evidence and crime. As a kid, I found some interesting apparent anomalies and I posited that they were evidence of a crime, which I then investigated, causing trouble to some unrelated people. The ‘investigators’ of Pizzagate are doing much the same thing. My investigation only lasted an hour, and did no harm, but Pizzagate has gone on for a while and it just muddies the water surrounding the real scandals of Podesta and his operation.

    Anyway, I’m getting bored talking to people with no interest in facts and basic integrity.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Beefcake the Mighty
    But after coming here to lecture on what topics constitute acceptable discourse, you continue to post after claiming you've grown bored with the whole unsolicited advice thing. Are you the guy who calls himself Wizard of Oz?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  67. FKA Max says:
    @RodW
    I just started watching #PizzaGate BANNED From YouTube.

    Near the beginning, it shows a censored photo of a Jeff Koons porn/art picture in the Whitney Museum of American Art, which the narrator claims shows "a grown man penetrating a probably three or four year old girl". She then wonders what the hashtag #jeffkoons could possibly mean, commenting that it could refer to the black man shown in the picture. For those who are too ignorant or incurious to know or find out for themselves, the image shows the artist Jeff Koons having sex with his then wife, an adult pornstar.

    Cassiel claims that the Pizzagate 'evidence' is "of wildly varying levels of quality". Well, no it isn't. It's all of this level of 'quality'. It doesn't meet any evidentiary standard at all, but Cassiel nevertheless tries to make a no smoke without a fire argument out of it anyway (that's what all his fancy talk about preponderance of evidence is).

    When someone persistently makes and posts videos like this, full of obviously unsubstantiable claims, it isn't harmless. It's deliberately malicious, and it should be treated as such. It can't be pardoned by saying "Oh, but this a bleeding heart that cares about the wellbeing of children" as Cassiel does.

    By all means go out and find and punish people who prey on children. But stop closing your eyes to obvious wrongdoing by another species of weirdo.

    Who Was the Umbrella Man? | JFK Assassination Documentary | The New York Times

    Published on Nov 20, 2013

    In 2011, on the anniversary of the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, Errol Morris explored the story behind the one man seen standing under an open black umbrella at the site.

    But stop closing your eyes to obvious wrongdoing by another species of weirdo.

    Weirdos, hysterics and opportunists just come with the territory/are part of the package.

    It is a two/multiple-front war…

    One of the pieces of evidence in the Pizzagate scandal, which threw me for a loop, was Andrew Breitbart’s tweet from 2011 about John Podesta. I did not understand its original/proper context, and so I interpreted it to be a very credible piece of evidence, which it is not really, as I found out.

    I think what we are witnessing in the case of Pizzagate is a collaboration of right-wing “moral entrepreneurs” (with whom I had not been that familiar with before, and who most likely and ironically were empowered and inspired by feminist, left-wing moral entrepreneurs’ trumped-up claims about child sexual abuse) and right-wing “conspiracy entrepreneurs ” ( e.g. Infowars.com et al., with whom I am personally very familiar with).

    This very good article puts Andrew Breitbart’s tweet about John Podesta in perspective and in its proper context:

    About that Podesta ‘underage sex-slaves’ Tweet from Andrew Breitbart

    Nefarious operators on the Internet (as well as some innocent, misinformed individuals) have been freaking out over a Tweet from the late Andrew Breitbart connecting John Podesta to a “underage sex slave” operation.

    How prog-guru John Podesta isn’t household name as world class underage sex slave op cover-upperer defending unspeakable dregs escapes me.

    — AndrewBreitbart (@AndrewBreitbart) February 4, 2011

    [...]

    There are tons of websites who make a lot of money doing pretty odious things. [...]

    However, because of the confusion over this Tweet, I think some context and an explanation is called for. And, for some reason, Breitbart News has not stepped up and delivered it themselves. (I searched, if they have, I will update this column post haste.)

    [...] – http://hotair.com/archives/2016/12/05/about-that-andrew-breitbart-tweet-about-podesta-and-underage-sex-slaves/

    I am still sitting on the fence about Pizzagate, but one thing is crystal clear to me, and that is, that if “moral entrepreneurs” and “conspiracy entrepreneurs”, be they of the right-wing or left-wing persuasion, get involved in debates and investigations, these usually turn irrational, disingenuous, and hysterical fast.

    http://www.unz.com/article/pizzagate/#comment-1685910

    Read More
    • Agree: RodW
    • Replies: @RodW
    All of the stuff about pizza, cheese, pasta and whatnot is quoted without the full context. This context actually tends to show that the people involved are foodies, with what appears to be a healthy family culture.

    I've often thought that the kind of people who censor and censure without thorough knowledge of situations are really the ones with dirty, sick minds.

    And whoever thought a flechette could be launched sideways from an umbrella had little grasp of physics and engineering, that's for sure.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  68. RodW says:
    @annamaria
    "...if you can’t be bothered to look at the evidence critically..."

    You mean, the readers should follow the New York Times' line and dismiss any "unfounded accusations," a la Mark Thompson (CEO of The NYT Company), the weasel that fought diligently to protect Jimmy Savile and to cover Jimmy's jolly deeds with children?
    Mark Thompson "was credibly accused of lying to cover up evidence of the Jimmy Savile sex scandal. Jimmy Savile managed to abuse hundreds of young children, and associates and friends were accused of acting in complicity with the rapes and even sentenced for raping the very same victims. And that same Mark Thompson who helped cover up the Savile scandal now runs the New York Times which was so quick to dismiss Pizzagate in its entirety as a hoax as well."
    This alone should put Pizzagate into focus of public attention.
    Perhaps you also need to read carefully this report: http://www.wikileaks-forum.com/belgium/358/belgian-pedophile-trafficking-ring-and-alleged-cover-up-marc-dutroux-and-nihoul/15315/

    The Savile thing was a different matter. There, the problem was that a lot of good sound evidence from many credible people was ignored out of bias in favour of a working-class man who had joined the Establishment and was engaged in conspicuous charities. I’m not aware that Savile was subject to totally unverifiable claims – correct me if I’m wrong.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Eagle Eye
    RodW - Here is a CHALLENGE for you.

    "Jimmy" Savile murdered and raped children (boys and girls) and remained untouchable during his life and for several years after his death thanks to broad cover by establishment pedophiles including Ted Heath, Cyril Smith, and no doubt many others.

    RodW - since you are so keen to avoid "slander" against a poor, innocent political operative and his poor, innocent brother who just happens to like edgy modern art, please provide an INNOCENT explanation for "Herb's" email to John Podesta (link below), especially the postscript:

    QUOTE: “Ps. Do you think I’ll do better playing dominos on cheese than on pasta?”

    Full email here: https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/30613

    , @Beefcake the Mighty
    You expect us to believe the English upper crust had some sort of paternalistic sympathy for a commoner who did superficial good deeds?
    , @annamaria
    "The Savile thing was a different matter."
    Perhaps you need to reread the account of the Belgian scandal to understand the reality and extend of government/judicial/MSM favors for powerful criminals: http://www.wikileaks-forum.com/belgium/358/belgian-pedophile-trafficking-ring-and-alleged-cover-up-marc-dutroux-and-nihoul/15315/
    And again, that the NYT was so quick in organizing the defense for Podesta brothers is a strong indication that Pizzagate deserves public attention (Mark Thompson, the NYT CEO, “was credibly accused of lying to cover up evidence of the Jimmy Savile sex scandal"). The history tells us repeatedly that those in the highest echelon of power love their power to obscenity, whether it is a pornography of war or breaking all barriers of decency in sexual matters.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  69. Eagle Eye says:
    @RodW
    The Savile thing was a different matter. There, the problem was that a lot of good sound evidence from many credible people was ignored out of bias in favour of a working-class man who had joined the Establishment and was engaged in conspicuous charities. I'm not aware that Savile was subject to totally unverifiable claims - correct me if I'm wrong.

    RodW – Here is a CHALLENGE for you.

    “Jimmy” Savile murdered and raped children (boys and girls) and remained untouchable during his life and for several years after his death thanks to broad cover by establishment pedophiles including Ted Heath, Cyril Smith, and no doubt many others.

    RodW – since you are so keen to avoid “slander” against a poor, innocent political operative and his poor, innocent brother who just happens to like edgy modern art, please provide an INNOCENT explanation for “Herb’s” email to John Podesta (link below), especially the postscript:

    QUOTE: “Ps. Do you think I’ll do better playing dominos on cheese than on pasta?”

    Full email here: https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/30613

    Read More
    • Replies: @RodW
    Very easy.

    I think you should give notice when changing strategies which have been long in place.
     
    Joke conflating politics with the giving of presents.

    I immediately realized something was different by the shape of the box and I contemplated who would be sending me something in the square shaped box. Lo and behold, instead of pasta and wonderful sauces, it was a lovely, tempting assortment of cheeses, Yummy.
     
    The content of a regular seasonal gift has changed. Instead of the usual pasta and sauces, it's cheese.

    I am awaiting the return of my children and grandchildren from their holiday travels so that we can demolish them.
     
    His extended family are coming home, and he will save the cheese so that his family can enjoy them.

    Ps. Do you think I’ll do better playing dominos on cheese than on pasta?
     
    They are all going to dress up in black robes, bugger a little boy and girl, then eat them. Er, no. They're going to play simple games like dominoes, cards, Scrabble etc., but probably mainly dominoes, as large families, including mine do, when they get together. And because elderly people are often not as good at these games as they used to be, they may facetiously consider which foods will be conducive to their maximum performance. Old people tend to like involved if lame humour, as well as good food.

    If you were a normal person, with a normal mind, and a normal family life, you would understand immediately from the context that this is not code - it's the typical mode of communication between old and intimate friends.

    You've succeeded in making me dislike John Podesta less now. Well done.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  70. Eagle Eye says:
    @annamaria
    "...if you can’t be bothered to look at the evidence critically..."

    You mean, the readers should follow the New York Times' line and dismiss any "unfounded accusations," a la Mark Thompson (CEO of The NYT Company), the weasel that fought diligently to protect Jimmy Savile and to cover Jimmy's jolly deeds with children?
    Mark Thompson "was credibly accused of lying to cover up evidence of the Jimmy Savile sex scandal. Jimmy Savile managed to abuse hundreds of young children, and associates and friends were accused of acting in complicity with the rapes and even sentenced for raping the very same victims. And that same Mark Thompson who helped cover up the Savile scandal now runs the New York Times which was so quick to dismiss Pizzagate in its entirety as a hoax as well."
    This alone should put Pizzagate into focus of public attention.
    Perhaps you also need to read carefully this report: http://www.wikileaks-forum.com/belgium/358/belgian-pedophile-trafficking-ring-and-alleged-cover-up-marc-dutroux-and-nihoul/15315/

    Thanks for the interesting link.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  71. RodW says:
    @Eagle Eye
    RodW - Here is a CHALLENGE for you.

    "Jimmy" Savile murdered and raped children (boys and girls) and remained untouchable during his life and for several years after his death thanks to broad cover by establishment pedophiles including Ted Heath, Cyril Smith, and no doubt many others.

    RodW - since you are so keen to avoid "slander" against a poor, innocent political operative and his poor, innocent brother who just happens to like edgy modern art, please provide an INNOCENT explanation for "Herb's" email to John Podesta (link below), especially the postscript:

    QUOTE: “Ps. Do you think I’ll do better playing dominos on cheese than on pasta?”

    Full email here: https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/30613

    Very easy.

    I think you should give notice when changing strategies which have been long in place.

    Joke conflating politics with the giving of presents.

    I immediately realized something was different by the shape of the box and I contemplated who would be sending me something in the square shaped box. Lo and behold, instead of pasta and wonderful sauces, it was a lovely, tempting assortment of cheeses, Yummy.

    The content of a regular seasonal gift has changed. Instead of the usual pasta and sauces, it’s cheese.

    I am awaiting the return of my children and grandchildren from their holiday travels so that we can demolish them.

    His extended family are coming home, and he will save the cheese so that his family can enjoy them.

    Ps. Do you think I’ll do better playing dominos on cheese than on pasta?

    They are all going to dress up in black robes, bugger a little boy and girl, then eat them. Er, no. They’re going to play simple games like dominoes, cards, Scrabble etc., but probably mainly dominoes, as large families, including mine do, when they get together. And because elderly people are often not as good at these games as they used to be, they may facetiously consider which foods will be conducive to their maximum performance. Old people tend to like involved if lame humour, as well as good food.

    If you were a normal person, with a normal mind, and a normal family life, you would understand immediately from the context that this is not code – it’s the typical mode of communication between old and intimate friends.

    You’ve succeeded in making me dislike John Podesta less now. Well done.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Skeptikal
    RodW:
    "They are all going to dress up in black robes, bugger a little boy and girl, then eat them. "
    Here is the "making Rod's shit stick to others" technique yet again.
    These ideas are coming from your mind, Rod.

    Rod your explanation is sweet. And I know that someone asked you to make up a story of some kind. But it does not come from Podesta. I don't think Podesta has grandkids.

    We need to hear explanatios from the horse's mouth.
    How often has the American public been told: Not to worry about surveillance if you have nothing to hide!
    Well, why do Podesta and the DNC have their panties in such a twist if they have nothing to hide?
    Since you are a Brit, and Britain is still a class-addled society, I reluctantly come to the conclusion that you are used to accepting the interests of your betters as your own.

    , @Eagle Eye
    QUOTE: They’re going to play simple games like dominoes, cards, Scrabble etc., but probably mainly dominoes, as large families, including mine do.

    Since when do English people (1) have "large families" and (2) play DOMINOES?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  72. @RodW
    It's really got nothing to do with Podesta. I hate the man. I'm just trying to get you and the other people here to understand that if you will keep regurgitating obviously false information, there's no reason to take you or the original claimants seriously.

    If you want to know if Podesta was really using code (I'd like to know), and if so what the code indicates, we'd all get much closer to finding out if we dropped all of the lurid, debunkable accusations against him, and simply persuaded journalists of integrity to pursue the matter. But by saying that the efits in the McCann case match the Podestas and other nonsense, you make it simple to dismiss the whole matter out of hand.

    And when I mentioned 'right', obviously I was talking about a moral right, not a legal right.

    Hmm, what “false information” have I been regurgitating here? I’ve simply noted your suspicious selective outrage, I guess that’s enough to get me lumped in the ranks of the deplorables.

    Again, it is PODESTA himself who could resolve this issue by explaining what his obvious code phrases mean (well, obvious to everyone but you, apparently). Put simply, apparatchiks and minions of the US Imperium do not deserve the concern you’re showing them here.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  73. RodW says:
    @FKA Max
    Who Was the Umbrella Man? | JFK Assassination Documentary | The New York Times
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yznRGS9f-jI

    Published on Nov 20, 2013

    In 2011, on the anniversary of the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, Errol Morris explored the story behind the one man seen standing under an open black umbrella at the site.

    But stop closing your eyes to obvious wrongdoing by another species of weirdo.
     
    Weirdos, hysterics and opportunists just come with the territory/are part of the package.

    It is a two/multiple-front war...

    One of the pieces of evidence in the Pizzagate scandal, which threw me for a loop, was Andrew Breitbart’s tweet from 2011 about John Podesta. I did not understand its original/proper context, and so I interpreted it to be a very credible piece of evidence, which it is not really, as I found out.

    I think what we are witnessing in the case of Pizzagate is a collaboration of right-wing “moral entrepreneurs” (with whom I had not been that familiar with before, and who most likely and ironically were empowered and inspired by feminist, left-wing moral entrepreneurs’ trumped-up claims about child sexual abuse) and right-wing “conspiracy entrepreneurs ” ( e.g. Infowars.com et al., with whom I am personally very familiar with).

    This very good article puts Andrew Breitbart’s tweet about John Podesta in perspective and in its proper context:

    About that Podesta ‘underage sex-slaves’ Tweet from Andrew Breitbart


    Nefarious operators on the Internet (as well as some innocent, misinformed individuals) have been freaking out over a Tweet from the late Andrew Breitbart connecting John Podesta to a “underage sex slave” operation.


    How prog-guru John Podesta isn’t household name as world class underage sex slave op cover-upperer defending unspeakable dregs escapes me.

    — AndrewBreitbart (@AndrewBreitbart) February 4, 2011
     
    [...]

    There are tons of websites who make a lot of money doing pretty odious things. [...]

    However, because of the confusion over this Tweet, I think some context and an explanation is called for. And, for some reason, Breitbart News has not stepped up and delivered it themselves. (I searched, if they have, I will update this column post haste.)

    [...] - http://hotair.com/archives/2016/12/05/about-that-andrew-breitbart-tweet-about-podesta-and-underage-sex-slaves/

    I am still sitting on the fence about Pizzagate, but one thing is crystal clear to me, and that is, that if “moral entrepreneurs” and “conspiracy entrepreneurs”, be they of the right-wing or left-wing persuasion, get involved in debates and investigations, these usually turn irrational, disingenuous, and hysterical fast.
     
    - http://www.unz.com/article/pizzagate/#comment-1685910

    All of the stuff about pizza, cheese, pasta and whatnot is quoted without the full context. This context actually tends to show that the people involved are foodies, with what appears to be a healthy family culture.

    I’ve often thought that the kind of people who censor and censure without thorough knowledge of situations are really the ones with dirty, sick minds.

    And whoever thought a flechette could be launched sideways from an umbrella had little grasp of physics and engineering, that’s for sure.

    Read More
    • Replies: @annamaria
    Well, here the NYT has a field day by promoting propaganda du jour with no factual support: https://consortiumnews.com/2016/12/29/details-still-lacking-on-russian-hack/
    Mr. Thompson (the defender of despicable Savile and such) has been occupying leading posts in MSM because he is good at forcing the plutocracy's policies upon the reading public. In no way the NYT exists for the sake of truth and dignity.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  74. @RodW
    It's just an analogy about the relationship between evidence and crime. As a kid, I found some interesting apparent anomalies and I posited that they were evidence of a crime, which I then investigated, causing trouble to some unrelated people. The 'investigators' of Pizzagate are doing much the same thing. My investigation only lasted an hour, and did no harm, but Pizzagate has gone on for a while and it just muddies the water surrounding the real scandals of Podesta and his operation.

    Anyway, I'm getting bored talking to people with no interest in facts and basic integrity.

    But after coming here to lecture on what topics constitute acceptable discourse, you continue to post after claiming you’ve grown bored with the whole unsolicited advice thing. Are you the guy who calls himself Wizard of Oz?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  75. @RodW
    The Savile thing was a different matter. There, the problem was that a lot of good sound evidence from many credible people was ignored out of bias in favour of a working-class man who had joined the Establishment and was engaged in conspicuous charities. I'm not aware that Savile was subject to totally unverifiable claims - correct me if I'm wrong.

    You expect us to believe the English upper crust had some sort of paternalistic sympathy for a commoner who did superficial good deeds?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  76. annamaria says:
    @RodW
    The Savile thing was a different matter. There, the problem was that a lot of good sound evidence from many credible people was ignored out of bias in favour of a working-class man who had joined the Establishment and was engaged in conspicuous charities. I'm not aware that Savile was subject to totally unverifiable claims - correct me if I'm wrong.

    “The Savile thing was a different matter.”
    Perhaps you need to reread the account of the Belgian scandal to understand the reality and extend of government/judicial/MSM favors for powerful criminals: http://www.wikileaks-forum.com/belgium/358/belgian-pedophile-trafficking-ring-and-alleged-cover-up-marc-dutroux-and-nihoul/15315/
    And again, that the NYT was so quick in organizing the defense for Podesta brothers is a strong indication that Pizzagate deserves public attention (Mark Thompson, the NYT CEO, “was credibly accused of lying to cover up evidence of the Jimmy Savile sex scandal”). The history tells us repeatedly that those in the highest echelon of power love their power to obscenity, whether it is a pornography of war or breaking all barriers of decency in sexual matters.

    Read More
    • Replies: @RodW
    Stop spouting the same vague crap as in the original article and point to one bit of credible evidence of child abuse. That means evidence that hasn't already been dealt with by Snopes, evidence that isn't based on fragments of email taken from their innocent context, and doesn't constitute misreporting or misunderstanding of images, all of which I've addressed here.

    There are various possible responses to the kind of accusations made - patient rebuttal of every point, angry denunciation, or just ignoring it completely. Unfortunately, all responses are taken as confirmation of the allegations.

    If there's any more to Pizzagate than that, then I'll be very interested. But since the evidence so far is made up, nothing of substance will emerge.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  77. annamaria says:
    @RodW
    All of the stuff about pizza, cheese, pasta and whatnot is quoted without the full context. This context actually tends to show that the people involved are foodies, with what appears to be a healthy family culture.

    I've often thought that the kind of people who censor and censure without thorough knowledge of situations are really the ones with dirty, sick minds.

    And whoever thought a flechette could be launched sideways from an umbrella had little grasp of physics and engineering, that's for sure.

    Well, here the NYT has a field day by promoting propaganda du jour with no factual support: https://consortiumnews.com/2016/12/29/details-still-lacking-on-russian-hack/
    Mr. Thompson (the defender of despicable Savile and such) has been occupying leading posts in MSM because he is good at forcing the plutocracy’s policies upon the reading public. In no way the NYT exists for the sake of truth and dignity.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  78. RodW says:
    @annamaria
    "The Savile thing was a different matter."
    Perhaps you need to reread the account of the Belgian scandal to understand the reality and extend of government/judicial/MSM favors for powerful criminals: http://www.wikileaks-forum.com/belgium/358/belgian-pedophile-trafficking-ring-and-alleged-cover-up-marc-dutroux-and-nihoul/15315/
    And again, that the NYT was so quick in organizing the defense for Podesta brothers is a strong indication that Pizzagate deserves public attention (Mark Thompson, the NYT CEO, “was credibly accused of lying to cover up evidence of the Jimmy Savile sex scandal"). The history tells us repeatedly that those in the highest echelon of power love their power to obscenity, whether it is a pornography of war or breaking all barriers of decency in sexual matters.

    Stop spouting the same vague crap as in the original article and point to one bit of credible evidence of child abuse. That means evidence that hasn’t already been dealt with by Snopes, evidence that isn’t based on fragments of email taken from their innocent context, and doesn’t constitute misreporting or misunderstanding of images, all of which I’ve addressed here.

    There are various possible responses to the kind of accusations made – patient rebuttal of every point, angry denunciation, or just ignoring it completely. Unfortunately, all responses are taken as confirmation of the allegations.

    If there’s any more to Pizzagate than that, then I’ll be very interested. But since the evidence so far is made up, nothing of substance will emerge.

    Read More
    • Replies: @annamaria
    "nothing of substance will emerge."

    How do you know? Why such a determination? How come that the proven liar involved in a massive and effective coverup of Savile scandal, Mark Thompson, has landed on a position of a CEO at the New York Times?
    The same NYT has spouted numerous condemning articles about Assange (even while the two women in question have been denying that there was any crime), that is, the NYT articles used the unproven allegations against Assange. And yet the same NYT, led by Mark Thompson (the Major Pedophile Protector) sees nothing but conspiracy theories in the stories that concern possible pedophile activities of two powerful men from the current administration.
    There was another pedophile scandal that left the perpetrators almost unscathed - the Epstein pedophile scandal. Other VIP included Clinton and Dershowitz. The New York Times did not bother to notice the Epstein scandal. Actually, the NYT completely ignored the Epstein pedophile scandal. Mind that Epstein was found guilty.
    Don't you see the difference in the NYC treatment of Assange (innocent till proven guilty) and Epstein (proven guilty)?
    http://nypost.com/2016/10/09/the-sex-slave-scandal-that-exposed-pedophile-billionaire-jeffrey-epstein/
    http://www.dailywire.com/news/5749/both-trump-and-clinton-went-jeffrey-epsteins-sex-amanda-prestigiacomo
    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/jan/10/jeffrey-epstein-decade-scandal-prince-andrew
    It is the disreputable reputation of the NYT that makes its dismissal of Pizzagate story suspicious and therefore attracts more attention to the story.

    , @Eagle Eye
    QUOTE: "... That means evidence that hasn’t already been dealt with by [SNOTS.COM]..."

    Note again the attempt to censor what can and cannot be quoted as relevant information. (We are NOT trying Podesta in a court of law yet - but the MSM hysteria suggests he should be.)

    Note also another attempt casually to elevate SNOTS.COM (misspelled Snopes) to the status of an objective, infallible finder of falsity or truth whose ex cathedra rulings are gospel truth for all Puffington Host readers. At the same time, WRod is telling us that anything that has been "dealt with" by SNOTS.COM must not be mentioned in polite discourse.

    This, of course, is of a piece with the massive coordinated push in Europe (particularly international-socialist Germany) and the U.S. to ban and censor "fake news." "Fake news" is a fancy new term for "things powerful people want to suppress," aka "NEWS." This tendency and an extremely wealth-friendly libel law enabled Jimmy Savile, Robert Maxwell, Ted Heath, Leon Britain etc. to stay in power long after rumors of their nefarious actions were common knowledge among journalists.

    BTW SNOTS.COM is run by some pretty rum people including a porn blogger. One suspects that this is the real reason Facebook wants to crawl into bed with the SNOTS sleazemasters for its illegal censorship projects.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4042194/Facebook-fact-checker-arbitrate-fake-news-accused-defrauding-website-pay-prostitutes-staff-includes-escort-porn-star-Vice-Vixen-domme.html

    , @Junior
    Snopes?

    Today, Snopes has turned into a sycophantic political surrogate for the Progressive Left, the Obama Administration, and Hillary Clinton. Fancying itself as a “political fact-checker,” it has become completely unreliable, existing as an excuse making machine for the morally relativistic and a propaganda apparatus fueled by unfounded accusations and political talking points; talking points seemingly crafted and issued directly from the Progressive minions of Chicago.
     
    http://www.angrypatriotmovement.com/who-is-behind-snopes/

    http://dailycaller.com/2016/07/28/snopes-caught-lying-about-lack-of-american-flags-at-democratic-convention/

    http://politicalcult.com/fact-checking-snopes-caught-massive-lie/

    http://yournewswire.com/snopes-caught-lying-for-hillary-again-questions-raised/

    http://conservativetribune.com/snopes-busted-obamas-lies/

    https://www.facebook.com/Snopes-Lies-221236624664088/
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  79. Skeptikal says:
    @RodW
    I've given examples of patently false, made-up accusations in my earlier comments. You can also easily find effective rebuttals of bullshit like the efits online (yes on Snopes, where they have the same queer understanding of the meaning of 'evidence' that I apparently have).

    And if you can't be bothered to look at the evidence critically, while claiming that Podesta is a murderer, then you're an evil slanderer. Just remember that.

    RodW:
    You make up “evil shit” against other commenters in every single one of your comments.
    Your “shit slinging” technique is to piggyback your “evil shit” on reasonable comments and then throw the whole mess back at the commenter and try to make *your shit* stick to the other person.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  80. Ron Unz says:
    @RodW
    "Is false information, sensationalized to appear as the smoking gun, planted as bait to discredit the alt-media outlets involved?"

    Alt-media discredits itself when its participants trade happily in undigested nonsense. It makes itself easy to ignore, which is a shame because an effective counterweight to the Pravda media is certainly required. Ron Unz's series of articles generally contain information that appears to be true. This Pizzagate thing is full of information that plainly isn't true, and yet instead of acknowledging what isn't true, we have people praising it as a great first step in the process of winnowing, as if farmers add a bit of leaf mould from the woods to the harvest before they start removing the chaff.

    It makes itself easy to ignore, which is a shame because an effective counterweight to the Pravda media is certainly required. Ron Unz’s series of articles generally contain information that appears to be true.

    Well, here’s the thing to consider. It seems to me that the main argument against the reality of the Pizzagate scandal is that the entire MSM is ignoring or pooh-poohing it.

    But you yourself concede that the very long list of scandals I present in my American Pravda series is based upon reasonably solid evidence. And all those other gigantic scandals have also been totally ignored or pooh-poohed by the same MSM. So why should we take the MSM seriously about Pizzagate?

    I certainly haven’t investigated it myself, but offhand there seems to be a huge mountain of circumstantial evidence in support, and no substantial arguments that I can see against it. Just yelling “Fake News!” or “it’s crazy!” isn’t very persuasive. And if those are the main arguments being made by the opponents who’ve supposedly examined the evidence, isn’t that rather telling?

    I remember reading that when circumstantial evidence pointed to Bernie Madoff running a Ponzi Scheme and the SEC gingerly interviewed him, he intimidated the SEC investigators by his very angry and outraged responses, so they backed off and let him continue swindling people for another decade or so.

    Read More
    • Replies: @RodW
    Wow Ron, what a farrago of illogic your response is!

    But you yourself concede that the very long list of scandals I present in my American Pravda series is based upon reasonably solid evidence. And all those other gigantic scandals have also been totally ignored or pooh-poohed by the same MSM. So why should we take the MSM seriously about Pizzagate?
     
    That's right, the long list of scandals is based on reasonably solid evidence, which is what makes them credible. It's not that the MSM ignores them that makes credible. The MSM ignoring them has no bearing whatsoever on their credibility. That's a pretty elementary logical error for you to be making.

    It seems to me that the main argument against the reality of the Pizzagate scandal is that the entire MSM is ignoring or pooh-poohing it.
     
    No, the main argument from critical thinkers is that the evidence presented consists entirely of a) fragments of emails quoted out of context, b) photographs about which dishonest or misleading claims are made, c) links to irrelevant material.

    there seems to be a huge mountain of circumstantial evidence in support, and no substantial arguments that I can see against it.
     
    There is a lot, but not a huge mountain. If someone decides to make a bunch of YouTube videos full of baseless claims, it doesn't take long before you have a quantity of the stuff. I've presented substantial arguments against it in this thread. A few examples are sufficient to show the method used to produce it, and to discredit the rest accordingly.

    Just yelling “Fake News!” or “it’s crazy!” isn’t very persuasive.
     
    Straw man. I'm not doing that. I've looked painstakingly at the evidence, and shared my conclusions here. I trust that you don't share some of the commenters' disdain for weighing evidence?

    I certainly haven’t investigated it myself ... And if those are the main arguments being made by the opponents who’ve supposedly examined the evidence, isn’t that rather telling?
     
    As someone in the business of journalism, don't you feel any shame to be saying this? Aren't you simply saying that you're prepared to believe anything?

    Let me put another thought to you. Have you considered that your acceptance of this sort of 'evidence' is contributing to the overall deterioration of journalism? The patently false and very dangerous 'the Russians stole the emails' narrative is possible because there are very few reliable news outlets left to challenge it. If the alt media gives equal weight to 9-11 investigation and Pizzagate 'investigation', then people who aren't used to practicing critical thinking will not learn the necessary habits of mind. I don't think it's a stretch to say that by retailing this kind of nonsense on your site, you're making the world a more dangerous place. I for one would like to see you up your game and behave more responsibly.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  81. Skeptikal says:
    @RodW
    Very easy.

    I think you should give notice when changing strategies which have been long in place.
     
    Joke conflating politics with the giving of presents.

    I immediately realized something was different by the shape of the box and I contemplated who would be sending me something in the square shaped box. Lo and behold, instead of pasta and wonderful sauces, it was a lovely, tempting assortment of cheeses, Yummy.
     
    The content of a regular seasonal gift has changed. Instead of the usual pasta and sauces, it's cheese.

    I am awaiting the return of my children and grandchildren from their holiday travels so that we can demolish them.
     
    His extended family are coming home, and he will save the cheese so that his family can enjoy them.

    Ps. Do you think I’ll do better playing dominos on cheese than on pasta?
     
    They are all going to dress up in black robes, bugger a little boy and girl, then eat them. Er, no. They're going to play simple games like dominoes, cards, Scrabble etc., but probably mainly dominoes, as large families, including mine do, when they get together. And because elderly people are often not as good at these games as they used to be, they may facetiously consider which foods will be conducive to their maximum performance. Old people tend to like involved if lame humour, as well as good food.

    If you were a normal person, with a normal mind, and a normal family life, you would understand immediately from the context that this is not code - it's the typical mode of communication between old and intimate friends.

    You've succeeded in making me dislike John Podesta less now. Well done.

    RodW:
    “They are all going to dress up in black robes, bugger a little boy and girl, then eat them. ”
    Here is the “making Rod’s shit stick to others” technique yet again.
    These ideas are coming from your mind, Rod.

    Rod your explanation is sweet. And I know that someone asked you to make up a story of some kind. But it does not come from Podesta. I don’t think Podesta has grandkids.

    We need to hear explanatios from the horse’s mouth.
    How often has the American public been told: Not to worry about surveillance if you have nothing to hide!
    Well, why do Podesta and the DNC have their panties in such a twist if they have nothing to hide?
    Since you are a Brit, and Britain is still a class-addled society, I reluctantly come to the conclusion that you are used to accepting the interests of your betters as your own.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  82. annamaria says:
    @RodW
    Stop spouting the same vague crap as in the original article and point to one bit of credible evidence of child abuse. That means evidence that hasn't already been dealt with by Snopes, evidence that isn't based on fragments of email taken from their innocent context, and doesn't constitute misreporting or misunderstanding of images, all of which I've addressed here.

    There are various possible responses to the kind of accusations made - patient rebuttal of every point, angry denunciation, or just ignoring it completely. Unfortunately, all responses are taken as confirmation of the allegations.

    If there's any more to Pizzagate than that, then I'll be very interested. But since the evidence so far is made up, nothing of substance will emerge.

    “nothing of substance will emerge.”

    How do you know? Why such a determination? How come that the proven liar involved in a massive and effective coverup of Savile scandal, Mark Thompson, has landed on a position of a CEO at the New York Times?
    The same NYT has spouted numerous condemning articles about Assange (even while the two women in question have been denying that there was any crime), that is, the NYT articles used the unproven allegations against Assange. And yet the same NYT, led by Mark Thompson (the Major Pedophile Protector) sees nothing but conspiracy theories in the stories that concern possible pedophile activities of two powerful men from the current administration.
    There was another pedophile scandal that left the perpetrators almost unscathed – the Epstein pedophile scandal. Other VIP included Clinton and Dershowitz. The New York Times did not bother to notice the Epstein scandal. Actually, the NYT completely ignored the Epstein pedophile scandal. Mind that Epstein was found guilty.
    Don’t you see the difference in the NYC treatment of Assange (innocent till proven guilty) and Epstein (proven guilty)?

    http://nypost.com/2016/10/09/the-sex-slave-scandal-that-exposed-pedophile-billionaire-jeffrey-epstein/

    http://www.dailywire.com/news/5749/both-trump-and-clinton-went-jeffrey-epsteins-sex-amanda-prestigiacomo

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/jan/10/jeffrey-epstein-decade-scandal-prince-andrew

    It is the disreputable reputation of the NYT that makes its dismissal of Pizzagate story suspicious and therefore attracts more attention to the story.

    Read More
    • Replies: @RodW
    Why do you keep throwing this NYT canard at me? Where have I suggested that the NYT or any of the MSM are any kind of authority?* Nowhere. The MSM is full of the fake news they're currently railing against, and they kill legitimate news by ignoring and suppressing it.

    The MSM has many reasons why it wants to kill the Pizzagate story and get past Emailgate. But just because the MSM wants to kill a story doesn't make the story any more likely to be true. I'm not surprised that all the loons populating this thread are making that elementary logical error, but I'm disappointed to see Unz doing it too.

    *I don't regard Snopes as part of the MSM. Snopes isn't infallible of course, but it does follow a fairly regular and transparent methodology.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  83. @RodW
    Just another idiotic claim that doesn't bear scrutiny.

    Just consider for a moment the possibility that you, and the bloke who wrote this article, and the girl who makes all those videos, and Ron Unz are actually more evil than John Podesta, because you think you have some sort of right to trade in completely unfounded but very damaging allegations, where any rebuttal is taken as proof of involvement.

    Just consider for a moment the possibility that you, and the bloke who wrote this article, and the girl who makes all those videos, and Ron Unz are actually more evil than John Podesta, because you think you have some sort of right to trade in completely unfounded but very damaging allegations, where any rebuttal is taken as proof of involvement.

    “Where any rebuttal is taken as proof of involvement”? Please tell me who is accusing you here of personal involvement in the Pizzagate affair? I certainly am not.

    And some people call us paranoiacs!

    I think I am going to cut off my discussion with ‘RodW’ now, since he is being hysterical and willfully obtuse.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  84. Skeptikal says:

    “I think I am going to cut off my discussion with ‘RodW’ now, since he is being hysterical and willfully obtuse.”

    I have come to the same conclusion.

    Don’t know what his dog is in this fight, in the sense that he seems obsessed with trivializing and recasting as ludicrous and hysterical all reasonable observations and comments. Why?
    Sure, some items and ideas may be way off-base, but Roy is upping the ante by reconfiguring every reasonable comment or observation or suggestion in lurid, ludicrous add-ons that actually come straight out of his head. It is hard to credit that he is just concerned that Podesta may by unjustly suspected of something. Rod’s approach is to ride his hobby horse regarding “evidence” while injecting his very own lurid images and allegations into the dialogue and trying to hang them around someone else’s neck. Weird.

    Of course there is the possibility and potential for some real luridness. That is why an investigation is called for. If the dominoes fall in a completely innocuous pattern, then no harm has been done and Podesta et al. are cleared. As it is, there is a cloud over this crew. One would think they would want to clear the cloud, a la Nixon in “Checkers.” As of now it looks like these people prefer being under a cloud of suspicion to the risk of making some explanations of the plethora of weird and unsettling circumstantial evidence, in particular, the email language, which they cannot deny stems from them.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  85. Eagle Eye says:
    @RodW
    Stop spouting the same vague crap as in the original article and point to one bit of credible evidence of child abuse. That means evidence that hasn't already been dealt with by Snopes, evidence that isn't based on fragments of email taken from their innocent context, and doesn't constitute misreporting or misunderstanding of images, all of which I've addressed here.

    There are various possible responses to the kind of accusations made - patient rebuttal of every point, angry denunciation, or just ignoring it completely. Unfortunately, all responses are taken as confirmation of the allegations.

    If there's any more to Pizzagate than that, then I'll be very interested. But since the evidence so far is made up, nothing of substance will emerge.

    QUOTE: “… That means evidence that hasn’t already been dealt with by [SNOTS.COM]…”

    Note again the attempt to censor what can and cannot be quoted as relevant information. (We are NOT trying Podesta in a court of law yet – but the MSM hysteria suggests he should be.)

    Note also another attempt casually to elevate SNOTS.COM (misspelled Snopes) to the status of an objective, infallible finder of falsity or truth whose ex cathedra rulings are gospel truth for all Puffington Host readers. At the same time, WRod is telling us that anything that has been “dealt with” by SNOTS.COM must not be mentioned in polite discourse.

    This, of course, is of a piece with the massive coordinated push in Europe (particularly international-socialist Germany) and the U.S. to ban and censor “fake news.” “Fake news” is a fancy new term for “things powerful people want to suppress,” aka “NEWS.” This tendency and an extremely wealth-friendly libel law enabled Jimmy Savile, Robert Maxwell, Ted Heath, Leon Britain etc. to stay in power long after rumors of their nefarious actions were common knowledge among journalists.

    BTW SNOTS.COM is run by some pretty rum people including a porn blogger. One suspects that this is the real reason Facebook wants to crawl into bed with the SNOTS sleazemasters for its illegal censorship projects.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4042194/Facebook-fact-checker-arbitrate-fake-news-accused-defrauding-website-pay-prostitutes-staff-includes-escort-porn-star-Vice-Vixen-domme.html

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  86. FKA Max says:
    @Skeptikal
    Interesting. And don't forget, in addition to the money-laundering potential, the tax-escaping potential of all the rich folks' educational or is it propaganda or ego-stoking etc. use of their art collections.
    See (just one random example):
    https://rfc.museum/about-us

    I wonder whether this Mera Rubell has dual Israeli-American citizenship . . .

    And don’t forget, in addition to the money-laundering potential, the tax-escaping potential of all the rich folks’ educational or is it propaganda or ego-st[r]oking etc. use of their art collections.

    Yes,

    Heather Podesta (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heather_Podesta ] spoke at this year’s Art Basel about exactly that:

    Salon | Art Market Talk | Post-Election Art Market

    Published on Dec 14, 2016
    Heather Podesta, Founder and CEO, Heather Podesta + Partners, Washington D.C.; Daniel H. Sallick, Chairman, Hirshhorn Museum and Sculpture Garden, Founder and Partner, Subject Matter, Washington D.C.
    Moderator: Josh Baer, Advisor and Publisher, Baer Faxt, New York
    Date: Friday, December 2, 2016, 1pm to 2pm
    Filmed on site at Art Basel in Miami Beach 2016

    The couple’s shared occupation is now at issue in the divorce. In the filing, Tony Podesta makes the case that he is responsible for his wife’s current success by schooling her in the lobbying business and introducing her to his network of high-profile contacts. The filing claims that her salary before their marriage was $55,000, and that she now earns “many millions” annually. “Ms. Podesta’s career has risen meteorically since the parties’ marriage, with Mr. Podesta’s assistance and connections,” according to the document.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/reliable-source/wp/2014/04/03/tony-podesta-divorce-filing-wife-heather-podesta-tried-to-embarrass-and-harass/

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  87. Eagle Eye says:
    @RodW
    It's really got nothing to do with Podesta. I hate the man. I'm just trying to get you and the other people here to understand that if you will keep regurgitating obviously false information, there's no reason to take you or the original claimants seriously.

    If you want to know if Podesta was really using code (I'd like to know), and if so what the code indicates, we'd all get much closer to finding out if we dropped all of the lurid, debunkable accusations against him, and simply persuaded journalists of integrity to pursue the matter. But by saying that the efits in the McCann case match the Podestas and other nonsense, you make it simple to dismiss the whole matter out of hand.

    And when I mentioned 'right', obviously I was talking about a moral right, not a legal right.

    Got it.

    WRod is ordering us uppity Americans rednecks to respect their betters and to:

    (1) “drop[] all of the lurid, debunkable [sic *] accusations against [Podesta.]”

    (2) relegate all further investigation to establishment “journalists of integrity to pursue the matter” as the final and exclusive truth-finding tribunal.

    (3) move along, nothing to see here.

    * “Debunkable” apparently means that WRod decides that he COULD “debunk” the item, but we will have to take his and his patrons’ word for it since they won’t share the sordid details with mere mortals.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  88. RodW says:
    @annamaria
    "nothing of substance will emerge."

    How do you know? Why such a determination? How come that the proven liar involved in a massive and effective coverup of Savile scandal, Mark Thompson, has landed on a position of a CEO at the New York Times?
    The same NYT has spouted numerous condemning articles about Assange (even while the two women in question have been denying that there was any crime), that is, the NYT articles used the unproven allegations against Assange. And yet the same NYT, led by Mark Thompson (the Major Pedophile Protector) sees nothing but conspiracy theories in the stories that concern possible pedophile activities of two powerful men from the current administration.
    There was another pedophile scandal that left the perpetrators almost unscathed - the Epstein pedophile scandal. Other VIP included Clinton and Dershowitz. The New York Times did not bother to notice the Epstein scandal. Actually, the NYT completely ignored the Epstein pedophile scandal. Mind that Epstein was found guilty.
    Don't you see the difference in the NYC treatment of Assange (innocent till proven guilty) and Epstein (proven guilty)?
    http://nypost.com/2016/10/09/the-sex-slave-scandal-that-exposed-pedophile-billionaire-jeffrey-epstein/
    http://www.dailywire.com/news/5749/both-trump-and-clinton-went-jeffrey-epsteins-sex-amanda-prestigiacomo
    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/jan/10/jeffrey-epstein-decade-scandal-prince-andrew
    It is the disreputable reputation of the NYT that makes its dismissal of Pizzagate story suspicious and therefore attracts more attention to the story.

    Why do you keep throwing this NYT canard at me? Where have I suggested that the NYT or any of the MSM are any kind of authority?* Nowhere. The MSM is full of the fake news they’re currently railing against, and they kill legitimate news by ignoring and suppressing it.

    The MSM has many reasons why it wants to kill the Pizzagate story and get past Emailgate. But just because the MSM wants to kill a story doesn’t make the story any more likely to be true. I’m not surprised that all the loons populating this thread are making that elementary logical error, but I’m disappointed to see Unz doing it too.

    *I don’t regard Snopes as part of the MSM. Snopes isn’t infallible of course, but it does follow a fairly regular and transparent methodology.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  89. RodW says:
    @Ron Unz

    It makes itself easy to ignore, which is a shame because an effective counterweight to the Pravda media is certainly required. Ron Unz’s series of articles generally contain information that appears to be true.
     
    Well, here's the thing to consider. It seems to me that the main argument against the reality of the Pizzagate scandal is that the entire MSM is ignoring or pooh-poohing it.

    But you yourself concede that the very long list of scandals I present in my American Pravda series is based upon reasonably solid evidence. And all those other gigantic scandals have also been totally ignored or pooh-poohed by the same MSM. So why should we take the MSM seriously about Pizzagate?

    I certainly haven't investigated it myself, but offhand there seems to be a huge mountain of circumstantial evidence in support, and no substantial arguments that I can see against it. Just yelling "Fake News!" or "it's crazy!" isn't very persuasive. And if those are the main arguments being made by the opponents who've supposedly examined the evidence, isn't that rather telling?

    I remember reading that when circumstantial evidence pointed to Bernie Madoff running a Ponzi Scheme and the SEC gingerly interviewed him, he intimidated the SEC investigators by his very angry and outraged responses, so they backed off and let him continue swindling people for another decade or so.

    Wow Ron, what a farrago of illogic your response is!

    But you yourself concede that the very long list of scandals I present in my American Pravda series is based upon reasonably solid evidence. And all those other gigantic scandals have also been totally ignored or pooh-poohed by the same MSM. So why should we take the MSM seriously about Pizzagate?

    That’s right, the long list of scandals is based on reasonably solid evidence, which is what makes them credible. It’s not that the MSM ignores them that makes credible. The MSM ignoring them has no bearing whatsoever on their credibility. That’s a pretty elementary logical error for you to be making.

    It seems to me that the main argument against the reality of the Pizzagate scandal is that the entire MSM is ignoring or pooh-poohing it.

    No, the main argument from critical thinkers is that the evidence presented consists entirely of a) fragments of emails quoted out of context, b) photographs about which dishonest or misleading claims are made, c) links to irrelevant material.

    there seems to be a huge mountain of circumstantial evidence in support, and no substantial arguments that I can see against it.

    There is a lot, but not a huge mountain. If someone decides to make a bunch of YouTube videos full of baseless claims, it doesn’t take long before you have a quantity of the stuff. I’ve presented substantial arguments against it in this thread. A few examples are sufficient to show the method used to produce it, and to discredit the rest accordingly.

    Just yelling “Fake News!” or “it’s crazy!” isn’t very persuasive.

    Straw man. I’m not doing that. I’ve looked painstakingly at the evidence, and shared my conclusions here. I trust that you don’t share some of the commenters’ disdain for weighing evidence?

    I certainly haven’t investigated it myself … And if those are the main arguments being made by the opponents who’ve supposedly examined the evidence, isn’t that rather telling?

    As someone in the business of journalism, don’t you feel any shame to be saying this? Aren’t you simply saying that you’re prepared to believe anything?

    Let me put another thought to you. Have you considered that your acceptance of this sort of ‘evidence’ is contributing to the overall deterioration of journalism? The patently false and very dangerous ‘the Russians stole the emails’ narrative is possible because there are very few reliable news outlets left to challenge it. If the alt media gives equal weight to 9-11 investigation and Pizzagate ‘investigation’, then people who aren’t used to practicing critical thinking will not learn the necessary habits of mind. I don’t think it’s a stretch to say that by retailing this kind of nonsense on your site, you’re making the world a more dangerous place. I for one would like to see you up your game and behave more responsibly.

    Read More
    • Disagree: BB753
    • Replies: @FKA Max

    Let me put another thought to you. Have you considered that your acceptance of this sort of ‘evidence’ is contributing to the overall deterioration of journalism?
     
    You must be suffering from Stockholm Syndrome... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stockholm_syndrome

    I think you need to read or re-read the two following articles by Mr. Unz to understand where he is coming from:

    American Pravda: How the CIA Invented "Conspiracy Theories"

    http://www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda-how-the-cia-invented-conspiracy-theories/

    So perhaps Beard was correct all along in recognizing the respectability of “conspiracy theories,” and we should return to his traditional American way of thinking, notwithstanding endless conspiratorial propaganda campaigns by the CIA and others to persuade us that we should dismiss such notions without any serious consideration.
     
    American Pravda: Breaching the Media Barrier

    http://www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda-breaching-the-media-barrier/

    Reframe Vulnerable “Conspiracy Theories” as Effective “Media[/Elite] Criticism”

    Over the last few decades, the political establishment and its media allies have created a powerful intellectual defense against major criticism by investing considerable resources in stigmatizing the notion of so-called “conspiracy theories.” This harsh pejorative term is applied to any important analysis of events that sharply deviants from the officially-endorsed narrative, and implicitly suggests that the proponent is an disreputable fanatic, suffering from delusions, paranoia, or other forms of mental illness. Such ideological attacks often effectively destroy his credibility, allowing his actual arguments to be ignored. A once-innocuous phrase has become politically “weaponized.”

    However, an effective means of circumventing this intellectual defense mechanism may be to adopt a meta-strategy of reframing such “conspiracy theories” as “media[/elite] criticism.” [...]

    However, suppose that an entirely different strategy were adopted. Instead of attempting to make a case “beyond any reasonable doubt,” proponents merely provide sufficient evidence and analysis to suggest that there is a 30% chance or a 50% chance or a 70% chance that the unorthodox theory is true.
     

    A crucial aspect enabling such a rebel alliance is the typically narrow focus of each particular constituent member. Most groups or individuals opposing establishment positions tend to be ideologically zealous about one particular issue or perhaps a small handful, while being much less interested in others. Given the total suppression of their views at the hands of the mainstream media, any venue in which their unorthodox perspectives are provided reasonably fair and equal treatment rather than ridiculed and denigrated tends to inspire considerable enthusiasm and loyalty on their part.
     
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  90. FKA Max says:
    @RodW
    Wow Ron, what a farrago of illogic your response is!

    But you yourself concede that the very long list of scandals I present in my American Pravda series is based upon reasonably solid evidence. And all those other gigantic scandals have also been totally ignored or pooh-poohed by the same MSM. So why should we take the MSM seriously about Pizzagate?
     
    That's right, the long list of scandals is based on reasonably solid evidence, which is what makes them credible. It's not that the MSM ignores them that makes credible. The MSM ignoring them has no bearing whatsoever on their credibility. That's a pretty elementary logical error for you to be making.

    It seems to me that the main argument against the reality of the Pizzagate scandal is that the entire MSM is ignoring or pooh-poohing it.
     
    No, the main argument from critical thinkers is that the evidence presented consists entirely of a) fragments of emails quoted out of context, b) photographs about which dishonest or misleading claims are made, c) links to irrelevant material.

    there seems to be a huge mountain of circumstantial evidence in support, and no substantial arguments that I can see against it.
     
    There is a lot, but not a huge mountain. If someone decides to make a bunch of YouTube videos full of baseless claims, it doesn't take long before you have a quantity of the stuff. I've presented substantial arguments against it in this thread. A few examples are sufficient to show the method used to produce it, and to discredit the rest accordingly.

    Just yelling “Fake News!” or “it’s crazy!” isn’t very persuasive.
     
    Straw man. I'm not doing that. I've looked painstakingly at the evidence, and shared my conclusions here. I trust that you don't share some of the commenters' disdain for weighing evidence?

    I certainly haven’t investigated it myself ... And if those are the main arguments being made by the opponents who’ve supposedly examined the evidence, isn’t that rather telling?
     
    As someone in the business of journalism, don't you feel any shame to be saying this? Aren't you simply saying that you're prepared to believe anything?

    Let me put another thought to you. Have you considered that your acceptance of this sort of 'evidence' is contributing to the overall deterioration of journalism? The patently false and very dangerous 'the Russians stole the emails' narrative is possible because there are very few reliable news outlets left to challenge it. If the alt media gives equal weight to 9-11 investigation and Pizzagate 'investigation', then people who aren't used to practicing critical thinking will not learn the necessary habits of mind. I don't think it's a stretch to say that by retailing this kind of nonsense on your site, you're making the world a more dangerous place. I for one would like to see you up your game and behave more responsibly.

    Let me put another thought to you. Have you considered that your acceptance of this sort of ‘evidence’ is contributing to the overall deterioration of journalism?

    You must be suffering from Stockholm Syndrome… https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stockholm_syndrome

    I think you need to read or re-read the two following articles by Mr. Unz to understand where he is coming from:

    American Pravda: How the CIA Invented “Conspiracy Theories”

    http://www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda-how-the-cia-invented-conspiracy-theories/

    So perhaps Beard was correct all along in recognizing the respectability of “conspiracy theories,” and we should return to his traditional American way of thinking, notwithstanding endless conspiratorial propaganda campaigns by the CIA and others to persuade us that we should dismiss such notions without any serious consideration.

    American Pravda: Breaching the Media Barrier

    http://www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda-breaching-the-media-barrier/

    Reframe Vulnerable “Conspiracy Theories” as Effective “Media[/Elite] Criticism”

    Over the last few decades, the political establishment and its media allies have created a powerful intellectual defense against major criticism by investing considerable resources in stigmatizing the notion of so-called “conspiracy theories.” This harsh pejorative term is applied to any important analysis of events that sharply deviants from the officially-endorsed narrative, and implicitly suggests that the proponent is an disreputable fanatic, suffering from delusions, paranoia, or other forms of mental illness. Such ideological attacks often effectively destroy his credibility, allowing his actual arguments to be ignored. A once-innocuous phrase has become politically “weaponized.”

    However, an effective means of circumventing this intellectual defense mechanism may be to adopt a meta-strategy of reframing such “conspiracy theories” as “media[/elite] criticism.” [...]

    However, suppose that an entirely different strategy were adopted. Instead of attempting to make a case “beyond any reasonable doubt,” proponents merely provide sufficient evidence and analysis to suggest that there is a 30% chance or a 50% chance or a 70% chance that the unorthodox theory is true.

    A crucial aspect enabling such a rebel alliance is the typically narrow focus of each particular constituent member. Most groups or individuals opposing establishment positions tend to be ideologically zealous about one particular issue or perhaps a small handful, while being much less interested in others. Given the total suppression of their views at the hands of the mainstream media, any venue in which their unorthodox perspectives are provided reasonably fair and equal treatment rather than ridiculed and denigrated tends to inspire considerable enthusiasm and loyalty on their part.

    Read More
    • Replies: @RodW
    There's no need to quote great swathes of irrelevant text and post more irrelevant links. I've read Unz's work and I'm in general agreement with its premises and content. I will say that Unz came rather late to his awakening about the nature of the media, although starting this website was certainly an admirable step after he'd woken up.

    Nevertheless, for the site to continue to be useful, it needs some quality control, and that requires objectivity.

    Instead of attempting to make a case “beyond any reasonable doubt,” proponents merely provide sufficient evidence and analysis to suggest that there is a 30% chance or a 50% chance or a 70% chance that the unorthodox theory is true.
     
    A cursory look at the original emails indicates that Pizzagate 'evidence' doesn't even suggest a 10% chance, even to someone who is regularly reviled elsewhere as an incorrigible conspiracy theorist. Applying evidentiary rigour will never, ever lose its relevance.
    , @Skeptikal
    It is my view that the idea of "conspiracy theory" should be reframed as, simply, a hypothesis. In all of the official narratives that we are asked to swallow whole (assassination of JFK; 9/11 are the biggies) there are multiple aspects of the event or obvious questions that the official theory does not explain (e.g., anomalies of JFK's route; why bring down building 7; etc.). Alternative hypotheses are those that try to account for all of the features of an event. The official stories appear to be put forth not to explain what happened, but to obscure what really happened and to further an agenda of which the event is a part.

    I believe the term "conspiracy theory" was first used in connection with those who questioned the official story regarding the assassination of JFK and produced alternative hypotheses and possible evidence to support their hypotheses. One feature of supposed "conspiracy theories" is that they offer a more complex hypothesis/explanation than the official narrative (single shooter vs. actual conspiracy to kill JFK) regarding motive/means/opportunity. It's as if the creators of the official story follow the mantra "Keep it simple, stupid" after they have in reality probably spent over a decade planning a very complex operation!! Goebbels's big lie.

    Of course it is now almost universally recognized that the official 9/11 story just doesn't make sense and hardly accounts for anything. Is 60% the portion of Americans who don't believe the official JFK story? And over 30% who don't believe the official 9/11 narrative?

    Anyhow, my point is that IMO conspiracy theory meme should be reframed as a hypothesis that accounts for more of the actual circumstances than the official story. And requires investigation to develop evidence, just like any detective would do: Follow leads, gather evidence, and assess the evidence using various further techniques to establish its validity.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  91. Eagle Eye says:
    @RodW
    Very easy.

    I think you should give notice when changing strategies which have been long in place.
     
    Joke conflating politics with the giving of presents.

    I immediately realized something was different by the shape of the box and I contemplated who would be sending me something in the square shaped box. Lo and behold, instead of pasta and wonderful sauces, it was a lovely, tempting assortment of cheeses, Yummy.
     
    The content of a regular seasonal gift has changed. Instead of the usual pasta and sauces, it's cheese.

    I am awaiting the return of my children and grandchildren from their holiday travels so that we can demolish them.
     
    His extended family are coming home, and he will save the cheese so that his family can enjoy them.

    Ps. Do you think I’ll do better playing dominos on cheese than on pasta?
     
    They are all going to dress up in black robes, bugger a little boy and girl, then eat them. Er, no. They're going to play simple games like dominoes, cards, Scrabble etc., but probably mainly dominoes, as large families, including mine do, when they get together. And because elderly people are often not as good at these games as they used to be, they may facetiously consider which foods will be conducive to their maximum performance. Old people tend to like involved if lame humour, as well as good food.

    If you were a normal person, with a normal mind, and a normal family life, you would understand immediately from the context that this is not code - it's the typical mode of communication between old and intimate friends.

    You've succeeded in making me dislike John Podesta less now. Well done.

    QUOTE: They’re going to play simple games like dominoes, cards, Scrabble etc., but probably mainly dominoes, as large families, including mine do.

    Since when do English people (1) have “large families” and (2) play DOMINOES?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  92. RodW says:
    @FKA Max

    Let me put another thought to you. Have you considered that your acceptance of this sort of ‘evidence’ is contributing to the overall deterioration of journalism?
     
    You must be suffering from Stockholm Syndrome... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stockholm_syndrome

    I think you need to read or re-read the two following articles by Mr. Unz to understand where he is coming from:

    American Pravda: How the CIA Invented "Conspiracy Theories"

    http://www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda-how-the-cia-invented-conspiracy-theories/

    So perhaps Beard was correct all along in recognizing the respectability of “conspiracy theories,” and we should return to his traditional American way of thinking, notwithstanding endless conspiratorial propaganda campaigns by the CIA and others to persuade us that we should dismiss such notions without any serious consideration.
     
    American Pravda: Breaching the Media Barrier

    http://www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda-breaching-the-media-barrier/

    Reframe Vulnerable “Conspiracy Theories” as Effective “Media[/Elite] Criticism”

    Over the last few decades, the political establishment and its media allies have created a powerful intellectual defense against major criticism by investing considerable resources in stigmatizing the notion of so-called “conspiracy theories.” This harsh pejorative term is applied to any important analysis of events that sharply deviants from the officially-endorsed narrative, and implicitly suggests that the proponent is an disreputable fanatic, suffering from delusions, paranoia, or other forms of mental illness. Such ideological attacks often effectively destroy his credibility, allowing his actual arguments to be ignored. A once-innocuous phrase has become politically “weaponized.”

    However, an effective means of circumventing this intellectual defense mechanism may be to adopt a meta-strategy of reframing such “conspiracy theories” as “media[/elite] criticism.” [...]

    However, suppose that an entirely different strategy were adopted. Instead of attempting to make a case “beyond any reasonable doubt,” proponents merely provide sufficient evidence and analysis to suggest that there is a 30% chance or a 50% chance or a 70% chance that the unorthodox theory is true.
     

    A crucial aspect enabling such a rebel alliance is the typically narrow focus of each particular constituent member. Most groups or individuals opposing establishment positions tend to be ideologically zealous about one particular issue or perhaps a small handful, while being much less interested in others. Given the total suppression of their views at the hands of the mainstream media, any venue in which their unorthodox perspectives are provided reasonably fair and equal treatment rather than ridiculed and denigrated tends to inspire considerable enthusiasm and loyalty on their part.
     

    There’s no need to quote great swathes of irrelevant text and post more irrelevant links. I’ve read Unz’s work and I’m in general agreement with its premises and content. I will say that Unz came rather late to his awakening about the nature of the media, although starting this website was certainly an admirable step after he’d woken up.

    Nevertheless, for the site to continue to be useful, it needs some quality control, and that requires objectivity.

    Instead of attempting to make a case “beyond any reasonable doubt,” proponents merely provide sufficient evidence and analysis to suggest that there is a 30% chance or a 50% chance or a 70% chance that the unorthodox theory is true.

    A cursory look at the original emails indicates that Pizzagate ‘evidence’ doesn’t even suggest a 10% chance, even to someone who is regularly reviled elsewhere as an incorrigible conspiracy theorist. Applying evidentiary rigour will never, ever lose its relevance.

    Read More
    • Replies: @FKA Max
    This is just an intuition, but I think you are not exactly sincere... and also a little bit too haughty for my taste.

    Good day

    concern troll ‎(plural concern trolls)

    (Internet slang) Someone who posts to an internet forum or newsgroup, claiming to share its goals while deliberately working against those goals, typically, by claiming "concern" about group plans to engage in productive activity, urging members instead to attempt some activity that would damage the group's credibility, or alternatively to give up on group projects entirely.
     
    - https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/concern_troll
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  93. Skeptikal says:
    @FKA Max

    Let me put another thought to you. Have you considered that your acceptance of this sort of ‘evidence’ is contributing to the overall deterioration of journalism?
     
    You must be suffering from Stockholm Syndrome... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stockholm_syndrome

    I think you need to read or re-read the two following articles by Mr. Unz to understand where he is coming from:

    American Pravda: How the CIA Invented "Conspiracy Theories"

    http://www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda-how-the-cia-invented-conspiracy-theories/

    So perhaps Beard was correct all along in recognizing the respectability of “conspiracy theories,” and we should return to his traditional American way of thinking, notwithstanding endless conspiratorial propaganda campaigns by the CIA and others to persuade us that we should dismiss such notions without any serious consideration.
     
    American Pravda: Breaching the Media Barrier

    http://www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda-breaching-the-media-barrier/

    Reframe Vulnerable “Conspiracy Theories” as Effective “Media[/Elite] Criticism”

    Over the last few decades, the political establishment and its media allies have created a powerful intellectual defense against major criticism by investing considerable resources in stigmatizing the notion of so-called “conspiracy theories.” This harsh pejorative term is applied to any important analysis of events that sharply deviants from the officially-endorsed narrative, and implicitly suggests that the proponent is an disreputable fanatic, suffering from delusions, paranoia, or other forms of mental illness. Such ideological attacks often effectively destroy his credibility, allowing his actual arguments to be ignored. A once-innocuous phrase has become politically “weaponized.”

    However, an effective means of circumventing this intellectual defense mechanism may be to adopt a meta-strategy of reframing such “conspiracy theories” as “media[/elite] criticism.” [...]

    However, suppose that an entirely different strategy were adopted. Instead of attempting to make a case “beyond any reasonable doubt,” proponents merely provide sufficient evidence and analysis to suggest that there is a 30% chance or a 50% chance or a 70% chance that the unorthodox theory is true.
     

    A crucial aspect enabling such a rebel alliance is the typically narrow focus of each particular constituent member. Most groups or individuals opposing establishment positions tend to be ideologically zealous about one particular issue or perhaps a small handful, while being much less interested in others. Given the total suppression of their views at the hands of the mainstream media, any venue in which their unorthodox perspectives are provided reasonably fair and equal treatment rather than ridiculed and denigrated tends to inspire considerable enthusiasm and loyalty on their part.
     

    It is my view that the idea of “conspiracy theory” should be reframed as, simply, a hypothesis. In all of the official narratives that we are asked to swallow whole (assassination of JFK; 9/11 are the biggies) there are multiple aspects of the event or obvious questions that the official theory does not explain (e.g., anomalies of JFK’s route; why bring down building 7; etc.). Alternative hypotheses are those that try to account for all of the features of an event. The official stories appear to be put forth not to explain what happened, but to obscure what really happened and to further an agenda of which the event is a part.

    I believe the term “conspiracy theory” was first used in connection with those who questioned the official story regarding the assassination of JFK and produced alternative hypotheses and possible evidence to support their hypotheses. One feature of supposed “conspiracy theories” is that they offer a more complex hypothesis/explanation than the official narrative (single shooter vs. actual conspiracy to kill JFK) regarding motive/means/opportunity. It’s as if the creators of the official story follow the mantra “Keep it simple, stupid” after they have in reality probably spent over a decade planning a very complex operation!! Goebbels’s big lie.

    Of course it is now almost universally recognized that the official 9/11 story just doesn’t make sense and hardly accounts for anything. Is 60% the portion of Americans who don’t believe the official JFK story? And over 30% who don’t believe the official 9/11 narrative?

    Anyhow, my point is that IMO conspiracy theory meme should be reframed as a hypothesis that accounts for more of the actual circumstances than the official story. And requires investigation to develop evidence, just like any detective would do: Follow leads, gather evidence, and assess the evidence using various further techniques to establish its validity.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  94. FKA Max says:
    @RodW
    There's no need to quote great swathes of irrelevant text and post more irrelevant links. I've read Unz's work and I'm in general agreement with its premises and content. I will say that Unz came rather late to his awakening about the nature of the media, although starting this website was certainly an admirable step after he'd woken up.

    Nevertheless, for the site to continue to be useful, it needs some quality control, and that requires objectivity.

    Instead of attempting to make a case “beyond any reasonable doubt,” proponents merely provide sufficient evidence and analysis to suggest that there is a 30% chance or a 50% chance or a 70% chance that the unorthodox theory is true.
     
    A cursory look at the original emails indicates that Pizzagate 'evidence' doesn't even suggest a 10% chance, even to someone who is regularly reviled elsewhere as an incorrigible conspiracy theorist. Applying evidentiary rigour will never, ever lose its relevance.

    This is just an intuition, but I think you are not exactly sincere… and also a little bit too haughty for my taste.

    Good day

    concern troll ‎(plural concern trolls)

    (Internet slang) Someone who posts to an internet forum or newsgroup, claiming to share its goals while deliberately working against those goals, typically, by claiming “concern” about group plans to engage in productive activity, urging members instead to attempt some activity that would damage the group’s credibility, or alternatively to give up on group projects entirely.

    https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/concern_troll

    Read More
    • Replies: @Skeptikal
    Yep, FKA Max, you nailed it, and I'm glad someone else is hip to "concern trolls" and can recognize them. I was coming to this conclusion myself, but am hesitant to call out trolls.

    RodW is not interested in debating the actual topic but instead, and quite successfully, has derailed the thread and the discussion, and has even entangled Ron Unz in his coils and made Unz and this website plus the validity of alternative news and discussion websites the topic of the thread (or tried to). RodW is becoming more and more open in his attempt to call the shots as to what is the acceptable borders of debate. He is acting like a self-appointed gatekeeper.

    For me the clue that RodW is not on the level is his nonsensical "quantification" of the chances that there is anything worth investigating in the Pizzagate thing: 10%??? That is actually an other of RodW's confabulations, like the lurid images he tried earlier to sling around other commenters' necks. In other words, RodW has moved on from his earlier technique to a new one. What hat does RodW pull that 10% figure out of? Does he have some kind of a gauge in his head?? Is RodW a bookie? Bookies take bets on everything, and he may have taken bets on the chances that Pizzagate will ever be investigated and decided that the chances are 10%. The

    The fact is that either there is something to investigate or not, and there is no way of knowing until some real investigation takes place. It is an all or nothing kind of thing, like the lady or the tiger. All other a priori prognistications a la the oxnoxiously all-knowing, supercilious RodW are worthless. As other commenters have not knuckled under to his self-important finger wagging. RodW has become ever more aggressively "Sister Mary explains it all to you"-ish, expanding his brief from ridiculing the topic of the thread and other commenters to maybe wanting to save Ron Unz from himself (and expressing this in a vaguely threatening way). Like, the world might cave in if RodW decides that Ron Unz doesn't live up to RodW's standards. Say, what?

    If he really thinks this article and thread are ridiculous, he doesn't have to follow it.
    Instead he keeps coming back with new ways to ridicule the subject, ridicule other commenters, appoint himself as arbiter of what is acceptable not only on this thread but now he actually questions the values of Ron Unz and his website---where, BTW, RodW is a guest, and the only place I know of where a serious and reasonable discussion of the Pizzagate thing is taking place.
    It sure makes one wonder . . .
    , @Eagle Eye
    "CONCERN TROLL" - exactly. Clearly, RodW (and utu) are on a mission to distract from Pizzagate.

    BTW here are some fascinating outlines of techniques we see (but don't perceive) used every day by skilled "concern trolls" etc. to derail or misdirect forum discussions that displease important interests:

    (1) http://whowhatwhy.org/2016/01/27/disinformation-part-1-how-trolls-control-an-internet-forum/

    (2) http://whowhatwhy.org/2016/02/02/disinformation-part-2-detailed-tips-for-trolls/

    (3) http://whowhatwhy.org/2016/02/11/disinformation-part-3-cointelpro-up-close-and-personal/
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  95. RodW says:

    Max, I am sincere, and I was unduly haughty to you. I apologize. I’m afraid I allowed myself to become irritated.

    Read More
    • Replies: @FKA Max
    Rod,

    don't apologize to me for being haughty.

    Apologize to Mr. Unz and the other commenters.


    I’m not trolling, but I am concerned.

    I’ve enjoyed reading Unz.com for the last year or so, and I’ve recommended it to several friends who appeared unduly addled by MSM disinformation. Even though they were the sort of PC people who would likely be outraged by Fred Reed or John Derbyshire, I felt confident that they’d learn something useful just by reading a few things on the site.

    But after the Pizzagate articles appeared, I feel a lot less inclined to point people to Unz.com. Because you can argue about opinions and argue in favour or against, but there’s no argument to be made for evidence that’s junk on the face of it.

    I make no apology for stating that the Pizzagate evidence is made-up drivel, and that Ron Unz should get a proper handle on it if he wants to be taken at all seriously.
     
    I suggest you contact your friends you recommended the Unz Review to, and simply revoke your recommendation, because I feel, that that seems to be your biggest concern. It is as simple as that. Just tell them, that you feel that the Unz Review publishing two (2) Pizzagate related articles has made you lose confidence in the publication and that the Unz Review has lost all its credibility in your eyes due to it publishing these two (2) Pizzagate articles by Mr. Cassiel.

    I personally believe, that this is tossing the baby out with the bathwater, but if you feel this strongly and are this concerned about the issue, this is the route I recommend you take. You will sleep better at night.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  96. Cochore says:
    @Seamus Padraig

    Even the crimes and the victims are totally putative. If there isn’t even any evidence of a crime, any suspicions can’t be considered well-founded.
     
    There's at least one known missing person case under discussion here, and that's the case of Madeleine McCann. She was abducted in Portugal in 2007, and the police sketch of the suspects really does look a lot like Podesta brothers, who are known to have been in Portugal at the time, as they have a friend who owns a mansion there.

    The Podestas friend who owned the mansion in Portugal was Sir Clement Freud, about whom it was posthumously revealed in 2010 that he was a prolific paedophile.

    The alarming thing is that Clement Freud even befriended the McCanns after their daughter had gone missing.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3643373/PICTURED-sinister-holiday-villa-paedophile-MP-Clement-Freud-hosted-McCanns-weeks-Madeleine-vanished.html

    Read More
    • Agree: Seamus Padraig
    • Replies: @Skeptikal
    "The alarming thing is that Clement Freud even befriended the McCanns after their daughter had gone missing.
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3643373/PICTURED-sinister-holiday-villa-paedophile-MP-Clement-Freud-hosted-McCanns-weeks-Madeleine-vanished.html"


    OMG, what a totally creepy-looking fellow.
    The idea of seeing this bloke in his night shirt serving strawberry drinks is vertigo-inducing.
    I for one find it extremely odd that this creep made a point of inveigling himself with the distraught parents as described.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  97. BB753 says:

    If I were a Washington DC cop, at least I would take a look at Comet Pizza. There’s enough circumstantial evidence for an investigation.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  98. Skeptikal says:
    @FKA Max
    This is just an intuition, but I think you are not exactly sincere... and also a little bit too haughty for my taste.

    Good day

    concern troll ‎(plural concern trolls)

    (Internet slang) Someone who posts to an internet forum or newsgroup, claiming to share its goals while deliberately working against those goals, typically, by claiming "concern" about group plans to engage in productive activity, urging members instead to attempt some activity that would damage the group's credibility, or alternatively to give up on group projects entirely.
     
    - https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/concern_troll

    Yep, FKA Max, you nailed it, and I’m glad someone else is hip to “concern trolls” and can recognize them. I was coming to this conclusion myself, but am hesitant to call out trolls.

    RodW is not interested in debating the actual topic but instead, and quite successfully, has derailed the thread and the discussion, and has even entangled Ron Unz in his coils and made Unz and this website plus the validity of alternative news and discussion websites the topic of the thread (or tried to). RodW is becoming more and more open in his attempt to call the shots as to what is the acceptable borders of debate. He is acting like a self-appointed gatekeeper.

    For me the clue that RodW is not on the level is his nonsensical “quantification” of the chances that there is anything worth investigating in the Pizzagate thing: 10%??? That is actually an other of RodW’s confabulations, like the lurid images he tried earlier to sling around other commenters’ necks. In other words, RodW has moved on from his earlier technique to a new one. What hat does RodW pull that 10% figure out of? Does he have some kind of a gauge in his head?? Is RodW a bookie? Bookies take bets on everything, and he may have taken bets on the chances that Pizzagate will ever be investigated and decided that the chances are 10%. The

    The fact is that either there is something to investigate or not, and there is no way of knowing until some real investigation takes place. It is an all or nothing kind of thing, like the lady or the tiger. All other a priori prognistications a la the oxnoxiously all-knowing, supercilious RodW are worthless. As other commenters have not knuckled under to his self-important finger wagging. RodW has become ever more aggressively “Sister Mary explains it all to you”-ish, expanding his brief from ridiculing the topic of the thread and other commenters to maybe wanting to save Ron Unz from himself (and expressing this in a vaguely threatening way). Like, the world might cave in if RodW decides that Ron Unz doesn’t live up to RodW’s standards. Say, what?

    If he really thinks this article and thread are ridiculous, he doesn’t have to follow it.
    Instead he keeps coming back with new ways to ridicule the subject, ridicule other commenters, appoint himself as arbiter of what is acceptable not only on this thread but now he actually questions the values of Ron Unz and his website—where, BTW, RodW is a guest, and the only place I know of where a serious and reasonable discussion of the Pizzagate thing is taking place.
    It sure makes one wonder . . .

    Read More
    • Replies: @Eagle Eye
    AGREE with Skeptical's general view.

    Quite simply - and scarily - this forum seems to be:

    the only place I know of where a serious and reasonable discussion of the Pizzagate thing is taking place. It sure makes one wonder . . .
     
    A major reason, of course, is the intelligent, libertarian audience and liberal moderators. - Ron Unz is a great host whose site (and moderation policies) encourage TRULY free debate (including, of course, many threads and utterances that I and many other readers thoroughly disagree with). Thanks, Ron!

    Slight proviso: In Skeptical’s posting, I would front-load the word TRIED in this sentence:

    RodW has TRIED to entangle Ron Unz in his coils and made Unz and this website plus the validity of alternative news and discussion websites the topic of the thread (or tried to).
     
    Ron Unz promptly knocked RodW’s attempts out of the park above.

    A re-review of RodW's series of postings shows that although unsuccessful, he is an operator who is quite skilled and experienced in manipulating and derailing discourse of this nature. He is clearly NOT a disinterested party. I would guess he is being paid a four-figure dollar amount (maybe FIVE FIGURE) for his skillful, often emotionally manipulative/distracting confabulations. (BTW don't believe his claim to be English - several factors reveal him to be American.)

    The very deployment of agents such as RodW (who may also be using other handles in this thread) indicates that there is something very big being covered up at all costs. In other words, RodW’s activities are themselves EVIDENCE of deeply nefarious goings-on.

    The experience in other countries (UK, Belgium, Western Australia, doubtless many others) shows that pedophiles as a matter of basic SURVIVAL develop extensive networks of like-minded support where it counts - law enforcement, politics, the judiciary, the MSM etc. Political and legal cover is 100 times more important to a pedophile who risks lengthy jail terms and even murder than to someone who with vague political preferences like reduced CO2 emissions or even better funding for community colleges.

    Pedophilia is an INCURABLE COMPULSION which is why convicted pedophiles are subject to serious constraints AFTER serving their sentences, including “civil commitment.” What would you do if you were an ambitious, well-connected, wealthy person afflicted with this compulsion?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  99. RodW says:

    concern troll

    I’m not trolling, but I am concerned.

    I’ve enjoyed reading Unz.com for the last year or so, and I’ve recommended it to several friends who appeared unduly addled by MSM disinformation. Even though they were the sort of PC people who would likely be outraged by Fred Reed or John Derbyshire, I felt confident that they’d learn something useful just by reading a few things on the site.

    But after the Pizzagate articles appeared, I feel a lot less inclined to point people to Unz.com. Because you can argue about opinions and argue in favour or against, but there’s no argument to be made for evidence that’s junk on the face of it.

    I make no apology for stating that the Pizzagate evidence is made-up drivel, and that Ron Unz should get a proper handle on it if he wants to be taken at all seriously.

    Read More
    • Replies: @JoeB
    Rod,

    I'm going to take you at your word regarding your sincerity.

    I, too, am not ready to convict these people. However, unlike you, I think an investigation is at least in order. I wonder why you are so reluctant?

    As for the emails, curious as to why you seem to glom on to the least odd one. I agree that it is as likely as not that food is being discussed. And if that were the only odd email, I'd quite agree with your conclusion. But it's not the only one or even the most odd one.

    What do you make of the one email to Podesta discussing a lost black and white handkerchief with a map on it? And whether he wants it back or not?

    I look forward to your sincere reply on this matter and I truly hope I am not incorrect in my assessment of your true motivations.

    Regards,

    Joe
    , @Skeptikal
    "I’m not trolling, but I am concerned.

    I’ve enjoyed reading Unz.com for the last year or so, and I’ve recommended it to several friends who appeared unduly addled by MSM disinformation. Even though they were the sort of PC people who would likely be outraged by Fred Reed or John Derbyshire, I felt confident that they’d learn something useful just by reading a few things on the site. "

    Uh huh . . .
    As LK Max said: concern troll.
    Poor RonW is just so concerned about what his friends might think now. I am so worried for them, too! Clearly, they cannot think for themselves and need RodW to think for them and vet for them what is OK to read. Just like here he is trying to tell other commenters what to think (after he has called them, and the blog owner, loony).

    Rod, the world---and certainly the Unz Review---can get along very nicely without your intercessions for its safety, integrity, etc. I know you are carrying the weight of your responsibility on your own shoulders. I suggest you take a Valium and give your shoulders, and us, a rest.
    P.S. I think your friends can probably take care of themselves, too.
    , @landlubber

    Pizzagate evidence is made-up drivel
     
    You are being too kind. These articles hysterically link Tony Podesta's depraved art to unrelated crimes.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  100. FKA Max says:
    @RodW
    Max, I am sincere, and I was unduly haughty to you. I apologize. I'm afraid I allowed myself to become irritated.

    Rod,

    don’t apologize to me for being haughty.

    Apologize to Mr. Unz and the other commenters.

    I’m not trolling, but I am concerned.

    I’ve enjoyed reading Unz.com for the last year or so, and I’ve recommended it to several friends who appeared unduly addled by MSM disinformation. Even though they were the sort of PC people who would likely be outraged by Fred Reed or John Derbyshire, I felt confident that they’d learn something useful just by reading a few things on the site.

    But after the Pizzagate articles appeared, I feel a lot less inclined to point people to Unz.com. Because you can argue about opinions and argue in favour or against, but there’s no argument to be made for evidence that’s junk on the face of it.

    I make no apology for stating that the Pizzagate evidence is made-up drivel, and that Ron Unz should get a proper handle on it if he wants to be taken at all seriously.

    I suggest you contact your friends you recommended the Unz Review to, and simply revoke your recommendation, because I feel, that that seems to be your biggest concern. It is as simple as that. Just tell them, that you feel that the Unz Review publishing two (2) Pizzagate related articles has made you lose confidence in the publication and that the Unz Review has lost all its credibility in your eyes due to it publishing these two (2) Pizzagate articles by Mr. Cassiel.

    I personally believe, that this is tossing the baby out with the bathwater, but if you feel this strongly and are this concerned about the issue, this is the route I recommend you take. You will sleep better at night.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Eagle Eye
    Nice come-back!

    Meanwhile, RodW and his sock puppets utu and landlubber were asked to explain what the code terms

    "handkerchief" and "map"

    mean in the context of Podesta's Wikileaks emails.

    And what's the deal with the $65,000 pizza delivery from Hawaii?

    CRICKETS!

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  101. JoeB says:
    @RodW

    concern troll
     
    I'm not trolling, but I am concerned.

    I've enjoyed reading Unz.com for the last year or so, and I've recommended it to several friends who appeared unduly addled by MSM disinformation. Even though they were the sort of PC people who would likely be outraged by Fred Reed or John Derbyshire, I felt confident that they'd learn something useful just by reading a few things on the site.

    But after the Pizzagate articles appeared, I feel a lot less inclined to point people to Unz.com. Because you can argue about opinions and argue in favour or against, but there's no argument to be made for evidence that's junk on the face of it.

    I make no apology for stating that the Pizzagate evidence is made-up drivel, and that Ron Unz should get a proper handle on it if he wants to be taken at all seriously.

    Rod,

    I’m going to take you at your word regarding your sincerity.

    I, too, am not ready to convict these people. However, unlike you, I think an investigation is at least in order. I wonder why you are so reluctant?

    As for the emails, curious as to why you seem to glom on to the least odd one. I agree that it is as likely as not that food is being discussed. And if that were the only odd email, I’d quite agree with your conclusion. But it’s not the only one or even the most odd one.

    What do you make of the one email to Podesta discussing a lost black and white handkerchief with a map on it? And whether he wants it back or not?

    I look forward to your sincere reply on this matter and I truly hope I am not incorrect in my assessment of your true motivations.

    Regards,

    Joe

    Read More
    • Replies: @RodW
    You'll recall that I was challenged to explain the relevant email, and a convenient link was provided to it. That's why I 'glommed' onto it. (And can you stop using haughty, insinuating language since we're all so sensitive here.)

    The person who issued the challenge hasn't yet shown that my interpretation is likely to be wrong. Instead, he ignored it and indulged in some infantile psychobabble about the English.

    I've shown that one piece of evidence claimed to be inexplicable code is in fact not code and not inexplicable. Online you can find plenty of other analyses of the other emails, which show the 'sinister' parts in their original context. I'm not a policeman or a prosecutor, but I daresay at least one policeman or prosecutor somewhere in the US has looked at the evidence and decided that it wouldn't stand up in court.

    Pizzagate is a lot of barking up the wrong tree. Looking at John Podesta's efforts to derail Democratic Party democracy would be a much more practical and just way to discredit the man, if that's the goal. He's one of the guilty ones there, not Vladimir Putin. But I digress. Because I'm a gatekeeper who wants to throw you off the cheese and pasta trail.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  102. Skeptikal says:
    @RodW

    concern troll
     
    I'm not trolling, but I am concerned.

    I've enjoyed reading Unz.com for the last year or so, and I've recommended it to several friends who appeared unduly addled by MSM disinformation. Even though they were the sort of PC people who would likely be outraged by Fred Reed or John Derbyshire, I felt confident that they'd learn something useful just by reading a few things on the site.

    But after the Pizzagate articles appeared, I feel a lot less inclined to point people to Unz.com. Because you can argue about opinions and argue in favour or against, but there's no argument to be made for evidence that's junk on the face of it.

    I make no apology for stating that the Pizzagate evidence is made-up drivel, and that Ron Unz should get a proper handle on it if he wants to be taken at all seriously.

    “I’m not trolling, but I am concerned.

    I’ve enjoyed reading Unz.com for the last year or so, and I’ve recommended it to several friends who appeared unduly addled by MSM disinformation. Even though they were the sort of PC people who would likely be outraged by Fred Reed or John Derbyshire, I felt confident that they’d learn something useful just by reading a few things on the site. ”

    Uh huh . . .
    As LK Max said: concern troll.
    Poor RonW is just so concerned about what his friends might think now. I am so worried for them, too! Clearly, they cannot think for themselves and need RodW to think for them and vet for them what is OK to read. Just like here he is trying to tell other commenters what to think (after he has called them, and the blog owner, loony).

    Rod, the world—and certainly the Unz Review—can get along very nicely without your intercessions for its safety, integrity, etc. I know you are carrying the weight of your responsibility on your own shoulders. I suggest you take a Valium and give your shoulders, and us, a rest.
    P.S. I think your friends can probably take care of themselves, too.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  103. Junior says:
    @RodW
    Stop spouting the same vague crap as in the original article and point to one bit of credible evidence of child abuse. That means evidence that hasn't already been dealt with by Snopes, evidence that isn't based on fragments of email taken from their innocent context, and doesn't constitute misreporting or misunderstanding of images, all of which I've addressed here.

    There are various possible responses to the kind of accusations made - patient rebuttal of every point, angry denunciation, or just ignoring it completely. Unfortunately, all responses are taken as confirmation of the allegations.

    If there's any more to Pizzagate than that, then I'll be very interested. But since the evidence so far is made up, nothing of substance will emerge.

    Snopes?

    Today, Snopes has turned into a sycophantic political surrogate for the Progressive Left, the Obama Administration, and Hillary Clinton. Fancying itself as a “political fact-checker,” it has become completely unreliable, existing as an excuse making machine for the morally relativistic and a propaganda apparatus fueled by unfounded accusations and political talking points; talking points seemingly crafted and issued directly from the Progressive minions of Chicago.

    http://www.angrypatriotmovement.com/who-is-behind-snopes/

    http://dailycaller.com/2016/07/28/snopes-caught-lying-about-lack-of-american-flags-at-democratic-convention/

    http://politicalcult.com/fact-checking-snopes-caught-massive-lie/

    http://yournewswire.com/snopes-caught-lying-for-hillary-again-questions-raised/

    http://conservativetribune.com/snopes-busted-obamas-lies/

    https://www.facebook.com/Snopes-Lies-221236624664088/

    Read More
    • Replies: @RodW
    Interesting that you question Snopes for misrepresenting things, and yet you won't support me when I show that this website is doing the same thing, and suggesting that the editors try to do better.

    If Snopes has indeed turned to arrant political hackery, then it's truly regrettable.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  104. Skeptikal says:
    @Cochore
    The Podestas friend who owned the mansion in Portugal was Sir Clement Freud, about whom it was posthumously revealed in 2010 that he was a prolific paedophile.

    The alarming thing is that Clement Freud even befriended the McCanns after their daughter had gone missing.
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3643373/PICTURED-sinister-holiday-villa-paedophile-MP-Clement-Freud-hosted-McCanns-weeks-Madeleine-vanished.html

    “The alarming thing is that Clement Freud even befriended the McCanns after their daughter had gone missing.
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3643373/PICTURED-sinister-holiday-villa-paedophile-MP-Clement-Freud-hosted-McCanns-weeks-Madeleine-vanished.html”

    OMG, what a totally creepy-looking fellow.
    The idea of seeing this bloke in his night shirt serving strawberry drinks is vertigo-inducing.
    I for one find it extremely odd that this creep made a point of inveigling himself with the distraught parents as described.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  105. RodW says:
    @JoeB
    Rod,

    I'm going to take you at your word regarding your sincerity.

    I, too, am not ready to convict these people. However, unlike you, I think an investigation is at least in order. I wonder why you are so reluctant?

    As for the emails, curious as to why you seem to glom on to the least odd one. I agree that it is as likely as not that food is being discussed. And if that were the only odd email, I'd quite agree with your conclusion. But it's not the only one or even the most odd one.

    What do you make of the one email to Podesta discussing a lost black and white handkerchief with a map on it? And whether he wants it back or not?

    I look forward to your sincere reply on this matter and I truly hope I am not incorrect in my assessment of your true motivations.

    Regards,

    Joe

    You’ll recall that I was challenged to explain the relevant email, and a convenient link was provided to it. That’s why I ‘glommed’ onto it. (And can you stop using haughty, insinuating language since we’re all so sensitive here.)

    The person who issued the challenge hasn’t yet shown that my interpretation is likely to be wrong. Instead, he ignored it and indulged in some infantile psychobabble about the English.

    I’ve shown that one piece of evidence claimed to be inexplicable code is in fact not code and not inexplicable. Online you can find plenty of other analyses of the other emails, which show the ‘sinister’ parts in their original context. I’m not a policeman or a prosecutor, but I daresay at least one policeman or prosecutor somewhere in the US has looked at the evidence and decided that it wouldn’t stand up in court.

    Pizzagate is a lot of barking up the wrong tree. Looking at John Podesta’s efforts to derail Democratic Party democracy would be a much more practical and just way to discredit the man, if that’s the goal. He’s one of the guilty ones there, not Vladimir Putin. But I digress. Because I’m a gatekeeper who wants to throw you off the cheese and pasta trail.

    Read More
    • Replies: @JoeB
    Rod,

    I was not rude nor haughty to you. In fact, I went out of my way to be civil to you and in fact tried to find common ground with you.

    Unfortunately, you fooled me. You are either interested in a dick measuring contest...or something more nefarious.

    You are most assuredly. NOT interested in a serious, honest or honorable discussion.

    In that case, I bid you a good evening, as any more effort on my part is an obvious waste of time.

    Regards,

    Joe
    , @Eagle Eye
    Explain handkerchief and map in full context in John Podesta's Wikileaks emails.

    Also, what was the alleged pizza delivery from Hawaii for $65,000 really about?

    Hypotheses based on seemingly minor observations can lead to much larger discoveries. The planet Uranus was discovered in the 19th century because the orbit of Neptune seemed perturbed relative to what it "should be."

    Later, it was discovered that even Uranus did not fully explain the perturbation of Nepture's orbit. Further analysis led to the discovery of Pluto in 1930 after several unwitting sightings.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  106. RodW says:
    @Junior
    Snopes?

    Today, Snopes has turned into a sycophantic political surrogate for the Progressive Left, the Obama Administration, and Hillary Clinton. Fancying itself as a “political fact-checker,” it has become completely unreliable, existing as an excuse making machine for the morally relativistic and a propaganda apparatus fueled by unfounded accusations and political talking points; talking points seemingly crafted and issued directly from the Progressive minions of Chicago.
     
    http://www.angrypatriotmovement.com/who-is-behind-snopes/

    http://dailycaller.com/2016/07/28/snopes-caught-lying-about-lack-of-american-flags-at-democratic-convention/

    http://politicalcult.com/fact-checking-snopes-caught-massive-lie/

    http://yournewswire.com/snopes-caught-lying-for-hillary-again-questions-raised/

    http://conservativetribune.com/snopes-busted-obamas-lies/

    https://www.facebook.com/Snopes-Lies-221236624664088/

    Interesting that you question Snopes for misrepresenting things, and yet you won’t support me when I show that this website is doing the same thing, and suggesting that the editors try to do better.

    If Snopes has indeed turned to arrant political hackery, then it’s truly regrettable.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  107. RodW says:

    Here’s a challenge for those who want your taxes spent on investigating Pizzagate:

    1. Pick one or more of the incriminating emails
    2. Post a link to it
    3. Explain what you think it means

    Your explanation can, like my attempt, point to an innocent conclusion, or it can point to a likely crime. But remember, if you do think that the email points to a crime, don’t omit to outline the means, motive and opportunity.

    By god, if we all pull together, we could get to the bottom of this thing!

    Read More
    • Replies: @Erebus

    Here’s a challenge for those who want your taxes spent on investigating Pizzagate (etc)...
     
    That's a false framing of the issue. Taxes beyond counting have been wasted on "investigations" that put innocents on death row, or exonerated guilty bankers of fraud and worse. How much did it cost to expose Bill's blue dress when it suited a political agenda? How many tax dollars were saved by the non-investigation of 9/11, also to suit a political agenda?

    I agree, however, that the "code" apparent in the Wikileaks emails could be referring to something else. Illicit drugs and/or orgies, and/or silly "secret club rituals" come to mind, but restricting the question to whether some unz.com commentators can prove that the Pizzagate paedophile iceberg supports the admittedly barely visible tips exposed by Wikileaks is disingenuous. Of course, they fall short of that. We wouldn't be having this discussion if they were proof beyond reasonable doubt. However, the Wikileaks emails do nothing to diminish the other circumstantial evidence surrounding the players, and there's steaming piles of it. The point being made here at Unz is that the steaming piles need investigating.

    Furthermore, another 650k emails were found on Weiner's laptop and are still hidden from the public. In its Erik Prince interview, Breitbart publicly stated that there is evidence of paedophilia, and much else, in there. Evidence of "great evil", that is known to the NYPD and FBI. (cf my comment #36 above). He is not alone in saying that these and other evidential emails are in the hands of law enforcement, and that only extraordinary political pressure keeps them from being exposed in a court of law.

    So:
    - Is Prince lying? Or,
    - are his NYPD sources (at the Captain level) lying? Or,
    - are they also as "amateurish" and prone to rushed mis-judgements as we are here at Unz?

    Unless at least one of the above are answered in the positive, the NYPD and/or the FBI have smoking gun evidence in their possession.
    If one of the above can be answered in the positive, Prince, and Breitbart, have exposed themselves to a massive libel suit, or worse. I haven't heard of any statement from the NYPD to the effect that Prince is full of shit. I haven't heard of any libel suit either. Surely, the Clintonistas would love to nail Breitbart to the wall, but what we get is wall-to-wall coverage of laughable CIA reports about "Russian Hacking" and hypocritical nonsense about "Fake (Russian) News". That says something, does it not? It says "Misdirection" to me. From what?

    Unless someone at the NSA/FBI/NYPD sends a thumb-drive to Wikileaks, I expect that the players will sit tight, work their networks hard, and hope that Pizzagate eventually disappears down the memory hole. That someone, should he appear, will be the most hunted man in the world.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  108. JoeB says:
    @RodW
    You'll recall that I was challenged to explain the relevant email, and a convenient link was provided to it. That's why I 'glommed' onto it. (And can you stop using haughty, insinuating language since we're all so sensitive here.)

    The person who issued the challenge hasn't yet shown that my interpretation is likely to be wrong. Instead, he ignored it and indulged in some infantile psychobabble about the English.

    I've shown that one piece of evidence claimed to be inexplicable code is in fact not code and not inexplicable. Online you can find plenty of other analyses of the other emails, which show the 'sinister' parts in their original context. I'm not a policeman or a prosecutor, but I daresay at least one policeman or prosecutor somewhere in the US has looked at the evidence and decided that it wouldn't stand up in court.

    Pizzagate is a lot of barking up the wrong tree. Looking at John Podesta's efforts to derail Democratic Party democracy would be a much more practical and just way to discredit the man, if that's the goal. He's one of the guilty ones there, not Vladimir Putin. But I digress. Because I'm a gatekeeper who wants to throw you off the cheese and pasta trail.

    Rod,

    I was not rude nor haughty to you. In fact, I went out of my way to be civil to you and in fact tried to find common ground with you.

    Unfortunately, you fooled me. You are either interested in a dick measuring contest…or something more nefarious.

    You are most assuredly. NOT interested in a serious, honest or honorable discussion.

    In that case, I bid you a good evening, as any more effort on my part is an obvious waste of time.

    Regards,

    Joe

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  109. Skeptikal says:

    Does anyone out there know whether all of the contents of Wiener’s laptop have been dumped via Wikileaks or otherwise made known to the public?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  110. @RodW

    concern troll
     
    I'm not trolling, but I am concerned.

    I've enjoyed reading Unz.com for the last year or so, and I've recommended it to several friends who appeared unduly addled by MSM disinformation. Even though they were the sort of PC people who would likely be outraged by Fred Reed or John Derbyshire, I felt confident that they'd learn something useful just by reading a few things on the site.

    But after the Pizzagate articles appeared, I feel a lot less inclined to point people to Unz.com. Because you can argue about opinions and argue in favour or against, but there's no argument to be made for evidence that's junk on the face of it.

    I make no apology for stating that the Pizzagate evidence is made-up drivel, and that Ron Unz should get a proper handle on it if he wants to be taken at all seriously.

    Pizzagate evidence is made-up drivel

    You are being too kind. These articles hysterically link Tony Podesta’s depraved art to unrelated crimes.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  111. Erebus says:
    @RodW
    Here's a challenge for those who want your taxes spent on investigating Pizzagate:

    1. Pick one or more of the incriminating emails
    2. Post a link to it
    3. Explain what you think it means

    Your explanation can, like my attempt, point to an innocent conclusion, or it can point to a likely crime. But remember, if you do think that the email points to a crime, don't omit to outline the means, motive and opportunity.

    By god, if we all pull together, we could get to the bottom of this thing!

    Here’s a challenge for those who want your taxes spent on investigating Pizzagate (etc)…

    That’s a false framing of the issue. Taxes beyond counting have been wasted on “investigations” that put innocents on death row, or exonerated guilty bankers of fraud and worse. How much did it cost to expose Bill’s blue dress when it suited a political agenda? How many tax dollars were saved by the non-investigation of 9/11, also to suit a political agenda?

    I agree, however, that the “code” apparent in the Wikileaks emails could be referring to something else. Illicit drugs and/or orgies, and/or silly “secret club rituals” come to mind, but restricting the question to whether some unz.com commentators can prove that the Pizzagate paedophile iceberg supports the admittedly barely visible tips exposed by Wikileaks is disingenuous. Of course, they fall short of that. We wouldn’t be having this discussion if they were proof beyond reasonable doubt. However, the Wikileaks emails do nothing to diminish the other circumstantial evidence surrounding the players, and there’s steaming piles of it. The point being made here at Unz is that the steaming piles need investigating.

    Furthermore, another 650k emails were found on Weiner’s laptop and are still hidden from the public. In its Erik Prince interview, Breitbart publicly stated that there is evidence of paedophilia, and much else, in there. Evidence of “great evil”, that is known to the NYPD and FBI. (cf my comment #36 above). He is not alone in saying that these and other evidential emails are in the hands of law enforcement, and that only extraordinary political pressure keeps them from being exposed in a court of law.

    So:
    - Is Prince lying? Or,
    - are his NYPD sources (at the Captain level) lying? Or,
    - are they also as “amateurish” and prone to rushed mis-judgements as we are here at Unz?

    Unless at least one of the above are answered in the positive, the NYPD and/or the FBI have smoking gun evidence in their possession.
    If one of the above can be answered in the positive, Prince, and Breitbart, have exposed themselves to a massive libel suit, or worse. I haven’t heard of any statement from the NYPD to the effect that Prince is full of shit. I haven’t heard of any libel suit either. Surely, the Clintonistas would love to nail Breitbart to the wall, but what we get is wall-to-wall coverage of laughable CIA reports about “Russian Hacking” and hypocritical nonsense about “Fake (Russian) News”. That says something, does it not? It says “Misdirection” to me. From what?

    Unless someone at the NSA/FBI/NYPD sends a thumb-drive to Wikileaks, I expect that the players will sit tight, work their networks hard, and hope that Pizzagate eventually disappears down the memory hole. That someone, should he appear, will be the most hunted man in the world.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  112. Skeptikal says:

    “The point being made here at Unz is that the steaming piles need investigating.”

    This point has been made repeatedly to RodW, but it just doesn’t “take” with him. With his references to loonies and “kiddie” etc. (just do a search for “loon” here and at the other Pizzagate thread) he has almost succeeded in derailing the discussion and shutting down this thread, and this line of inquiry. RodW clearly has an agenda to do just this.

    So, thank you, Erebus, for presenting so clearly the actual situation vis-a-the emails and info that has emerged from the NYPD and the FBI. The typical way that stings have been engineered that have caught child porn users has been via material seen on laptops, so it seems as though the Wiener laptop may contain ample material to warrant an investigation. Computer contents have been enough to trigger investigations that include sting operations (see, for example [and there are many, just start googling "child porn investigations"], https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/how-the-government-is-using-malware-to-ensnare-child-porn-users/2016/01/21/fb8ab5f8-bec0-11e5-83d4-42e3bceea902_story.html?utm_term=.9cd1d28a1131). I believe the assumption behind these types of investigations is that merely viewing child porn is a crime because what is being viewed has involved the sexual abuse and exploitation of children, and sometimes worse.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  113. utu says:

    Erebus

    ” what we get is wall-to-wall coverage of laughable CIA reports about “Russian Hacking” and hypocritical nonsense about “Fake (Russian) News”. That says something, does it not? It says “Misdirection” to me. From what?”

    Actually, when the blogosphere went mad after the Pizzagate some believed that it was the misdirection to not look at Clinton foundation and pay to play scheme where there was a real crime. The pay to play scheme was just getting traction in the last week of October after the WSJ gave a green light to look into it. But the misdirection worked. They succeeded. Who talks about pay to play now? Was it done by the disinfo agents who were planting fake news? Are people on the right end of the spectrum susceptible to fake disinfo news?

    Pizzagate is for suckers.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  114. Eagle Eye says:
    @Skeptikal
    Yep, FKA Max, you nailed it, and I'm glad someone else is hip to "concern trolls" and can recognize them. I was coming to this conclusion myself, but am hesitant to call out trolls.

    RodW is not interested in debating the actual topic but instead, and quite successfully, has derailed the thread and the discussion, and has even entangled Ron Unz in his coils and made Unz and this website plus the validity of alternative news and discussion websites the topic of the thread (or tried to). RodW is becoming more and more open in his attempt to call the shots as to what is the acceptable borders of debate. He is acting like a self-appointed gatekeeper.

    For me the clue that RodW is not on the level is his nonsensical "quantification" of the chances that there is anything worth investigating in the Pizzagate thing: 10%??? That is actually an other of RodW's confabulations, like the lurid images he tried earlier to sling around other commenters' necks. In other words, RodW has moved on from his earlier technique to a new one. What hat does RodW pull that 10% figure out of? Does he have some kind of a gauge in his head?? Is RodW a bookie? Bookies take bets on everything, and he may have taken bets on the chances that Pizzagate will ever be investigated and decided that the chances are 10%. The

    The fact is that either there is something to investigate or not, and there is no way of knowing until some real investigation takes place. It is an all or nothing kind of thing, like the lady or the tiger. All other a priori prognistications a la the oxnoxiously all-knowing, supercilious RodW are worthless. As other commenters have not knuckled under to his self-important finger wagging. RodW has become ever more aggressively "Sister Mary explains it all to you"-ish, expanding his brief from ridiculing the topic of the thread and other commenters to maybe wanting to save Ron Unz from himself (and expressing this in a vaguely threatening way). Like, the world might cave in if RodW decides that Ron Unz doesn't live up to RodW's standards. Say, what?

    If he really thinks this article and thread are ridiculous, he doesn't have to follow it.
    Instead he keeps coming back with new ways to ridicule the subject, ridicule other commenters, appoint himself as arbiter of what is acceptable not only on this thread but now he actually questions the values of Ron Unz and his website---where, BTW, RodW is a guest, and the only place I know of where a serious and reasonable discussion of the Pizzagate thing is taking place.
    It sure makes one wonder . . .

    AGREE with Skeptical’s general view.

    Quite simply – and scarily – this forum seems to be:

    the only place I know of where a serious and reasonable discussion of the Pizzagate thing is taking place. It sure makes one wonder . . .

    A major reason, of course, is the intelligent, libertarian audience and liberal moderators. – Ron Unz is a great host whose site (and moderation policies) encourage TRULY free debate (including, of course, many threads and utterances that I and many other readers thoroughly disagree with). Thanks, Ron!

    Slight proviso: In Skeptical’s posting, I would front-load the word TRIED in this sentence:

    RodW has TRIED to entangle Ron Unz in his coils and made Unz and this website plus the validity of alternative news and discussion websites the topic of the thread (or tried to).

    Ron Unz promptly knocked RodW’s attempts out of the park above.

    A re-review of RodW’s series of postings shows that although unsuccessful, he is an operator who is quite skilled and experienced in manipulating and derailing discourse of this nature. He is clearly NOT a disinterested party. I would guess he is being paid a four-figure dollar amount (maybe FIVE FIGURE) for his skillful, often emotionally manipulative/distracting confabulations. (BTW don’t believe his claim to be English – several factors reveal him to be American.)

    The very deployment of agents such as RodW (who may also be using other handles in this thread) indicates that there is something very big being covered up at all costs. In other words, RodW’s activities are themselves EVIDENCE of deeply nefarious goings-on.

    The experience in other countries (UK, Belgium, Western Australia, doubtless many others) shows that pedophiles as a matter of basic SURVIVAL develop extensive networks of like-minded support where it counts – law enforcement, politics, the judiciary, the MSM etc. Political and legal cover is 100 times more important to a pedophile who risks lengthy jail terms and even murder than to someone who with vague political preferences like reduced CO2 emissions or even better funding for community colleges.

    Pedophilia is an INCURABLE COMPULSION which is why convicted pedophiles are subject to serious constraints AFTER serving their sentences, including “civil commitment.” What would you do if you were an ambitious, well-connected, wealthy person afflicted with this compulsion?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  115. Eagle Eye says:
    @FKA Max
    This is just an intuition, but I think you are not exactly sincere... and also a little bit too haughty for my taste.

    Good day

    concern troll ‎(plural concern trolls)

    (Internet slang) Someone who posts to an internet forum or newsgroup, claiming to share its goals while deliberately working against those goals, typically, by claiming "concern" about group plans to engage in productive activity, urging members instead to attempt some activity that would damage the group's credibility, or alternatively to give up on group projects entirely.
     
    - https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/concern_troll

    “CONCERN TROLL” – exactly. Clearly, RodW (and utu) are on a mission to distract from Pizzagate.

    BTW here are some fascinating outlines of techniques we see (but don’t perceive) used every day by skilled “concern trolls” etc. to derail or misdirect forum discussions that displease important interests:

    (1) http://whowhatwhy.org/2016/01/27/disinformation-part-1-how-trolls-control-an-internet-forum/

    (2) http://whowhatwhy.org/2016/02/02/disinformation-part-2-detailed-tips-for-trolls/

    (3) http://whowhatwhy.org/2016/02/11/disinformation-part-3-cointelpro-up-close-and-personal/

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  116. Eagle Eye says:
    @RodW
    You'll recall that I was challenged to explain the relevant email, and a convenient link was provided to it. That's why I 'glommed' onto it. (And can you stop using haughty, insinuating language since we're all so sensitive here.)

    The person who issued the challenge hasn't yet shown that my interpretation is likely to be wrong. Instead, he ignored it and indulged in some infantile psychobabble about the English.

    I've shown that one piece of evidence claimed to be inexplicable code is in fact not code and not inexplicable. Online you can find plenty of other analyses of the other emails, which show the 'sinister' parts in their original context. I'm not a policeman or a prosecutor, but I daresay at least one policeman or prosecutor somewhere in the US has looked at the evidence and decided that it wouldn't stand up in court.

    Pizzagate is a lot of barking up the wrong tree. Looking at John Podesta's efforts to derail Democratic Party democracy would be a much more practical and just way to discredit the man, if that's the goal. He's one of the guilty ones there, not Vladimir Putin. But I digress. Because I'm a gatekeeper who wants to throw you off the cheese and pasta trail.

    Explain handkerchief and map in full context in John Podesta’s Wikileaks emails.

    Also, what was the alleged pizza delivery from Hawaii for $65,000 really about?

    Hypotheses based on seemingly minor observations can lead to much larger discoveries. The planet Uranus was discovered in the 19th century because the orbit of Neptune seemed perturbed relative to what it “should be.”

    Later, it was discovered that even Uranus did not fully explain the perturbation of Nepture’s orbit. Further analysis led to the discovery of Pluto in 1930 after several unwitting sightings.

    Read More
    • Replies: @RodW

    Explain handkerchief and map in full context in John Podesta’s Wikileaks emails.

    Also, what was the alleged pizza delivery from Hawaii for $65,000 really about?
     
    No. Explain it yourself. I met your challenge, now you meet mine. Let's have some reciprocity here.

    Although I'm getting paid handsomely for posting here, and as much free cheese and pizza as I can eat, I simply can't be bothered to explain everything.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  117. Skeptikal says:

    “But the misdirection worked. They succeeded. Who talks about pay to play now?”

    I think Erebus is closer to the point when he/she suggests that the “fake News” meme was the vehicle of misdirection away from pay to play and other Clinton Foundation peccadilloes.
    The fake news meme did in fact take over and it is still be blared from the MSM bullhorns.

    If Pizzagate was launched as misdirection from pay to play, it sure hasn’t worked, since no one is talking about Pizzagate except a few at the Unz Review. That is, Pizzagate has not overshadowed anythihg or drawn any attention away from anything. Whereas the fake news meme certainly has. So, again, Utu’s conclusion to me is not grounded in reality. His closer, “Pizzagate is for suckers,” is another indication that he/she is attemptting to lay a false lead away from Pizzagate without offering any basis to do so, except to try to picture Pizzagate as a misdirction away from Pay to Play and ridicule anyone who has other ideas. I consider this proposition pretty silly—in fact, only for suckers. Who let themselves be led by Utu and RodW and Corporal Clegger types who have an obvious agenda of deleligitimizing perfectly reasonable observations about the Pizzagate funny business.

    A sideline on fake news and the Russian hacker story (part of the actual fake news): In the current issue of Harvard magazine I read this stated as an established fact, neither qualified nor documented in any way: “The 2016 digital break-in at the Democratic National Committee’s headquarters was like a modern iteration of Watergate, but initiated by a foreign power seeking to interfere in teh presidential election” (58). Say, what? This will now be quoted as a documented fact, because it has appeared in a supposedly reliable print medium.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  118. Eagle Eye says:

    “PAY TO PLAY” is no longer discussed for the same reason that GRAVITY is no longer discussed: everyone accepts it is there, and there is general consensus about how it works in practice. Political junkies may be interested in the minute details, but nobody disputes the basic picture.

    Hillary’s countless influence-selling scams, the Haiti “adoption”/child harvesting scandal etc. are well known to anyone interested in finding out. Nobody outside the DC/Georgetown dinner party circuit really argues that Hillary is NOT fundamentally corrupt.

    PIZZAGATE alone remains the subject of massive attempts at obfuscation, misdirection, ad hominem attacks against anyone willing to raise the subject, etc. Moreover, it clearly involves a number of people beyond core Hillary campaign players.

    PREDICTION: Look for further strange developments including convenient “suicides,” generous divorce settlements, strange elevations and demotions of individuals with pertinent knowledge (like Arlen Specter), etc.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  119. Skeptikal says:

    How does Arlen Specter fit in? I must have missed something.

    Surely Huma Abedin and her caro sposo are two to watch.
    Can anyone launch a freedom of information act regarding the contents of the computer?
    Is there nothing the public can do to push this?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Eagle Eye
    Sorry, Skeptical - reference to Arlen Specter was intended as a historical example of someone who rode a little knowledge in a sensitive case (JFK assassination) to high office. Should have been omitted or at least elaborated. Going forward, look for surprising career jumps for certain FBI and NYPD folks.

    Huma Abedin and her caro sposo are no doubt a mine of information, especially since Anthony appears to have acted as the brains of the operation, i.e. as an informal adviser to Hillary through Huma, certainly with Hillary's knowledge. (Remember the Clintons seem to have introduced the couple and Bill officiated at the wedding.)

    It is likely that Trump promised not to go after Hillary as part of a post-election deal. In return, Hillary conceded the election, and probably also gave an undertaking not to challenge any results directly. (Hence the Shill Stein shenanigans.)

    Huma and Anthony are probably NOT involved in Pizzagate themselves (whatever Pizzagate may turn out to be in substance). They have their own problems to contend with - Anthony's compulsive "sexting" and Muslim Brotherhood affiliation of Huma and her family.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  120. RodW says:
    @Eagle Eye
    Explain handkerchief and map in full context in John Podesta's Wikileaks emails.

    Also, what was the alleged pizza delivery from Hawaii for $65,000 really about?

    Hypotheses based on seemingly minor observations can lead to much larger discoveries. The planet Uranus was discovered in the 19th century because the orbit of Neptune seemed perturbed relative to what it "should be."

    Later, it was discovered that even Uranus did not fully explain the perturbation of Nepture's orbit. Further analysis led to the discovery of Pluto in 1930 after several unwitting sightings.

    Explain handkerchief and map in full context in John Podesta’s Wikileaks emails.

    Also, what was the alleged pizza delivery from Hawaii for $65,000 really about?

    No. Explain it yourself. I met your challenge, now you meet mine. Let’s have some reciprocity here.

    Although I’m getting paid handsomely for posting here, and as much free cheese and pizza as I can eat, I simply can’t be bothered to explain everything.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  121. Eagle Eye says:
    @Skeptikal
    How does Arlen Specter fit in? I must have missed something.

    Surely Huma Abedin and her caro sposo are two to watch.
    Can anyone launch a freedom of information act regarding the contents of the computer?
    Is there nothing the public can do to push this?

    Sorry, Skeptical – reference to Arlen Specter was intended as a historical example of someone who rode a little knowledge in a sensitive case (JFK assassination) to high office. Should have been omitted or at least elaborated. Going forward, look for surprising career jumps for certain FBI and NYPD folks.

    Huma Abedin and her caro sposo are no doubt a mine of information, especially since Anthony appears to have acted as the brains of the operation, i.e. as an informal adviser to Hillary through Huma, certainly with Hillary’s knowledge. (Remember the Clintons seem to have introduced the couple and Bill officiated at the wedding.)

    It is likely that Trump promised not to go after Hillary as part of a post-election deal. In return, Hillary conceded the election, and probably also gave an undertaking not to challenge any results directly. (Hence the Shill Stein shenanigans.)

    Huma and Anthony are probably NOT involved in Pizzagate themselves (whatever Pizzagate may turn out to be in substance). They have their own problems to contend with – Anthony’s compulsive “sexting” and Muslim Brotherhood affiliation of Huma and her family.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Skeptikal
    "They have their own problems to contend with – Anthony’s compulsive “sexting” and Muslim Brotherhood affiliation of Huma and her family."

    Yes, I didn't assume that they did have any particular connection with Pizzagate (aside from what is on Weiner's laptop??), but they certainly fall under the rubric of personages to watch because (I read somewhere) that Huma had already made a deal of some kind with the Feds in return for immunity.
    What would Wiener be advising Hillary about?
    William Engdahl's piece a few weeks ago (on Huma, her mom, and her role in the Muslim Brotherhood) was excellent. Real eye-opener.
    http://journal-neo.org/2016/11/04/the-real-huma-gate-crime-is-the-muslim-brotherhood/

    And raised for me the intriguing possibility that Huma had been subjected to genital mutilation as a child (her mother is a strong advocate of same), and this might be one small piece in the weird enigma of her marriage to AW.

    Re Arlen Specter, I am still missing the connection of how he rode a little knowledge to high office. Can you elaborate?

    Re trolls, I just read this at WhoWhatWhy, and it is like our RodW has been following the tips for trolls right down the line and checking them off. Come on, RodW, show some originality!!
    http://whowhatwhy.org/2016/02/02/disinformation-part-2-detailed-tips-for-trolls/
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  122. Skeptikal says:
    @Eagle Eye
    Sorry, Skeptical - reference to Arlen Specter was intended as a historical example of someone who rode a little knowledge in a sensitive case (JFK assassination) to high office. Should have been omitted or at least elaborated. Going forward, look for surprising career jumps for certain FBI and NYPD folks.

    Huma Abedin and her caro sposo are no doubt a mine of information, especially since Anthony appears to have acted as the brains of the operation, i.e. as an informal adviser to Hillary through Huma, certainly with Hillary's knowledge. (Remember the Clintons seem to have introduced the couple and Bill officiated at the wedding.)

    It is likely that Trump promised not to go after Hillary as part of a post-election deal. In return, Hillary conceded the election, and probably also gave an undertaking not to challenge any results directly. (Hence the Shill Stein shenanigans.)

    Huma and Anthony are probably NOT involved in Pizzagate themselves (whatever Pizzagate may turn out to be in substance). They have their own problems to contend with - Anthony's compulsive "sexting" and Muslim Brotherhood affiliation of Huma and her family.

    “They have their own problems to contend with – Anthony’s compulsive “sexting” and Muslim Brotherhood affiliation of Huma and her family.”

    Yes, I didn’t assume that they did have any particular connection with Pizzagate (aside from what is on Weiner’s laptop??), but they certainly fall under the rubric of personages to watch because (I read somewhere) that Huma had already made a deal of some kind with the Feds in return for immunity.
    What would Wiener be advising Hillary about?
    William Engdahl’s piece a few weeks ago (on Huma, her mom, and her role in the Muslim Brotherhood) was excellent. Real eye-opener.

    http://journal-neo.org/2016/11/04/the-real-huma-gate-crime-is-the-muslim-brotherhood/

    And raised for me the intriguing possibility that Huma had been subjected to genital mutilation as a child (her mother is a strong advocate of same), and this might be one small piece in the weird enigma of her marriage to AW.

    Re Arlen Specter, I am still missing the connection of how he rode a little knowledge to high office. Can you elaborate?

    Re trolls, I just read this at WhoWhatWhy, and it is like our RodW has been following the tips for trolls right down the line and checking them off. Come on, RodW, show some originality!!

    http://whowhatwhy.org/2016/02/02/disinformation-part-2-detailed-tips-for-trolls/

    Read More
    • Replies: @Eagle Eye
    Slightly off-topic response re Specter, but it illustrates a larger point often made on this site: power inside the political establishment is based in significant part on secret insider knowledge of embarrassing facts. This knowledge is routinely exploited for blackmail for financial and political gain.

    Perhaps the most famous example of this is one Hillary Rodham Clinton who worked as an attorney staffer for the Watergate impeachment inquiry until she was fired for dishonesty. (Fancy that.)

    Specter apparently invented the "magic bullet" theory of the JFK assassination. Here is Wikipedia - usually a reliable source where anti-Left material is concerned:


    Specter worked for Lyndon Johnson's Warren Commission, which investigated the assassination of John F. Kennedy, at the recommendation of Representative Gerald Ford, who was then one of the Commissioners. As an assistant for the commission, he co-wrote the proposal of[18] the "single bullet theory," which suggested the non-fatal wounds to Kennedy and wounds to Texas Governor John Connally were caused by the same bullet. This was a crucial assertion for the Warren Commission, since if the two had been wounded by separate bullets within such a short time frame, that would have demonstrated the presence of a second assassin and therefore a conspiracy.[19]
     
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  123. Eagle Eye says:
    @Skeptikal
    "They have their own problems to contend with – Anthony’s compulsive “sexting” and Muslim Brotherhood affiliation of Huma and her family."

    Yes, I didn't assume that they did have any particular connection with Pizzagate (aside from what is on Weiner's laptop??), but they certainly fall under the rubric of personages to watch because (I read somewhere) that Huma had already made a deal of some kind with the Feds in return for immunity.
    What would Wiener be advising Hillary about?
    William Engdahl's piece a few weeks ago (on Huma, her mom, and her role in the Muslim Brotherhood) was excellent. Real eye-opener.
    http://journal-neo.org/2016/11/04/the-real-huma-gate-crime-is-the-muslim-brotherhood/

    And raised for me the intriguing possibility that Huma had been subjected to genital mutilation as a child (her mother is a strong advocate of same), and this might be one small piece in the weird enigma of her marriage to AW.

    Re Arlen Specter, I am still missing the connection of how he rode a little knowledge to high office. Can you elaborate?

    Re trolls, I just read this at WhoWhatWhy, and it is like our RodW has been following the tips for trolls right down the line and checking them off. Come on, RodW, show some originality!!
    http://whowhatwhy.org/2016/02/02/disinformation-part-2-detailed-tips-for-trolls/

    Slightly off-topic response re Specter, but it illustrates a larger point often made on this site: power inside the political establishment is based in significant part on secret insider knowledge of embarrassing facts. This knowledge is routinely exploited for blackmail for financial and political gain.

    Perhaps the most famous example of this is one Hillary Rodham Clinton who worked as an attorney staffer for the Watergate impeachment inquiry until she was fired for dishonesty. (Fancy that.)

    Specter apparently invented the “magic bullet” theory of the JFK assassination. Here is Wikipedia – usually a reliable source where anti-Left material is concerned:

    Specter worked for Lyndon Johnson’s Warren Commission, which investigated the assassination of John F. Kennedy, at the recommendation of Representative Gerald Ford, who was then one of the Commissioners. As an assistant for the commission, he co-wrote the proposal of[18] the “single bullet theory,” which suggested the non-fatal wounds to Kennedy and wounds to Texas Governor John Connally were caused by the same bullet. This was a crucial assertion for the Warren Commission, since if the two had been wounded by separate bullets within such a short time frame, that would have demonstrated the presence of a second assassin and therefore a conspiracy.[19]

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  124. Eagle Eye says:
    @FKA Max
    Rod,

    don't apologize to me for being haughty.

    Apologize to Mr. Unz and the other commenters.


    I’m not trolling, but I am concerned.

    I’ve enjoyed reading Unz.com for the last year or so, and I’ve recommended it to several friends who appeared unduly addled by MSM disinformation. Even though they were the sort of PC people who would likely be outraged by Fred Reed or John Derbyshire, I felt confident that they’d learn something useful just by reading a few things on the site.

    But after the Pizzagate articles appeared, I feel a lot less inclined to point people to Unz.com. Because you can argue about opinions and argue in favour or against, but there’s no argument to be made for evidence that’s junk on the face of it.

    I make no apology for stating that the Pizzagate evidence is made-up drivel, and that Ron Unz should get a proper handle on it if he wants to be taken at all seriously.
     
    I suggest you contact your friends you recommended the Unz Review to, and simply revoke your recommendation, because I feel, that that seems to be your biggest concern. It is as simple as that. Just tell them, that you feel that the Unz Review publishing two (2) Pizzagate related articles has made you lose confidence in the publication and that the Unz Review has lost all its credibility in your eyes due to it publishing these two (2) Pizzagate articles by Mr. Cassiel.

    I personally believe, that this is tossing the baby out with the bathwater, but if you feel this strongly and are this concerned about the issue, this is the route I recommend you take. You will sleep better at night.

    Nice come-back!

    Meanwhile, RodW and his sock puppets utu and landlubber were asked to explain what the code terms

    “handkerchief” and “map”

    mean in the context of Podesta’s Wikileaks emails.

    And what’s the deal with the $65,000 pizza delivery from Hawaii?

    CRICKETS!

    Read More
    • Replies: @FKA Max

    And what’s the deal with the $65,000 pizza delivery from Hawaii?
     
    I think the $65,000 pizza/hot dog delivery was supposed to have been flown in from Chicago, not from Hawaii, if I am not mistaken. I think John Podesta was dreaming about having a hot dog stand on Hawaii after retirement or something like that, if I remember correctly, and that was/is just a running joke among him and his friends and family.

    I am personally not too terribly focused on the alleged pizza/pasta, etc. code language in the Podesta emails - and it being allegedly linked to pedophilia, etc. - myself. It could really just be innocent ``foodie'' talk/language and a ``foodie'' obsession with Italian food. The Podesta brothers are, after all, of Italian descent. What gave me pause was, that they are/were close friends with Dennis Hastert, but even that is not too out of the ordinary since they have been high-powered lobbyists in D.C. for decades.

    James Alefantis on the other hand seems to be genuinely debauched and likely attracted to young teenage boys, or at least hang out with people with this type of sexual preference, but again, this in and of itself is not a crime. Alefantis seems to have spent much time in Europe, specifically in Berlin, Germany. The age of consent in Germany and Italy, for example, is only 14 at the moment, so he could legally engage in consensual sexual activity with teenagers in those countries: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_consent

    The angle, that personally interests me the most about Pizzagate
    is the connection of the Clintons to Jeffrey Epstein, and the potential link to Israeli/Mossad drug/weapons trafficking and the Podestas' potential involvement with tax-evasion and the laundering of this drug/dark money (pay for play, etc.) through modern artwork purchases, charitable foundations, etc.. I briefly touched upon this here: http://www.unz.com/article/precedents-for-pizzagate/#comment-1708044 & http://www.unz.com/article/precedents-for-pizzagate/#comment-1708349

    I believe that Jeffrey Epstein - like Mark Rich [ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marc_Rich#U.S._indictment_and_pardon ] and Robert Maxwell [ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Maxwell#Mossad_allegations.3B_Vanunu_case ] before him - is an Israeli/Mossad intelligence asset tasked to befriend and if possible entrap and then blackmail high-level political and business players - particularly in the U.S. and in the UK - through extra-marital affairs, under-age sex, or illicit drug use, etc.:


    I agree, this is probably the most important takeaway from this entire situation/scandal:

    I would venture the suggestion that people with a compulsion towards sexual contact with children are identified early in their careers and consequently put forward for rapid progress within government institutions by those working behind the scene to exercise control over others with decision making capacity in the highest levels of government. [emphasis added]

    Besides being attracted to teenage girls himself, Jeffrey Epstein also allegedly tried to do exactly that:

    Papers filed in 2006 alleged that Epstein installed concealed cameras in numerous places on his property to record sexual activity with underage girls by prominent people for criminal purposes such as blackmail.[21]
     

    - http://www.unz.com/article/pizzagate/#comment-1690740

    Robert Maxwell is the father of Ghislaine Maxwell, who is close friends with Jeffery Epstein
     

    - http://www.unz.com/article/pizzagate/#comment-1674224

    As to RodW and his merry band of Pizzagate debunkers... if he was truly as well-intentioned as he professes to be, and if they were really as superiorily intelligent as they claim to be, they would know that being haughty and insulting people is the surest way NOT to convince others of their point of view.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  125. utu says:

    “Coler says his writers have tried to write fake news for liberals — but they just never take the bait.

    Coler’s company, Disinfomedia, owns many faux news sites — he won’t say how many. But he says his is one of the biggest fake-news businesses out there, which makes him a sort of godfather of the industry.”

    “However, Coler insists this is not about money. It’s about showing how easily fake news spreads. And fake news spread wide and far before the election. When I pointed out to Coler that the money gave him a lot of incentive to keep doing it regardless of the impact, he admitted that was “correct.””

    We Tracked Down A Fake-News Creator In The Suburbs. Here’s What We Learned

    http://www.npr.org/sections/alltechconsidered/2016/11/23/503146770/npr-finds-the-head-of-a-covert-fake-news-operation-in-the-suburbs

    Meet NPR’ Poster-boy for the “Fake News” Crisis, Jestin Coler – an Obama Administration Cognitive Infiltration Asset

    https://willyloman.wordpress.com/category/cass-sunstein-2/

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  126. FKA Max says:
    @Eagle Eye
    Nice come-back!

    Meanwhile, RodW and his sock puppets utu and landlubber were asked to explain what the code terms

    "handkerchief" and "map"

    mean in the context of Podesta's Wikileaks emails.

    And what's the deal with the $65,000 pizza delivery from Hawaii?

    CRICKETS!

    And what’s the deal with the $65,000 pizza delivery from Hawaii?

    I think the $65,000 pizza/hot dog delivery was supposed to have been flown in from Chicago, not from Hawaii, if I am not mistaken. I think John Podesta was dreaming about having a hot dog stand on Hawaii after retirement or something like that, if I remember correctly, and that was/is just a running joke among him and his friends and family.

    I am personally not too terribly focused on the alleged pizza/pasta, etc. code language in the Podesta emails – and it being allegedly linked to pedophilia, etc. – myself. It could really just be innocent “foodie” talk/language and a “foodie” obsession with Italian food. The Podesta brothers are, after all, of Italian descent. What gave me pause was, that they are/were close friends with Dennis Hastert, but even that is not too out of the ordinary since they have been high-powered lobbyists in D.C. for decades.

    James Alefantis on the other hand seems to be genuinely debauched and likely attracted to young teenage boys, or at least hang out with people with this type of sexual preference, but again, this in and of itself is not a crime. Alefantis seems to have spent much time in Europe, specifically in Berlin, Germany. The age of consent in Germany and Italy, for example, is only 14 at the moment, so he could legally engage in consensual sexual activity with teenagers in those countries: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_consent

    The angle, that personally interests me the most about Pizzagate
    is the connection of the Clintons to Jeffrey Epstein, and the potential link to Israeli/Mossad drug/weapons trafficking and the Podestas’ potential involvement with tax-evasion and the laundering of this drug/dark money (pay for play, etc.) through modern artwork purchases, charitable foundations, etc.. I briefly touched upon this here: http://www.unz.com/article/precedents-for-pizzagate/#comment-1708044 & http://www.unz.com/article/precedents-for-pizzagate/#comment-1708349

    I believe that Jeffrey Epstein – like Mark Rich (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marc_Rich#U.S._indictment_and_pardon ] and Robert Maxwell (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Maxwell#Mossad_allegations.3B_Vanunu_case ] before him – is an Israeli/Mossad intelligence asset tasked to befriend and if possible entrap and then blackmail high-level political and business players – particularly in the U.S. and in the UK – through extra-marital affairs, under-age sex, or illicit drug use, etc.:

    I agree, this is probably the most important takeaway from this entire situation/scandal:

    I would venture the suggestion that people with a compulsion towards sexual contact with children are identified early in their careers and consequently put forward for rapid progress within government institutions by those working behind the scene to exercise control over others with decision making capacity in the highest levels of government. [emphasis added]

    Besides being attracted to teenage girls himself, Jeffrey Epstein also allegedly tried to do exactly that:

    Papers filed in 2006 alleged that Epstein installed concealed cameras in numerous places on his property to record sexual activity with underage girls by prominent people for criminal purposes such as blackmail.[21]

    http://www.unz.com/article/pizzagate/#comment-1690740

    Robert Maxwell is the father of Ghislaine Maxwell, who is close friends with Jeffery Epstein

    http://www.unz.com/article/pizzagate/#comment-1674224

    As to RodW and his merry band of Pizzagate debunkers… if he was truly as well-intentioned as he professes to be, and if they were really as superiorily intelligent as they claim to be, they would know that being haughty and insulting people is the surest way NOT to convince others of their point of view.

    Read More
    • Replies: @RodW

    The angle, that personally interests me the most about Pizzagate
    is the connection of the Clintons to Jeffrey Epstein, and the potential link to Israeli/Mossad drug/weapons trafficking and the Podestas’ potential involvement with tax-evasion and the laundering of this drug/dark money (pay for play, etc.) through modern artwork purchases, charitable foundations, etc.
     
    That's got nothing to do with 'Pizzagate', and linking it with Pizzagate makes it less likely to receive the attention it deserves.

    The evidence for these things doesn't appear to be completely made up as it is for Pizzagate, so I'd like to see it investigated. Fox does sometimes do some real journalism, so I'm glad to see they're pursuing it.

    As to RodW and his merry band of Pizzagate debunkers
     
    There is no 'merry band'. A couple of other participants in this forum apparently aren't persuaded by the 'evidence' for Pizzagate, that's all.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  127. It is commenters such as yourself and those of like minds that contribute to unz.com and help to make it such a wonderful pro-American free- speech site in the truest sense of the term. Kudos to Ron Unz also for all of his hard work.

    As a non-American myself, though a person who lived and loved amongst Americans for many years, I can vouch for the fact that most of you are a generous and open hearted people for whom I wish nothing but good for in the future. This will not happen though unless drastic action is taken. It is very clear to me that America is constantly being steered away from achieving its potential for good and has been highjacked by a small minority with nefarious aims.

    I believe that Pizzagate is potentially a crack in the armour of this evil and that once it is prised open it would reveal a stinking and cancerous tumour that has infected the nation and would present an opportunity to do some radical and much needed surgery. It must be done.

    Doing harm to children is a despicable act in itself and should always be investigated and dealt with to the fullest extent of the law, covering up and enabling it is also a great wrong. Doing harm to the nation is quite simply treason and should be punishable even more harshly. In fact it is one of the very few crimes in Britain still on the books as being punishable by death, along with fire in the King’s shipyards ;o).

    Commenters like Corporal Clugg reveal their true intentions by using emotive terms like the Podestas being HARASSED by police! Since when is ‘helping the police with their enquiries’ harassment? Good citizens are only too happy to assist the police and recognise it as a duty towards a good and just society.

    Thanks to all who agree that a thorough and open investigation is warranted, you constantly restore my faith in humanity. All the best for 2017.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  128. RodW says:
    @FKA Max

    And what’s the deal with the $65,000 pizza delivery from Hawaii?
     
    I think the $65,000 pizza/hot dog delivery was supposed to have been flown in from Chicago, not from Hawaii, if I am not mistaken. I think John Podesta was dreaming about having a hot dog stand on Hawaii after retirement or something like that, if I remember correctly, and that was/is just a running joke among him and his friends and family.

    I am personally not too terribly focused on the alleged pizza/pasta, etc. code language in the Podesta emails - and it being allegedly linked to pedophilia, etc. - myself. It could really just be innocent ``foodie'' talk/language and a ``foodie'' obsession with Italian food. The Podesta brothers are, after all, of Italian descent. What gave me pause was, that they are/were close friends with Dennis Hastert, but even that is not too out of the ordinary since they have been high-powered lobbyists in D.C. for decades.

    James Alefantis on the other hand seems to be genuinely debauched and likely attracted to young teenage boys, or at least hang out with people with this type of sexual preference, but again, this in and of itself is not a crime. Alefantis seems to have spent much time in Europe, specifically in Berlin, Germany. The age of consent in Germany and Italy, for example, is only 14 at the moment, so he could legally engage in consensual sexual activity with teenagers in those countries: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_consent

    The angle, that personally interests me the most about Pizzagate
    is the connection of the Clintons to Jeffrey Epstein, and the potential link to Israeli/Mossad drug/weapons trafficking and the Podestas' potential involvement with tax-evasion and the laundering of this drug/dark money (pay for play, etc.) through modern artwork purchases, charitable foundations, etc.. I briefly touched upon this here: http://www.unz.com/article/precedents-for-pizzagate/#comment-1708044 & http://www.unz.com/article/precedents-for-pizzagate/#comment-1708349

    I believe that Jeffrey Epstein - like Mark Rich [ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marc_Rich#U.S._indictment_and_pardon ] and Robert Maxwell [ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Maxwell#Mossad_allegations.3B_Vanunu_case ] before him - is an Israeli/Mossad intelligence asset tasked to befriend and if possible entrap and then blackmail high-level political and business players - particularly in the U.S. and in the UK - through extra-marital affairs, under-age sex, or illicit drug use, etc.:


    I agree, this is probably the most important takeaway from this entire situation/scandal:

    I would venture the suggestion that people with a compulsion towards sexual contact with children are identified early in their careers and consequently put forward for rapid progress within government institutions by those working behind the scene to exercise control over others with decision making capacity in the highest levels of government. [emphasis added]

    Besides being attracted to teenage girls himself, Jeffrey Epstein also allegedly tried to do exactly that:

    Papers filed in 2006 alleged that Epstein installed concealed cameras in numerous places on his property to record sexual activity with underage girls by prominent people for criminal purposes such as blackmail.[21]
     

    - http://www.unz.com/article/pizzagate/#comment-1690740

    Robert Maxwell is the father of Ghislaine Maxwell, who is close friends with Jeffery Epstein
     

    - http://www.unz.com/article/pizzagate/#comment-1674224

    As to RodW and his merry band of Pizzagate debunkers... if he was truly as well-intentioned as he professes to be, and if they were really as superiorily intelligent as they claim to be, they would know that being haughty and insulting people is the surest way NOT to convince others of their point of view.

    The angle, that personally interests me the most about Pizzagate
    is the connection of the Clintons to Jeffrey Epstein, and the potential link to Israeli/Mossad drug/weapons trafficking and the Podestas’ potential involvement with tax-evasion and the laundering of this drug/dark money (pay for play, etc.) through modern artwork purchases, charitable foundations, etc.

    That’s got nothing to do with ‘Pizzagate’, and linking it with Pizzagate makes it less likely to receive the attention it deserves.

    The evidence for these things doesn’t appear to be completely made up as it is for Pizzagate, so I’d like to see it investigated. Fox does sometimes do some real journalism, so I’m glad to see they’re pursuing it.

    As to RodW and his merry band of Pizzagate debunkers

    There is no ‘merry band’. A couple of other participants in this forum apparently aren’t persuaded by the ‘evidence’ for Pizzagate, that’s all.

    Read More
    • Replies: @NoseytheDuke
    There is no ‘merry band’. A couple of other participants in this forum apparently aren’t persuaded by the ‘evidence’ for Pizzagate, that’s all.

    Fine, so you and a couple of other participants in this forum are not convinced by the evidence for Pizzagate. That is certainly no reason why an investigation into allegations of sexual exploitation should not be undertaken. A very simple rule when dealing with children is to always put the interests of the children first, follow this and one can hardly go wrong.

    FKA Max has done an excellent job of laying out the different types of "evidence", as you put it, and how they might converge and given the fact that a broad range of evidence concerns people in positions of power and some of it includes people with a past history of criminal activities with children, an investigation is doubly warranted due to a possibility of blackmail being employed at the highest levels of government.

    That means there are two very good reasons for this matter to be investigated and I am at a loss to understand why you and the other participants are so devoted to squashing the very idea.

    If an investigation (an open and thorough one) reveals nothing then at least we will all know that due diligence in the interest of child welfare and the interests of the nation has been done. On what grounds do you object to that?

    , @FKA Max

    That’s got nothing to do with ‘Pizzagate’, and linking it with Pizzagate makes it less likely to receive the attention it deserves.
     
    I think precisely the opposite is true, Rod.

    Recently American voters were polled, and nearly half of Republicans and almost 20% (!!!) of Democrats stated, that they thought, there was some validity to Pizzagate.

    Nearly half of Donald Trump voters believe in "Pizzagate," according to a new poll from The Economist/YouGov.

    Interestingly, 17 percent of Clinton supporters also agreed that the leaked emails from Clinton campaign chair John Podesta used code words to discuss a pedophilia and human trafficking ring, a disproven theory that began circulating online shortly before the election.
     
    - http://dcist.com/2016/12/poll.php

    Pizzagate
    has become an umbrella term and rallying cry for a movement of investigators and activists from both sides of the aisle, who are suspicious of the dealings and fed up with the corruption in D.C.. Just like the term Alt Right has become an umbrella term for a movement in which not everybody considers themselves to be a race realist and/or 'red-pilled' on the 'Jewish Question,' when these are the two main tenets/pillars of the 'core' Alt Right movement/world view.

    Pizzagate is a 'gateway drug' for 'normies' into a much bigger and wider field of elite corruption research.

    Case in point: PizzagateWiki http://pizzagate.wiki/Main_Page

    PizzaGate Update: DynCorp Hacked PizzaGate Website?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KLVZ9sxdVRM

    Streamed live 15 hours ago

    New evidence suggests DynCorp may have hacked the PizzaGate Wiki website. Dyncorp is a company that has been mentioned by PizzaGate researchers as it has been engaged in several crimes including child trafficking for decades, yet the company continues to receive massive amounts of money from the U.S government. More recently, a number of their employees were also recorded exploiting an adolescent boy under the approval of a company manager. Clinton and the media worked together to cover up this incident in order to protect the company responsible for these actions. There are other potential connections between this company, the government, and the pizzagate scandal through possible connections to Jeffrey Epstein and child trafficking in Haiti.

    Connection to aircraft shared by Jeffrey Epstein, the CIA, and DynCorp
    http://pizzagate.wiki/DynCorp#Connection_to_aircraft_shared_by_Jeffrey_Epstein.2C_the_CIA.2C_and_DynCorp

    For the record: I am not at all a fan of 'super patriot' Erik Price, nor of his sister Betsy DeVos.

    The infiltration and invasion of the ‘Alt Lite’ (not the Alt Right) by the Zionist-Vatican alliance intensifies:
    An Honest Conversation About Blackwater | Erik Prince and Stefan Molyneux [...] Infowars has tons of Vatican connections just like the Murdoch media empire [...] This is a somewhat ‘kooky’ website, but he has been documenting Alex Jones’ connection to the Vatican for years
     
    - http://www.unz.com/article/npis-spencer-vs-politcos-hirsh-etc/#comment-1665634

    Not being Donald Trump, but especially not being Steve Bannon fanboys is the key to Make America truly Great Again… in my humble opinion.

    Ann Coulter is doing a great job of putting pressure on Trump, Bannon, et al. [...] I tried to give Steve Bannon the benefit of the doubt, but I think you are pretty much spot on with your characterization of him ‘He sounds very much like a Catholic neocon type.
     
    - http://www.unz.com/article/the-empire-strikes-back-the-msms-3-point-plan-to-recapture-the-narrative/#comment-1673513
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  129. @RodW

    The angle, that personally interests me the most about Pizzagate
    is the connection of the Clintons to Jeffrey Epstein, and the potential link to Israeli/Mossad drug/weapons trafficking and the Podestas’ potential involvement with tax-evasion and the laundering of this drug/dark money (pay for play, etc.) through modern artwork purchases, charitable foundations, etc.
     
    That's got nothing to do with 'Pizzagate', and linking it with Pizzagate makes it less likely to receive the attention it deserves.

    The evidence for these things doesn't appear to be completely made up as it is for Pizzagate, so I'd like to see it investigated. Fox does sometimes do some real journalism, so I'm glad to see they're pursuing it.

    As to RodW and his merry band of Pizzagate debunkers
     
    There is no 'merry band'. A couple of other participants in this forum apparently aren't persuaded by the 'evidence' for Pizzagate, that's all.

    There is no ‘merry band’. A couple of other participants in this forum apparently aren’t persuaded by the ‘evidence’ for Pizzagate, that’s all.

    Fine, so you and a couple of other participants in this forum are not convinced by the evidence for Pizzagate. That is certainly no reason why an investigation into allegations of sexual exploitation should not be undertaken. A very simple rule when dealing with children is to always put the interests of the children first, follow this and one can hardly go wrong.

    FKA Max has done an excellent job of laying out the different types of “evidence”, as you put it, and how they might converge and given the fact that a broad range of evidence concerns people in positions of power and some of it includes people with a past history of criminal activities with children, an investigation is doubly warranted due to a possibility of blackmail being employed at the highest levels of government.

    That means there are two very good reasons for this matter to be investigated and I am at a loss to understand why you and the other participants are so devoted to squashing the very idea.

    If an investigation (an open and thorough one) reveals nothing then at least we will all know that due diligence in the interest of child welfare and the interests of the nation has been done. On what grounds do you object to that?

    Read More
    • Replies: @RodW

    If an investigation (an open and thorough one) reveals nothing then at least we will all know that due diligence in the interest of child welfare and the interests of the nation has been done. On what grounds do you object to that?
     
    As I've been saying all along, there's no good evidence to support it. I don't think there's enough evidentiary basis for an investigation.

    I'm a bit of a student of conspiracy, and this is my comparison of some criminal conspiracies.

    Kennedy assassination
    Victims: POTUS and numerous persons peripherally involved
    Evidence: Physical evidence, authentic and faked photos and videos, witness testimony, perpetrator testimony
    Validation: Decades of compilation and analysis by accredited experts
    My theory: Collaboration between CIA and mafia. Motive related to Cuban policy.

    9/11
    Victims: Thousands of civilians, numerous military personnel
    Evidence: Physical evidence, authentic and faked photos and videos, witness testimony, perpetrator testimony
    Validation: Decades of compilation and analysis by accredited experts
    My theory: Collaboration between top level government cabal and Al-Qaeda (unwitting). Motive related to U.S. and Israeli hegemony

    Pizzagate
    Victims: None known
    Evidence: Text and photos taken out of context
    Validation: Acclamation by people on web forums without the slightest interest in objective truth
    My theory: The conspiracy to traffic children using a pizzeria doesn't exist

    Caveats
    My theories on Kennedy and 9/11 may be completely wrong. There are many competing theories, the evidence is highly equivocal, and I'm not an expert in most of the relevant areas. I am however highly qualified in image and text analysis, having spent my whole life at it in academic and professional contexts.

    That's my take on it. I believe that any investigation would (has already?) run into the problem of poor evidence. So, those who are calling for an investigation, how would you go about it if you were given the authority of chief investigator? What lines of enquiry would you pursue?
    , @Eagle Eye
    The very fact that RodW (likely aliases: utu, landlubber, Corporal Clegg) is trying so hard to squash any interest in Pizzagate indicates that the smoldering comes from a real fire.
    , @RodW

    A very simple rule when dealing with children is to always put the interests of the children first, follow this and one can hardly go wrong.
     
    Yes, but which children are you talking about? For them to have interests to put first, you have to be able to specify the children and their interests. So who are they, and what are their interests?

    If the answer is "I don't know", then you've got a major obstacle to an investigation.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  130. RodW says:
    @NoseytheDuke
    There is no ‘merry band’. A couple of other participants in this forum apparently aren’t persuaded by the ‘evidence’ for Pizzagate, that’s all.

    Fine, so you and a couple of other participants in this forum are not convinced by the evidence for Pizzagate. That is certainly no reason why an investigation into allegations of sexual exploitation should not be undertaken. A very simple rule when dealing with children is to always put the interests of the children first, follow this and one can hardly go wrong.

    FKA Max has done an excellent job of laying out the different types of "evidence", as you put it, and how they might converge and given the fact that a broad range of evidence concerns people in positions of power and some of it includes people with a past history of criminal activities with children, an investigation is doubly warranted due to a possibility of blackmail being employed at the highest levels of government.

    That means there are two very good reasons for this matter to be investigated and I am at a loss to understand why you and the other participants are so devoted to squashing the very idea.

    If an investigation (an open and thorough one) reveals nothing then at least we will all know that due diligence in the interest of child welfare and the interests of the nation has been done. On what grounds do you object to that?

    If an investigation (an open and thorough one) reveals nothing then at least we will all know that due diligence in the interest of child welfare and the interests of the nation has been done. On what grounds do you object to that?

    As I’ve been saying all along, there’s no good evidence to support it. I don’t think there’s enough evidentiary basis for an investigation.

    I’m a bit of a student of conspiracy, and this is my comparison of some criminal conspiracies.

    Kennedy assassination
    Victims: POTUS and numerous persons peripherally involved
    Evidence: Physical evidence, authentic and faked photos and videos, witness testimony, perpetrator testimony
    Validation: Decades of compilation and analysis by accredited experts
    My theory: Collaboration between CIA and mafia. Motive related to Cuban policy.

    9/11
    Victims: Thousands of civilians, numerous military personnel
    Evidence: Physical evidence, authentic and faked photos and videos, witness testimony, perpetrator testimony
    Validation: Decades of compilation and analysis by accredited experts
    My theory: Collaboration between top level government cabal and Al-Qaeda (unwitting). Motive related to U.S. and Israeli hegemony

    Pizzagate
    Victims: None known
    Evidence: Text and photos taken out of context
    Validation: Acclamation by people on web forums without the slightest interest in objective truth
    My theory: The conspiracy to traffic children using a pizzeria doesn’t exist

    Caveats
    My theories on Kennedy and 9/11 may be completely wrong. There are many competing theories, the evidence is highly equivocal, and I’m not an expert in most of the relevant areas. I am however highly qualified in image and text analysis, having spent my whole life at it in academic and professional contexts.

    That’s my take on it. I believe that any investigation would (has already?) run into the problem of poor evidence. So, those who are calling for an investigation, how would you go about it if you were given the authority of chief investigator? What lines of enquiry would you pursue?

    Read More
    • Replies: @NoseytheDuke
    I find it hard to believe that you are a so called conspiracy theorist and I checked your comment history to see that there is nothing there that would validate that claim, rather there is enough there in the few months of your commenting to expose you as a liar. Correct me if I am mistaken. You've attempted to ridicule other people's suspicions on other topics for discussion and I didn't see a single post in support at all. Nothing in fact that would suggest an open mind but plenty to suggest a troll who seeks to convince people to "move along, that there is nothing to see here".

    This is The Unz Review, chum, and though it is a free speech site, pure bullshit is not well received here. As to the post I'm responding to...

    JFK - No thorough and open investigation (quite the opposite)
    9/11 - No thorough and open investigation (quite the opposite)

    The thorough and open investigation of Pizzagate just could/might throw enough light onto the cover-ups of the crimes that you mentioned that finally a tipping point of public opinion is reached and real investigations would be demanded and undertaken.

    When dealing with alternative theories to huge crimes there are impossibilities, possibilities and probabilities to consider. In the cases of both JFK and 9/11 the official findings are clearly impossibilities.

    Your attitude to Pizzagate is one of just impossibilities hence no investigation is called for. You are both wrong and as mentioned, a liar.

    There exists an abundance of seemingly strange occurrences (as set out by the aforementioned FKA Max and others) that constitute evidence suggesting both possibilities and probabilities worth investigating and due to the magnitude and implications of this, pray tell what you consider is more worthy of the attention of the nation's finest given that billions are spent each year on the employment of investigators?

    I've stated previously that if one is not a "conspiracy theorist" then you must be a coincidence theorist. What an amazing coincidence that Mark Thompson would be acting much as yourself in trying to shut down discussion on totally separate matters of sex crimes involving children. What an amazing coincidence that the Podesta's pedophile friend Clement Freud would befriend the McCanns. What a coincidence that these friends would share tastes in "art" involving children that most people would find highly offensive and even perverted.

    Nobody is suggesting the selection of a tree suitable for a lynching, just an investigation. Why is that so traumatic for you to contemplate?

    Take your lies and bullshit elsewhere, creep. I expect you to disappear and reappear here with a new identity anytime soon, Eagle Eye is quite likely correct as to you having multiple IDs.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  131. Eagle Eye says:
    @NoseytheDuke
    There is no ‘merry band’. A couple of other participants in this forum apparently aren’t persuaded by the ‘evidence’ for Pizzagate, that’s all.

    Fine, so you and a couple of other participants in this forum are not convinced by the evidence for Pizzagate. That is certainly no reason why an investigation into allegations of sexual exploitation should not be undertaken. A very simple rule when dealing with children is to always put the interests of the children first, follow this and one can hardly go wrong.

    FKA Max has done an excellent job of laying out the different types of "evidence", as you put it, and how they might converge and given the fact that a broad range of evidence concerns people in positions of power and some of it includes people with a past history of criminal activities with children, an investigation is doubly warranted due to a possibility of blackmail being employed at the highest levels of government.

    That means there are two very good reasons for this matter to be investigated and I am at a loss to understand why you and the other participants are so devoted to squashing the very idea.

    If an investigation (an open and thorough one) reveals nothing then at least we will all know that due diligence in the interest of child welfare and the interests of the nation has been done. On what grounds do you object to that?

    The very fact that RodW (likely aliases: utu, landlubber, Corporal Clegg) is trying so hard to squash any interest in Pizzagate indicates that the smoldering comes from a real fire.

    Read More
    • Replies: @RodW
    A more plausible but equally wrong hypothesis is that Adeon Cassiel is paying me to keep this thread going.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  132. RodW says:
    @NoseytheDuke
    There is no ‘merry band’. A couple of other participants in this forum apparently aren’t persuaded by the ‘evidence’ for Pizzagate, that’s all.

    Fine, so you and a couple of other participants in this forum are not convinced by the evidence for Pizzagate. That is certainly no reason why an investigation into allegations of sexual exploitation should not be undertaken. A very simple rule when dealing with children is to always put the interests of the children first, follow this and one can hardly go wrong.

    FKA Max has done an excellent job of laying out the different types of "evidence", as you put it, and how they might converge and given the fact that a broad range of evidence concerns people in positions of power and some of it includes people with a past history of criminal activities with children, an investigation is doubly warranted due to a possibility of blackmail being employed at the highest levels of government.

    That means there are two very good reasons for this matter to be investigated and I am at a loss to understand why you and the other participants are so devoted to squashing the very idea.

    If an investigation (an open and thorough one) reveals nothing then at least we will all know that due diligence in the interest of child welfare and the interests of the nation has been done. On what grounds do you object to that?

    A very simple rule when dealing with children is to always put the interests of the children first, follow this and one can hardly go wrong.

    Yes, but which children are you talking about? For them to have interests to put first, you have to be able to specify the children and their interests. So who are they, and what are their interests?

    If the answer is “I don’t know”, then you’ve got a major obstacle to an investigation.

    Read More
    • Replies: @NoseytheDuke
    There usually are obstacles to investigations which is why we use trained investigators. You are really getting more and more desperate with every comment.
    , @Erebus
    I wrote this earlier (at post #136), but was unable to publish it. It's probably obsolete now, but here it is anyway.

    Yes, but which children are you talking about? For them to have interests to put first, you have to be able to specify the children and their interests. So who are they, and what are their interests?
    If the answer is “I don’t know”, then you’ve got a major obstacle to an investigation.
     
    Utter bollocks. Similar to your "challenge" that I addressed above (http://www.unz.com/article/precedents-for-pizzagate/#comment-1713738), that's another false frame. Someone "highly qualified" in "text analysis" would, of course know that, so one is (not) surprised to see you resorting to it again.
    The victim is often unknown at the start of an investigation. If a cop finds a human hand in a garbage can, he doesn't need to know the victim's identity to start an investigation. Likewise, if a couple of guys are inadvertently overheard discussing a heinous criminal act and it is reported to the police, an investigation will be opened. To be sure, the investigation would attempt, inter alia, to determine the identity of the victim(s), but even if that is never determined the investigation will normally proceed until it reaches trial, or goes cold.

    Likewise, we here at Unz don't know, and make no claims to knowing the identities of the victims. Indeed, depending on the nature of the possible crimes, they may never be known.
    As for "their interests", surely these would include not being sexually, or otherwise abused.
    As others have pointed out, the state also has interests in this case. Inter alia, they include knowing that the persons entrusted with making decisions and acting on its behalf are not criminals or vulnerable to extraordinary influence from parties hostile to the state's function and well-being.

    OTOH, we do have a public claim from a high profile source that the NYPD and the FBI are in possession of evidence of "great evil" in high places, including sexual abuse of children.
    Neither of those agencies have denied his claims, much less demanded that Prince retract his statements. Nobody has brought a libel suit against him, and Prince would know that his statements are libelous in the extreme if they were false. Ergo, the claim stands.
    Depending on the nature of the evidence, we may never learn the identities of the victims, but we may well learn the identities of the perpetrators and the nature of their crimes against both the victims and against the state. That is enough to proceed, no?

    What I, and I believe others, here at Unz are saying is that the evidence that is apparently in hand must not be allowed to moulder on the shelf until forgotten or destroyed, but to become the basis of a real, immediate investigation.
    Thanks to Wikileaks, we have the "Pizza codes" serving as a dimly recognized public tip protruding from what appears, as evidenced from a variety of sources, to be a fetid swamp of the most heinous corruption at the highest levels. That's why we can talk about it at all.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  133. RodW says:
    @Eagle Eye
    The very fact that RodW (likely aliases: utu, landlubber, Corporal Clegg) is trying so hard to squash any interest in Pizzagate indicates that the smoldering comes from a real fire.

    A more plausible but equally wrong hypothesis is that Adeon Cassiel is paying me to keep this thread going.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  134. @RodW

    If an investigation (an open and thorough one) reveals nothing then at least we will all know that due diligence in the interest of child welfare and the interests of the nation has been done. On what grounds do you object to that?
     
    As I've been saying all along, there's no good evidence to support it. I don't think there's enough evidentiary basis for an investigation.

    I'm a bit of a student of conspiracy, and this is my comparison of some criminal conspiracies.

    Kennedy assassination
    Victims: POTUS and numerous persons peripherally involved
    Evidence: Physical evidence, authentic and faked photos and videos, witness testimony, perpetrator testimony
    Validation: Decades of compilation and analysis by accredited experts
    My theory: Collaboration between CIA and mafia. Motive related to Cuban policy.

    9/11
    Victims: Thousands of civilians, numerous military personnel
    Evidence: Physical evidence, authentic and faked photos and videos, witness testimony, perpetrator testimony
    Validation: Decades of compilation and analysis by accredited experts
    My theory: Collaboration between top level government cabal and Al-Qaeda (unwitting). Motive related to U.S. and Israeli hegemony

    Pizzagate
    Victims: None known
    Evidence: Text and photos taken out of context
    Validation: Acclamation by people on web forums without the slightest interest in objective truth
    My theory: The conspiracy to traffic children using a pizzeria doesn't exist

    Caveats
    My theories on Kennedy and 9/11 may be completely wrong. There are many competing theories, the evidence is highly equivocal, and I'm not an expert in most of the relevant areas. I am however highly qualified in image and text analysis, having spent my whole life at it in academic and professional contexts.

    That's my take on it. I believe that any investigation would (has already?) run into the problem of poor evidence. So, those who are calling for an investigation, how would you go about it if you were given the authority of chief investigator? What lines of enquiry would you pursue?

    I find it hard to believe that you are a so called conspiracy theorist and I checked your comment history to see that there is nothing there that would validate that claim, rather there is enough there in the few months of your commenting to expose you as a liar. Correct me if I am mistaken. You’ve attempted to ridicule other people’s suspicions on other topics for discussion and I didn’t see a single post in support at all. Nothing in fact that would suggest an open mind but plenty to suggest a troll who seeks to convince people to “move along, that there is nothing to see here”.

    This is The Unz Review, chum, and though it is a free speech site, pure bullshit is not well received here. As to the post I’m responding to…

    JFK – No thorough and open investigation (quite the opposite)
    9/11 – No thorough and open investigation (quite the opposite)

    The thorough and open investigation of Pizzagate just could/might throw enough light onto the cover-ups of the crimes that you mentioned that finally a tipping point of public opinion is reached and real investigations would be demanded and undertaken.

    When dealing with alternative theories to huge crimes there are impossibilities, possibilities and probabilities to consider. In the cases of both JFK and 9/11 the official findings are clearly impossibilities.

    Your attitude to Pizzagate is one of just impossibilities hence no investigation is called for. You are both wrong and as mentioned, a liar.

    There exists an abundance of seemingly strange occurrences (as set out by the aforementioned FKA Max and others) that constitute evidence suggesting both possibilities and probabilities worth investigating and due to the magnitude and implications of this, pray tell what you consider is more worthy of the attention of the nation’s finest given that billions are spent each year on the employment of investigators?

    I’ve stated previously that if one is not a “conspiracy theorist” then you must be a coincidence theorist. What an amazing coincidence that Mark Thompson would be acting much as yourself in trying to shut down discussion on totally separate matters of sex crimes involving children. What an amazing coincidence that the Podesta’s pedophile friend Clement Freud would befriend the McCanns. What a coincidence that these friends would share tastes in “art” involving children that most people would find highly offensive and even perverted.

    Nobody is suggesting the selection of a tree suitable for a lynching, just an investigation. Why is that so traumatic for you to contemplate?

    Take your lies and bullshit elsewhere, creep. I expect you to disappear and reappear here with a new identity anytime soon, Eagle Eye is quite likely correct as to you having multiple IDs.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  135. @RodW

    A very simple rule when dealing with children is to always put the interests of the children first, follow this and one can hardly go wrong.
     
    Yes, but which children are you talking about? For them to have interests to put first, you have to be able to specify the children and their interests. So who are they, and what are their interests?

    If the answer is "I don't know", then you've got a major obstacle to an investigation.

    There usually are obstacles to investigations which is why we use trained investigators. You are really getting more and more desperate with every comment.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  136. RodW says:

    It was my intention to discuss the morality of publicizing Pizzagate, but I achieved something entirely different. I’ve shown to any objective observer that the proponents of Pizzagate are hysterical fantasists who make stuff up at the drop of a hat, respond with rage to reasoned argument, have a rhetorical armoury containing nothing but ad hominem, and a wildly exaggerated view of the power of online forums to affect events in the real world.

    Skeptikal, NoseytheDuke and Eagle Eye, congratulations! You’ve demonstrated that adherents of the Pizzagate fantasy are indeed loonies. You’re probably mentally unfit to be held morally responsible for the damage you may do. But the author and publisher of this site aren’t so easily excused.

    Read More
    • Agree: landlubber
    • Replies: @NoseytheDuke
    No, it was and is your intention to discredit the very suggestion of an investigation being warranted and any objective observer would likely conclude that you are now playing the victim card. You truly are pathetic. First you mention an exaggerated view of the power of online forums then in the same comment you speak of the damage that such posts can do, so which is it?

    This is not an ad hominem attack, rather it is a conclusion based upon your pathetic attempts to sway Unz commenters, unsuccessfully I might add, towards your own limited viewpoint. Certainly the hysteria that you mention has come from people like yourself (and likely even from yourself using multiple handles) using emotive terms.

    I have called you a liar, which indeed you are by claiming to be a "conspiracy theorist" while your comment history clearly shows you to be a coincidence theorist.

    Your game plan is just so transparent, and dishonest too, showing you to be an intellectual wisp here.

    You seize on one small detail of Pizzagate, attack it from all angles then claim that this proves that there is no substance at all to anything regarding Pizzagate so no need for an investigation. Other commenters here have patiently demonstrated that all of the odd facts, yes facts, taken together would definitely point to there being grounds for an investigation. This has been your transparent MO on other topics too.

    You appear to be saying that the case should be proven in order to warrant an investigation which is, I repeat, pathetic.

    , @Skeptikal
    "adherents of the Pizzagate fantasy are indeed loonies."

    Here RodW uses two of the troll tips:

    1. Label it a “Wild Rumor”: This is basically the rhetorical job that "Pizzagate fantasy" does

    2. Shoot the Messenger; Label your opponents “kooks,” . . .
    This is the rhetorical job done by RodW's favorite word, "loony," and also the ridiculous label of "adherents."

    Etc.
    See http://whowhatwhy.org/2016/02/02/disinformation-part-2-detailed-tips-for-trolls/
    As I noted earlier, RodW follows the troll tips to a T!
    He is reduced to reposting his earlier BS because it just isn't working and he can't think of anything new to say.

    Be gone, troll!!

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  137. @RodW
    It was my intention to discuss the morality of publicizing Pizzagate, but I achieved something entirely different. I've shown to any objective observer that the proponents of Pizzagate are hysterical fantasists who make stuff up at the drop of a hat, respond with rage to reasoned argument, have a rhetorical armoury containing nothing but ad hominem, and a wildly exaggerated view of the power of online forums to affect events in the real world.

    Skeptikal, NoseytheDuke and Eagle Eye, congratulations! You've demonstrated that adherents of the Pizzagate fantasy are indeed loonies. You're probably mentally unfit to be held morally responsible for the damage you may do. But the author and publisher of this site aren't so easily excused.

    No, it was and is your intention to discredit the very suggestion of an investigation being warranted and any objective observer would likely conclude that you are now playing the victim card. You truly are pathetic. First you mention an exaggerated view of the power of online forums then in the same comment you speak of the damage that such posts can do, so which is it?

    This is not an ad hominem attack, rather it is a conclusion based upon your pathetic attempts to sway Unz commenters, unsuccessfully I might add, towards your own limited viewpoint. Certainly the hysteria that you mention has come from people like yourself (and likely even from yourself using multiple handles) using emotive terms.

    I have called you a liar, which indeed you are by claiming to be a “conspiracy theorist” while your comment history clearly shows you to be a coincidence theorist.

    Your game plan is just so transparent, and dishonest too, showing you to be an intellectual wisp here.

    You seize on one small detail of Pizzagate, attack it from all angles then claim that this proves that there is no substance at all to anything regarding Pizzagate so no need for an investigation. Other commenters here have patiently demonstrated that all of the odd facts, yes facts, taken together would definitely point to there being grounds for an investigation. This has been your transparent MO on other topics too.

    You appear to be saying that the case should be proven in order to warrant an investigation which is, I repeat, pathetic.

    Read More
    • Replies: @NoseytheDuke
    I must concede that you (RonW) did not identify yourself as a conspiracy theorist, rather as a "student of conspiracies", an uncommon term which you used in the context of being supportive of the so called conspiracy theories regarding the assassination of JFK (for which the term conspiracy theorist came into common usage) and of 9/11.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  138. @NoseytheDuke
    No, it was and is your intention to discredit the very suggestion of an investigation being warranted and any objective observer would likely conclude that you are now playing the victim card. You truly are pathetic. First you mention an exaggerated view of the power of online forums then in the same comment you speak of the damage that such posts can do, so which is it?

    This is not an ad hominem attack, rather it is a conclusion based upon your pathetic attempts to sway Unz commenters, unsuccessfully I might add, towards your own limited viewpoint. Certainly the hysteria that you mention has come from people like yourself (and likely even from yourself using multiple handles) using emotive terms.

    I have called you a liar, which indeed you are by claiming to be a "conspiracy theorist" while your comment history clearly shows you to be a coincidence theorist.

    Your game plan is just so transparent, and dishonest too, showing you to be an intellectual wisp here.

    You seize on one small detail of Pizzagate, attack it from all angles then claim that this proves that there is no substance at all to anything regarding Pizzagate so no need for an investigation. Other commenters here have patiently demonstrated that all of the odd facts, yes facts, taken together would definitely point to there being grounds for an investigation. This has been your transparent MO on other topics too.

    You appear to be saying that the case should be proven in order to warrant an investigation which is, I repeat, pathetic.

    I must concede that you (RonW) did not identify yourself as a conspiracy theorist, rather as a “student of conspiracies”, an uncommon term which you used in the context of being supportive of the so called conspiracy theories regarding the assassination of JFK (for which the term conspiracy theorist came into common usage) and of 9/11.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  139. Eagle Eye says:

    138 comments above.

    Short SUMMARY: Pizzagate is REAL. It is a smoldering fire that very powerful forces are trying to hide and hush up, but the smoke and stench just won’t go away. The MSM have been given strict orders to cover it up and to ban and ignore any mention.

    Here on UNZ.ORG, “concern troll” RodW has been turning himself into a pretzel to warn everyone off looking at and consider the sinister facts. “Evidence must meet [his] tests!” “Don’t worry your sweet little head about it, just leave it to ‘accredited experts.’” (The same ones who were so worried about losing their precious “acceditation” that they still haven’t solved the 1963 JFK and Oswald assassinations.) Others would prefer to focus on other people (Alefantis) – anything but the obvious.

    Again, the SHERE EFFORT TO HUSH UP ALL DISCUSSION SPEAKS TO GUILT, and obvious fear of “the other shoe dropping.” Meanwhile, multiple law enforcement agencies and well-heeled individuals are conducting their own investigations, quietly and persistently, to get closer to what is happening. Quite likely, peripheral players have already been “rolled” to save their precious derrieres.

    Working hypothesis: Pizzagate involves major crimes by a circle of people including John and Tony Podesta. It likely reaches much farther, and there are huge amounts of evidence yet to be discovered. WHAT ARE THEY ALL HIDING? Were the Podestas in Portugal when Madeleine McCann disappeared? As an EU country, Portugal will have detailed records of arrivals and departures, to say nothing of cell phone, credit card etc. records.

    Precisely because of the DESPERATE establishment efforts to suppress even cautious discussions of Pizzagate data points, any foreign intelligence service worth its salt will long have conducted an efficient investigation to uncover more material. Such Pizzagate material has no doubt been in use for months if not years to blackmail key players (not necessarily only the Podestas) for political and/or financial favors.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Eagle Eye
    Correction - the URL is, of course, UNZ.COM, not ORG.

    See? Reasonable commenters keep all data under review, and have no problem admitting mistakes where appropriate.

    Conversely, known data amply documented here and elsewhere must be considered and borne in mind, and cross-referenced as further information becomes available. In the process, individual data points may turn out to be erroneous or irrelevant IN LIGHT OF BETTER DATA.

    A good "PRIMER" outlining the state of public knowledge to date is found here: https://dcpizzagate.wordpress.com/
    NOTES: (1) Save screenshots before the site disappears. (2) Eagle Eye is not associated with this blog or its authors.

    Remember (again): in the field of astronomy, scientists spent DECADES poring over puzzling irregularities in the orbit of Uranus, leading ultimately to the discovery of a new planet, Neptune. It took FURTHER DECADES to discover that something ELSE was affecting the orbit of Uranus. Ultimately, another culprit was caught on film: Pluto.

    Pizzagate data available to date includes Wikileaks, Comet Ping Pong background data, Haiti/Adoptiongate, background of Podestas and other players, all documented here, on the above site, and elsewhere. Also relevant are likely connections or at least instructive parallels with the Madeleine McCann case in Portugal/UK, parallels with decades-long UK cases (Savile, Heath, Cyril Smith, Clement Freud, Kincora, Haut de la Garenne, etc.), Belgian (Dutroux) and West Australian cases etc.

    Note the reaction of law enforcement in the UK cases - suspects were typically allowed to skate during their lifetime (perhaps under some behind-the-scenes deal), but the matter was NOT dropped entirely, and posthumous investigations comprehensively trashed the reputation of high-powered suspects.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  140. Skeptikal says:
    @RodW
    It was my intention to discuss the morality of publicizing Pizzagate, but I achieved something entirely different. I've shown to any objective observer that the proponents of Pizzagate are hysterical fantasists who make stuff up at the drop of a hat, respond with rage to reasoned argument, have a rhetorical armoury containing nothing but ad hominem, and a wildly exaggerated view of the power of online forums to affect events in the real world.

    Skeptikal, NoseytheDuke and Eagle Eye, congratulations! You've demonstrated that adherents of the Pizzagate fantasy are indeed loonies. You're probably mentally unfit to be held morally responsible for the damage you may do. But the author and publisher of this site aren't so easily excused.

    “adherents of the Pizzagate fantasy are indeed loonies.”

    Here RodW uses two of the troll tips:

    1. Label it a “Wild Rumor”: This is basically the rhetorical job that “Pizzagate fantasy” does

    2. Shoot the Messenger; Label your opponents “kooks,” . . .
    This is the rhetorical job done by RodW’s favorite word, “loony,” and also the ridiculous label of “adherents.”

    Etc.
    See http://whowhatwhy.org/2016/02/02/disinformation-part-2-detailed-tips-for-trolls/
    As I noted earlier, RodW follows the troll tips to a T!
    He is reduced to reposting his earlier BS because it just isn’t working and he can’t think of anything new to say.

    Be gone, troll!!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  141. Eagle Eye says:
    @Eagle Eye
    138 comments above.

    Short SUMMARY: Pizzagate is REAL. It is a smoldering fire that very powerful forces are trying to hide and hush up, but the smoke and stench just won't go away. The MSM have been given strict orders to cover it up and to ban and ignore any mention.

    Here on UNZ.ORG, "concern troll" RodW has been turning himself into a pretzel to warn everyone off looking at and consider the sinister facts. "Evidence must meet [his] tests!" "Don't worry your sweet little head about it, just leave it to 'accredited experts.'" (The same ones who were so worried about losing their precious "acceditation" that they still haven't solved the 1963 JFK and Oswald assassinations.) Others would prefer to focus on other people (Alefantis) - anything but the obvious.

    Again, the SHERE EFFORT TO HUSH UP ALL DISCUSSION SPEAKS TO GUILT, and obvious fear of "the other shoe dropping." Meanwhile, multiple law enforcement agencies and well-heeled individuals are conducting their own investigations, quietly and persistently, to get closer to what is happening. Quite likely, peripheral players have already been "rolled" to save their precious derrieres.

    Working hypothesis: Pizzagate involves major crimes by a circle of people including John and Tony Podesta. It likely reaches much farther, and there are huge amounts of evidence yet to be discovered. WHAT ARE THEY ALL HIDING? Were the Podestas in Portugal when Madeleine McCann disappeared? As an EU country, Portugal will have detailed records of arrivals and departures, to say nothing of cell phone, credit card etc. records.

    Precisely because of the DESPERATE establishment efforts to suppress even cautious discussions of Pizzagate data points, any foreign intelligence service worth its salt will long have conducted an efficient investigation to uncover more material. Such Pizzagate material has no doubt been in use for months if not years to blackmail key players (not necessarily only the Podestas) for political and/or financial favors.

    Correction – the URL is, of course, UNZ.COM, not ORG.

    See? Reasonable commenters keep all data under review, and have no problem admitting mistakes where appropriate.

    Conversely, known data amply documented here and elsewhere must be considered and borne in mind, and cross-referenced as further information becomes available. In the process, individual data points may turn out to be erroneous or irrelevant IN LIGHT OF BETTER DATA.

    A good “PRIMER” outlining the state of public knowledge to date is found here: https://dcpizzagate.wordpress.com/
    NOTES: (1) Save screenshots before the site disappears. (2) Eagle Eye is not associated with this blog or its authors.

    Remember (again): in the field of astronomy, scientists spent DECADES poring over puzzling irregularities in the orbit of Uranus, leading ultimately to the discovery of a new planet, Neptune. It took FURTHER DECADES to discover that something ELSE was affecting the orbit of Uranus. Ultimately, another culprit was caught on film: Pluto.

    Pizzagate data available to date includes Wikileaks, Comet Ping Pong background data, Haiti/Adoptiongate, background of Podestas and other players, all documented here, on the above site, and elsewhere. Also relevant are likely connections or at least instructive parallels with the Madeleine McCann case in Portugal/UK, parallels with decades-long UK cases (Savile, Heath, Cyril Smith, Clement Freud, Kincora, Haut de la Garenne, etc.), Belgian (Dutroux) and West Australian cases etc.

    Note the reaction of law enforcement in the UK cases – suspects were typically allowed to skate during their lifetime (perhaps under some behind-the-scenes deal), but the matter was NOT dropped entirely, and posthumous investigations comprehensively trashed the reputation of high-powered suspects.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Skeptikal
    At the Wordpress site,
    " Warning: Reading this article will result in what is known as being red-pilled. "
    What is being red-pilled?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  142. Skeptikal says:
    @Eagle Eye
    Correction - the URL is, of course, UNZ.COM, not ORG.

    See? Reasonable commenters keep all data under review, and have no problem admitting mistakes where appropriate.

    Conversely, known data amply documented here and elsewhere must be considered and borne in mind, and cross-referenced as further information becomes available. In the process, individual data points may turn out to be erroneous or irrelevant IN LIGHT OF BETTER DATA.

    A good "PRIMER" outlining the state of public knowledge to date is found here: https://dcpizzagate.wordpress.com/
    NOTES: (1) Save screenshots before the site disappears. (2) Eagle Eye is not associated with this blog or its authors.

    Remember (again): in the field of astronomy, scientists spent DECADES poring over puzzling irregularities in the orbit of Uranus, leading ultimately to the discovery of a new planet, Neptune. It took FURTHER DECADES to discover that something ELSE was affecting the orbit of Uranus. Ultimately, another culprit was caught on film: Pluto.

    Pizzagate data available to date includes Wikileaks, Comet Ping Pong background data, Haiti/Adoptiongate, background of Podestas and other players, all documented here, on the above site, and elsewhere. Also relevant are likely connections or at least instructive parallels with the Madeleine McCann case in Portugal/UK, parallels with decades-long UK cases (Savile, Heath, Cyril Smith, Clement Freud, Kincora, Haut de la Garenne, etc.), Belgian (Dutroux) and West Australian cases etc.

    Note the reaction of law enforcement in the UK cases - suspects were typically allowed to skate during their lifetime (perhaps under some behind-the-scenes deal), but the matter was NOT dropped entirely, and posthumous investigations comprehensively trashed the reputation of high-powered suspects.

    At the WordPress site,
    ” Warning: Reading this article will result in what is known as being red-pilled. ”
    What is being red-pilled?

    Read More
    • Replies: @RodW

    What is being red-pilled?
     
    That's a very important term, which anybody who studies conspiracy should know. It comes from The Matrix. If you take the red pill, you become aware of the true nature of the Matrix, and 'go down the rabbit hole' like Alice in Wonderland (no irony intended here - that's the literal context).

    Unfortunately, it's a romantic, self-dramatizing expression, which also serves to establish a self-policing esprit de corps. Using it is akin to claiming that you've been enlightened.

    From the conspiracists viewpoint, it's a positive variant of the much older and negative put-down, "drinking the Kool Aid", which refers to consuming the suicide potion at Jonestown.

    just leave it to ‘accredited experts.’” (The same ones who were so worried about losing their precious “acceditation” that they still haven’t solved the 1963 JFK and Oswald assassinations.)
     
    By accredited experts, I don't mean 'hacks who have received Establishment approval', I mean of course, people with acknowledged and relevant expertise in the field of inquiry. When considering ballistics for example, it really does help if you've fired a gun. Similarly, when discussing what airliners can and can't do, it helps if you've flown one. And regarding JFK, the physical evidence and witness testimony, sifted carefully by people with relevant expertise, seems to point to the Mob firing from directly behind and from the grassy knoll, with CIA involvement.

    Regarding the Wikileaks emails, the one from the Stratfor dump about spending $65,000 on pizza/dogs and "waitresses" may have a simple explanation, but it seems likely to involve some form of behaviour that upright citizens wouldn't approve of. That would seem a good place to start an investigation, since it points to some fairly specific matters for which records may still exist. I wonder if Judge Andrew Napolitano could be persuaded to throw some light on this?
    , @Eagle Eye
    "REDPILLED" - short answer: pop culture reference, rough meaning is "having the scales lifted off of one's eyes."
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  143. Given the nature of the allegations, one would think that the Podesta’s & company would welcome an honest investigation if there truly is nothing to see.. I would.

    Perhaps, it is just an unpleasant misunderstanding, but given the brothers taste for deviant art, weird friends and cryptic emails, it is a stretch to characterize calls for a legitimate inquiry a witch hunt. Personally, I think it is a loose thread on a very big knot of corruption and won’t feel myself a kook until its properly examined .

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  144. RodW says:
    @Skeptikal
    At the Wordpress site,
    " Warning: Reading this article will result in what is known as being red-pilled. "
    What is being red-pilled?

    What is being red-pilled?

    That’s a very important term, which anybody who studies conspiracy should know. It comes from The Matrix. If you take the red pill, you become aware of the true nature of the Matrix, and ‘go down the rabbit hole’ like Alice in Wonderland (no irony intended here – that’s the literal context).

    Unfortunately, it’s a romantic, self-dramatizing expression, which also serves to establish a self-policing esprit de corps. Using it is akin to claiming that you’ve been enlightened.

    From the conspiracists viewpoint, it’s a positive variant of the much older and negative put-down, “drinking the Kool Aid”, which refers to consuming the suicide potion at Jonestown.

    just leave it to ‘accredited experts.’” (The same ones who were so worried about losing their precious “acceditation” that they still haven’t solved the 1963 JFK and Oswald assassinations.)

    By accredited experts, I don’t mean ‘hacks who have received Establishment approval’, I mean of course, people with acknowledged and relevant expertise in the field of inquiry. When considering ballistics for example, it really does help if you’ve fired a gun. Similarly, when discussing what airliners can and can’t do, it helps if you’ve flown one. And regarding JFK, the physical evidence and witness testimony, sifted carefully by people with relevant expertise, seems to point to the Mob firing from directly behind and from the grassy knoll, with CIA involvement.

    Regarding the Wikileaks emails, the one from the Stratfor dump about spending $65,000 on pizza/dogs and “waitresses” may have a simple explanation, but it seems likely to involve some form of behaviour that upright citizens wouldn’t approve of. That would seem a good place to start an investigation, since it points to some fairly specific matters for which records may still exist. I wonder if Judge Andrew Napolitano could be persuaded to throw some light on this?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  145. Erebus says:
    @RodW

    A very simple rule when dealing with children is to always put the interests of the children first, follow this and one can hardly go wrong.
     
    Yes, but which children are you talking about? For them to have interests to put first, you have to be able to specify the children and their interests. So who are they, and what are their interests?

    If the answer is "I don't know", then you've got a major obstacle to an investigation.

    I wrote this earlier (at post #136), but was unable to publish it. It’s probably obsolete now, but here it is anyway.

    Yes, but which children are you talking about? For them to have interests to put first, you have to be able to specify the children and their interests. So who are they, and what are their interests?
    If the answer is “I don’t know”, then you’ve got a major obstacle to an investigation.

    Utter bollocks. Similar to your “challenge” that I addressed above (http://www.unz.com/article/precedents-for-pizzagate/#comment-1713738), that’s another false frame. Someone “highly qualified” in “text analysis” would, of course know that, so one is (not) surprised to see you resorting to it again.
    The victim is often unknown at the start of an investigation. If a cop finds a human hand in a garbage can, he doesn’t need to know the victim’s identity to start an investigation. Likewise, if a couple of guys are inadvertently overheard discussing a heinous criminal act and it is reported to the police, an investigation will be opened. To be sure, the investigation would attempt, inter alia, to determine the identity of the victim(s), but even if that is never determined the investigation will normally proceed until it reaches trial, or goes cold.

    Likewise, we here at Unz don’t know, and make no claims to knowing the identities of the victims. Indeed, depending on the nature of the possible crimes, they may never be known.
    As for “their interests”, surely these would include not being sexually, or otherwise abused.
    As others have pointed out, the state also has interests in this case. Inter alia, they include knowing that the persons entrusted with making decisions and acting on its behalf are not criminals or vulnerable to extraordinary influence from parties hostile to the state’s function and well-being.

    OTOH, we do have a public claim from a high profile source that the NYPD and the FBI are in possession of evidence of “great evil” in high places, including sexual abuse of children.
    Neither of those agencies have denied his claims, much less demanded that Prince retract his statements. Nobody has brought a libel suit against him, and Prince would know that his statements are libelous in the extreme if they were false. Ergo, the claim stands.
    Depending on the nature of the evidence, we may never learn the identities of the victims, but we may well learn the identities of the perpetrators and the nature of their crimes against both the victims and against the state. That is enough to proceed, no?

    What I, and I believe others, here at Unz are saying is that the evidence that is apparently in hand must not be allowed to moulder on the shelf until forgotten or destroyed, but to become the basis of a real, immediate investigation.
    Thanks to Wikileaks, we have the “Pizza codes” serving as a dimly recognized public tip protruding from what appears, as evidenced from a variety of sources, to be a fetid swamp of the most heinous corruption at the highest levels. That’s why we can talk about it at all.

    Read More
    • Replies: @RodW

    Neither of those agencies have denied his claims, much less demanded that Prince retract his statements. Nobody has brought a libel suit against him, and Prince would know that his statements are libelous in the extreme if they were false. Ergo, the claim stands.
     
    The notion that because nobody has rebutted this means it's true is incorrect. That's not how the world works.

    Prince is making all sorts of vague claims that may or may not be true. This sort of thing happens all the time, but suing, or even bothering to respond, is rare. Similarly, I've been called a liar and a possible pedophile in this thread, but I haven't bothered to respond. I did consider sharing my social media links to shut the hysterics up, but then I don't want hysterics harassing me on my public feeds.

    There's enough in Wikileaks and in the Clinton and Weiner computer scandals to merit investigations, without a shadow of doubt. It may even turn up links to pedophilia. But as I keep saying, the evidence of pedophilia in the Podesta 'Pizzagate' thing is insubstantial.
    , @RodW
    @BucephalusXYZ

    There seems to be some confusion about what evidence is. Let's address the matter.

    In response to my key objection that the evidence of actual victims is very thin (consisting principally of poor Maddie McCann as far I can tell), Erebus says;


    The victim is often unknown at the start of an investigation. If a cop finds a human hand in a garbage can, he doesn’t need to know the victim’s identity to start an investigation. Likewise, if a couple of guys are inadvertently overheard discussing a heinous criminal act and it is reported to the police, an investigation will be opened. To be sure, the investigation would attempt, inter alia, to determine the identity of the victim(s), but even if that is never determined the investigation will normally proceed until it reaches trial, or goes cold.
     
    A human hand in a garbage can is what's called 'physical evidence', or more tellingly perhaps, 'real evidence'. The hand alone powerfully suggests what's called 'foul play'. There's due cause for concern about the health and well-being of the person who used to be attached to the hand. One could easily posit that a crime has been committed.

    If we overheard talk of a heinous crime, we would know it was heinous because the words themselves would suggest heinousness - things like "burnt", "crushed", "ripped apart", "greetin'", "jailbait" etc. I expect you have your own favourites. These are NOT everyday expressions that are open to much confusion. We'd know its heinousness by its name (a rather powerful evidentiary concept, no?) Again, we would naturally have concern for the victim or victims.

    In these examples, there's little room for doubt about foul play, and the existence of victims. It's all very prima facie as we'd say if we thought using dead language was helpful. If we were to investigate further, in the first case we'd do DNA testing of the hand, search for human and camera witnesses to the crime, look for bodies missing a hand. In the second case, we'd interview the thugs and so on.

    Contrast this with Pizzagate. One has to put 'evidence' in parenthesis because there isn't any. There's no real evidence, only the claim that commonly used words for food don't mean what they normally mean. When each example is examined in context, its validity as supporting evidence of the claim falls apart. Just because there's lots of it doesn't increase its validity, when each example falls apart on inspection. The only victims suggested by this 'evidence' are the unfortunate pigs, cows and chickens who provided the meat.

    It may be argued that it's not just words, there are the efits. But those are of one man, not two, and before they were said to be the spitting image of the Podestas, they were said with equal validity to be the spitting image of Maddie's father. Not very good evidence of much.

    So what kind of 'investigation' could we have based on this 'evidence'? Maybe waterboard John and Tony Podesta? Perhaps dig around some pizzerias with a big spade? Or maybe pay some of our hottest 'internet citizen sleuths' to stay up even later at night to comb the Web even more thoroughly until it all becomes clear. Seriously, what do you want? Where would you start? What is your hypothesis?

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  146. RodW says:
    @Erebus
    I wrote this earlier (at post #136), but was unable to publish it. It's probably obsolete now, but here it is anyway.

    Yes, but which children are you talking about? For them to have interests to put first, you have to be able to specify the children and their interests. So who are they, and what are their interests?
    If the answer is “I don’t know”, then you’ve got a major obstacle to an investigation.
     
    Utter bollocks. Similar to your "challenge" that I addressed above (http://www.unz.com/article/precedents-for-pizzagate/#comment-1713738), that's another false frame. Someone "highly qualified" in "text analysis" would, of course know that, so one is (not) surprised to see you resorting to it again.
    The victim is often unknown at the start of an investigation. If a cop finds a human hand in a garbage can, he doesn't need to know the victim's identity to start an investigation. Likewise, if a couple of guys are inadvertently overheard discussing a heinous criminal act and it is reported to the police, an investigation will be opened. To be sure, the investigation would attempt, inter alia, to determine the identity of the victim(s), but even if that is never determined the investigation will normally proceed until it reaches trial, or goes cold.

    Likewise, we here at Unz don't know, and make no claims to knowing the identities of the victims. Indeed, depending on the nature of the possible crimes, they may never be known.
    As for "their interests", surely these would include not being sexually, or otherwise abused.
    As others have pointed out, the state also has interests in this case. Inter alia, they include knowing that the persons entrusted with making decisions and acting on its behalf are not criminals or vulnerable to extraordinary influence from parties hostile to the state's function and well-being.

    OTOH, we do have a public claim from a high profile source that the NYPD and the FBI are in possession of evidence of "great evil" in high places, including sexual abuse of children.
    Neither of those agencies have denied his claims, much less demanded that Prince retract his statements. Nobody has brought a libel suit against him, and Prince would know that his statements are libelous in the extreme if they were false. Ergo, the claim stands.
    Depending on the nature of the evidence, we may never learn the identities of the victims, but we may well learn the identities of the perpetrators and the nature of their crimes against both the victims and against the state. That is enough to proceed, no?

    What I, and I believe others, here at Unz are saying is that the evidence that is apparently in hand must not be allowed to moulder on the shelf until forgotten or destroyed, but to become the basis of a real, immediate investigation.
    Thanks to Wikileaks, we have the "Pizza codes" serving as a dimly recognized public tip protruding from what appears, as evidenced from a variety of sources, to be a fetid swamp of the most heinous corruption at the highest levels. That's why we can talk about it at all.

    Neither of those agencies have denied his claims, much less demanded that Prince retract his statements. Nobody has brought a libel suit against him, and Prince would know that his statements are libelous in the extreme if they were false. Ergo, the claim stands.

    The notion that because nobody has rebutted this means it’s true is incorrect. That’s not how the world works.

    Prince is making all sorts of vague claims that may or may not be true. This sort of thing happens all the time, but suing, or even bothering to respond, is rare. Similarly, I’ve been called a liar and a possible pedophile in this thread, but I haven’t bothered to respond. I did consider sharing my social media links to shut the hysterics up, but then I don’t want hysterics harassing me on my public feeds.

    There’s enough in Wikileaks and in the Clinton and Weiner computer scandals to merit investigations, without a shadow of doubt. It may even turn up links to pedophilia. But as I keep saying, the evidence of pedophilia in the Podesta ‘Pizzagate’ thing is insubstantial.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Eagle Eye
    Going over RodW's suspiciously tireless series of posts, it becomes obvious that he is trying to protect SUSPECTS OTHER THAN PODESTA who so far have not been named or directly associated with the brewing scandal.

    With every posting by RodW or his sock puppets, PIZZAGATE GETS BIGGER.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  147. Eagle Eye says:
    @Skeptikal
    At the Wordpress site,
    " Warning: Reading this article will result in what is known as being red-pilled. "
    What is being red-pilled?

    “REDPILLED” – short answer: pop culture reference, rough meaning is “having the scales lifted off of one’s eyes.”

    Read More
    • Replies: @Skeptikal
    Thanks for the short answer.
    The long answer didn't make much sense to me.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  148. Eagle Eye says:
    @RodW

    Neither of those agencies have denied his claims, much less demanded that Prince retract his statements. Nobody has brought a libel suit against him, and Prince would know that his statements are libelous in the extreme if they were false. Ergo, the claim stands.
     
    The notion that because nobody has rebutted this means it's true is incorrect. That's not how the world works.

    Prince is making all sorts of vague claims that may or may not be true. This sort of thing happens all the time, but suing, or even bothering to respond, is rare. Similarly, I've been called a liar and a possible pedophile in this thread, but I haven't bothered to respond. I did consider sharing my social media links to shut the hysterics up, but then I don't want hysterics harassing me on my public feeds.

    There's enough in Wikileaks and in the Clinton and Weiner computer scandals to merit investigations, without a shadow of doubt. It may even turn up links to pedophilia. But as I keep saying, the evidence of pedophilia in the Podesta 'Pizzagate' thing is insubstantial.

    Going over RodW’s suspiciously tireless series of posts, it becomes obvious that he is trying to protect SUSPECTS OTHER THAN PODESTA who so far have not been named or directly associated with the brewing scandal.

    With every posting by RodW or his sock puppets, PIZZAGATE GETS BIGGER.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Erebus

    ... he is trying to protect SUSPECTS OTHER THAN PODESTA who so far have not been named...
     
    Hmmm... the obviousness of it escapes me, but it's a distinct possibility. He's on a crusade of some sort. Perhaps they're named in Weiner's 650k emails.

    If all concerned Americans flooded the NYPD and FBI with demands for an investigation, it may help pull the plug on the swamp.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  149. Erebus says:

    That’s not how the world works.

    You must not be American. That is how it works in the most litigious country on earth.

    Prince is making all sorts of vague claims that may or may not be true. This sort of thing happens all the time, but suing, or even bothering to respond, is rare.

    “Vague” is hardly the word I would use to describe what he said. Furthermore, his claims put the integrity of the NYPD & FBI on the chopping block. They have acknowledged being in possession of the laptop. A public person citing first hand, hi-level sources has claimed that the evidence they have in hand includes “… money laundering, underage sex, pay-for-play, and, of course, plenty of proof of inappropriate handling, sending/receiving of classified information, up to SAP level Special Access Programs”. I’d say that’s as specific as he could be in an unofficial interview. To be sure, he or his sources may be lying (as I noted at #111) but if he is, he’s open to the mother of all libel suits.

    I’ve been called a liar and a possible pedophile in this thread, but I haven’t bothered to respond.

    If I was a VIP and another VIP accused me publicly of the above, I would be pretty vocal in my defence. An anonymous entity calling another anonymous entity names on an obscure internet forum doesn’t usually elicit much, but that’s because we have nothing to lose here. When there is a great deal to lose, one would expect some sort of a defence. Instead, we have nothing from the agencies or the accused. Perhaps you’d argue that they’re staying silent as people will never believe anything until it’s been officially denied?

    But as I keep saying, the evidence of pedophilia in the Podesta ‘Pizzagate’ thing is insubstantial.

    Ahhh… Grasshopper, you have mastered the art of the strawman argument. Of course it is, and no-one here argues with that. If that’s all there was we wouldn’t be having this discussion. The “”Pizzagate” thing” serves, as I said above “… as a dimly recognized public tip protruding from what appears, as evidenced from a variety of sources, to be a fetid swamp of the most heinous corruption at the highest levels.” You acknowledge as much by your sentences immediately preceding the above quote.
    I’m sure all the “loonies” here are aware that, by itself, it doesn’t stand. It may indicate that America’s ruling class aren’t fit to rule, but are otherwise harmless. But it ain’t standing by itself, is it? And that’s what all the fuss is about.

    Read More
    • Replies: @RodW

    You must not be American. That is how it works in the most litigious country on earth.
     
    As I mentioned, I'm English. The UK has such litigant-friendly defamation laws that foreigners head thither to sue their enemies whenever possible.

    When there is a great deal to lose, one would expect some sort of a defence.
     
    When Prince gave that interview, it was just before the US election. The neocons were all moving to support Clinton, and she also had supporters in the military. Given the timing and the peroration, it looked to me as though Prince was making some claims that have already been made by others against some publicly hated targets, with some insider-ish sounding verbiage, for the purpose of rallying his supporters in the 'military community' to vote against Clinton. Consequently, drawing attention to this little blip on the radar by suing Prince would seem like a grave tactical folly. Maybe there is substance to what Prince was saying, and if there is, I'm sure that 'super patriot' will go into further detail for the good of his country.

    Grasshopper, you have mastered the art of the strawman argument. Of course it is, and no-one here argues with that.
     
    Eh? Should I take "no-one here" to mean "no-one here who isn't a loonie"? If that's the case, then we're basically in agreement. If not, you haven't been paying attention to what the loonies are actually saying. They really get upset when I question 'evidence' against the Podestas. To my mind, the Stratfor content and the Pizzagate 'allegations' are entirely different things. Investigating the former would be very fruitful. Investigating the latter would be pointless for what seem to me obvious reasons. Call me a paedophile, creep, liar, Englishman, grasshopper, whatever, if you will.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  150. RodW says:
    @Erebus

    That’s not how the world works.
     
    You must not be American. That is how it works in the most litigious country on earth.

    Prince is making all sorts of vague claims that may or may not be true. This sort of thing happens all the time, but suing, or even bothering to respond, is rare.
     
    "Vague" is hardly the word I would use to describe what he said. Furthermore, his claims put the integrity of the NYPD & FBI on the chopping block. They have acknowledged being in possession of the laptop. A public person citing first hand, hi-level sources has claimed that the evidence they have in hand includes "... money laundering, underage sex, pay-for-play, and, of course, plenty of proof of inappropriate handling, sending/receiving of classified information, up to SAP level Special Access Programs”. I'd say that's as specific as he could be in an unofficial interview. To be sure, he or his sources may be lying (as I noted at #111) but if he is, he's open to the mother of all libel suits.

    I’ve been called a liar and a possible pedophile in this thread, but I haven’t bothered to respond.
     
    If I was a VIP and another VIP accused me publicly of the above, I would be pretty vocal in my defence. An anonymous entity calling another anonymous entity names on an obscure internet forum doesn't usually elicit much, but that's because we have nothing to lose here. When there is a great deal to lose, one would expect some sort of a defence. Instead, we have nothing from the agencies or the accused. Perhaps you'd argue that they're staying silent as people will never believe anything until it's been officially denied?

    But as I keep saying, the evidence of pedophilia in the Podesta ‘Pizzagate’ thing is insubstantial.
     
    Ahhh... Grasshopper, you have mastered the art of the strawman argument. Of course it is, and no-one here argues with that. If that's all there was we wouldn't be having this discussion. The ""Pizzagate" thing" serves, as I said above "... as a dimly recognized public tip protruding from what appears, as evidenced from a variety of sources, to be a fetid swamp of the most heinous corruption at the highest levels." You acknowledge as much by your sentences immediately preceding the above quote.
    I'm sure all the "loonies" here are aware that, by itself, it doesn't stand. It may indicate that America's ruling class aren't fit to rule, but are otherwise harmless. But it ain't standing by itself, is it? And that's what all the fuss is about.

    You must not be American. That is how it works in the most litigious country on earth.

    As I mentioned, I’m English. The UK has such litigant-friendly defamation laws that foreigners head thither to sue their enemies whenever possible.

    When there is a great deal to lose, one would expect some sort of a defence.

    When Prince gave that interview, it was just before the US election. The neocons were all moving to support Clinton, and she also had supporters in the military. Given the timing and the peroration, it looked to me as though Prince was making some claims that have already been made by others against some publicly hated targets, with some insider-ish sounding verbiage, for the purpose of rallying his supporters in the ‘military community’ to vote against Clinton. Consequently, drawing attention to this little blip on the radar by suing Prince would seem like a grave tactical folly. Maybe there is substance to what Prince was saying, and if there is, I’m sure that ‘super patriot’ will go into further detail for the good of his country.

    Grasshopper, you have mastered the art of the strawman argument. Of course it is, and no-one here argues with that.

    Eh? Should I take “no-one here” to mean “no-one here who isn’t a loonie”? If that’s the case, then we’re basically in agreement. If not, you haven’t been paying attention to what the loonies are actually saying. They really get upset when I question ‘evidence’ against the Podestas. To my mind, the Stratfor content and the Pizzagate ‘allegations’ are entirely different things. Investigating the former would be very fruitful. Investigating the latter would be pointless for what seem to me obvious reasons. Call me a paedophile, creep, liar, Englishman, grasshopper, whatever, if you will.

    Read More
    • Replies: @NoseytheDuke
    I'm an Englishman. I am also an Australian and, not to show off at all, I have a US Green Card too. Who cares? I called you a liar and possibly I was wrong and I should have just called you an idiot instead. If I was wrong please correct me and tell me which one of those words best describes you.

    Here's my advice on a response to Erebus, "You're correct, thank you. I'm sorry." (No need to thank me compadre)

    ps (whispering) You are so out of your depth taking on Erebus, with lots of people at unz actually, but certainly with Erebus. Cheers
    , @Erebus

    As I mentioned, I’m English
     
    I pay no attention to statements like that. Everyone here has whatever background they claim, and it's connection to what they are off-line is often, well, whimsical.

    Consequently, drawing attention to this little blip on the radar by suing Prince would seem like a grave tactical folly.
     
    I agree, at the time it would have been tactical folly. That time has long passed. Today, if Prince was lying, it would be tactically appropriate, if not genius. Be that as it may, it would mesh beautifully with the "fake news" meme they're nurturing so lovingly. Suing his ass off in an OJ Simpson circus would be an effective demonstration of how to deal with "fake news" the American way.

    To my mind, the Stratfor content and the Pizzagate ‘allegations’ are entirely different things. Investigating the latter would be pointless...
     
    Nice try. It's not "Stratfor" we're so much concerned with, it's the 650k Weiner emails. It's there where we part ways. Should it be allowed to mature, I believe a professional investigation into the 650k emails will lead to the same swamp where resides the Pizzagate "evidence" (along with other "great evils").
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  151. Erebus says:
    @Eagle Eye
    Going over RodW's suspiciously tireless series of posts, it becomes obvious that he is trying to protect SUSPECTS OTHER THAN PODESTA who so far have not been named or directly associated with the brewing scandal.

    With every posting by RodW or his sock puppets, PIZZAGATE GETS BIGGER.

    … he is trying to protect SUSPECTS OTHER THAN PODESTA who so far have not been named…

    Hmmm… the obviousness of it escapes me, but it’s a distinct possibility. He’s on a crusade of some sort. Perhaps they’re named in Weiner’s 650k emails.

    If all concerned Americans flooded the NYPD and FBI with demands for an investigation, it may help pull the plug on the swamp.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  152. RodW says:

    He’s on a crusade of some sort.

    Yes. A crusade against arrant nonsense on a website I’ve read everyday for a year or so. As I said, I haven’t encountered this sort of rubbish before.

    It’s worth taking a look at who Aedon Cassiel is. This is what he says about himself.

    Originally from South Carolina, at first he identified with the rebellious spirit of the Left during the Bush years. Years of actual first–hand experience with the Left, however, have now turned him into a sworn enemy.

    From https://www.righton.net/author/aedoncassiel/
    In other words, a self-professed zealot. Fortunately, most of the other authors on Unz.com have more to their CVs than hatred of ‘the Left’. As I’ve pointed out, repeating slander against people you’ve chosen to hate is morally reprehensible, even if it is ‘for the children’.

    Perhaps they’re named in Weiner’s 650k emails.

    Oh sure. An English person living in Japan on Weiner’s email list. Very likely. Don’t start making stuff up like a nutter.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Skeptikal
    "In other words, a self-professed zealot."

    More ad hominem crap and "wild" namecalling (as in "shooting wild").

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  153. @RodW

    You must not be American. That is how it works in the most litigious country on earth.
     
    As I mentioned, I'm English. The UK has such litigant-friendly defamation laws that foreigners head thither to sue their enemies whenever possible.

    When there is a great deal to lose, one would expect some sort of a defence.
     
    When Prince gave that interview, it was just before the US election. The neocons were all moving to support Clinton, and she also had supporters in the military. Given the timing and the peroration, it looked to me as though Prince was making some claims that have already been made by others against some publicly hated targets, with some insider-ish sounding verbiage, for the purpose of rallying his supporters in the 'military community' to vote against Clinton. Consequently, drawing attention to this little blip on the radar by suing Prince would seem like a grave tactical folly. Maybe there is substance to what Prince was saying, and if there is, I'm sure that 'super patriot' will go into further detail for the good of his country.

    Grasshopper, you have mastered the art of the strawman argument. Of course it is, and no-one here argues with that.
     
    Eh? Should I take "no-one here" to mean "no-one here who isn't a loonie"? If that's the case, then we're basically in agreement. If not, you haven't been paying attention to what the loonies are actually saying. They really get upset when I question 'evidence' against the Podestas. To my mind, the Stratfor content and the Pizzagate 'allegations' are entirely different things. Investigating the former would be very fruitful. Investigating the latter would be pointless for what seem to me obvious reasons. Call me a paedophile, creep, liar, Englishman, grasshopper, whatever, if you will.

    I’m an Englishman. I am also an Australian and, not to show off at all, I have a US Green Card too. Who cares? I called you a liar and possibly I was wrong and I should have just called you an idiot instead. If I was wrong please correct me and tell me which one of those words best describes you.

    Here’s my advice on a response to Erebus, “You’re correct, thank you. I’m sorry.” (No need to thank me compadre)

    ps (whispering) You are so out of your depth taking on Erebus, with lots of people at unz actually, but certainly with Erebus. Cheers

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  154. Erebus says:

    Oh sure. An English person living in Japan on Weiner’s email list. Very likely. Don’t start making stuff up like a nutter.

    I think you’ve misread something. The word “they’re” in my sentence refers to Eagle Eye’s unnamed suspects.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Eagle Eye
    Interesting slip by RodW. Japan, eh?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  155. Erebus says:
    @RodW

    You must not be American. That is how it works in the most litigious country on earth.
     
    As I mentioned, I'm English. The UK has such litigant-friendly defamation laws that foreigners head thither to sue their enemies whenever possible.

    When there is a great deal to lose, one would expect some sort of a defence.
     
    When Prince gave that interview, it was just before the US election. The neocons were all moving to support Clinton, and she also had supporters in the military. Given the timing and the peroration, it looked to me as though Prince was making some claims that have already been made by others against some publicly hated targets, with some insider-ish sounding verbiage, for the purpose of rallying his supporters in the 'military community' to vote against Clinton. Consequently, drawing attention to this little blip on the radar by suing Prince would seem like a grave tactical folly. Maybe there is substance to what Prince was saying, and if there is, I'm sure that 'super patriot' will go into further detail for the good of his country.

    Grasshopper, you have mastered the art of the strawman argument. Of course it is, and no-one here argues with that.
     
    Eh? Should I take "no-one here" to mean "no-one here who isn't a loonie"? If that's the case, then we're basically in agreement. If not, you haven't been paying attention to what the loonies are actually saying. They really get upset when I question 'evidence' against the Podestas. To my mind, the Stratfor content and the Pizzagate 'allegations' are entirely different things. Investigating the former would be very fruitful. Investigating the latter would be pointless for what seem to me obvious reasons. Call me a paedophile, creep, liar, Englishman, grasshopper, whatever, if you will.

    As I mentioned, I’m English

    I pay no attention to statements like that. Everyone here has whatever background they claim, and it’s connection to what they are off-line is often, well, whimsical.

    Consequently, drawing attention to this little blip on the radar by suing Prince would seem like a grave tactical folly.

    I agree, at the time it would have been tactical folly. That time has long passed. Today, if Prince was lying, it would be tactically appropriate, if not genius. Be that as it may, it would mesh beautifully with the “fake news” meme they’re nurturing so lovingly. Suing his ass off in an OJ Simpson circus would be an effective demonstration of how to deal with “fake news” the American way.

    To my mind, the Stratfor content and the Pizzagate ‘allegations’ are entirely different things. Investigating the latter would be pointless…

    Nice try. It’s not “Stratfor” we’re so much concerned with, it’s the 650k Weiner emails. It’s there where we part ways. Should it be allowed to mature, I believe a professional investigation into the 650k emails will lead to the same swamp where resides the Pizzagate “evidence” (along with other “great evils”).

    Read More
    • Replies: @RodW
    Please excuse my misreading. I did wonder about “they’re” in that context.

    Be that as it may, it would mesh beautifully with the “fake news” meme they’re nurturing so lovingly.
     
    They seem to be nurturing their own fake news about 'Russia did it' to great effect and in line with their traditional agenda, so why complicate the narrative now by going after a 'veteran', one of the official sacred cows of America? And as a mercenary herself, how would Clinton look actively persecuting one? It would draw much unwanted attention to a lot of stuff.

    It’s not “Stratfor” we’re so much concerned with, it’s the 650k Weiner emails. It’s there where we part ways.
     
    We're not in disagreement. All the Wikipedia mails and the Weiner mails need to be investigated for the corruption and crimes they're likely to reveal. But starting from the viewpoint that they'll lead to the killers of Maddie McCann seems daft. Is this viewpoint so hard to understand?

    Oh, and NoseytheDuke ... it helps if you leaven each post with a little relevant discussion in addition to your sycophancy and abuse towards other posters ... if you want to be considered relevant at all.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  156. RodW says:
    @Erebus

    As I mentioned, I’m English
     
    I pay no attention to statements like that. Everyone here has whatever background they claim, and it's connection to what they are off-line is often, well, whimsical.

    Consequently, drawing attention to this little blip on the radar by suing Prince would seem like a grave tactical folly.
     
    I agree, at the time it would have been tactical folly. That time has long passed. Today, if Prince was lying, it would be tactically appropriate, if not genius. Be that as it may, it would mesh beautifully with the "fake news" meme they're nurturing so lovingly. Suing his ass off in an OJ Simpson circus would be an effective demonstration of how to deal with "fake news" the American way.

    To my mind, the Stratfor content and the Pizzagate ‘allegations’ are entirely different things. Investigating the latter would be pointless...
     
    Nice try. It's not "Stratfor" we're so much concerned with, it's the 650k Weiner emails. It's there where we part ways. Should it be allowed to mature, I believe a professional investigation into the 650k emails will lead to the same swamp where resides the Pizzagate "evidence" (along with other "great evils").

    Please excuse my misreading. I did wonder about “they’re” in that context.

    Be that as it may, it would mesh beautifully with the “fake news” meme they’re nurturing so lovingly.

    They seem to be nurturing their own fake news about ‘Russia did it’ to great effect and in line with their traditional agenda, so why complicate the narrative now by going after a ‘veteran’, one of the official sacred cows of America? And as a mercenary herself, how would Clinton look actively persecuting one? It would draw much unwanted attention to a lot of stuff.

    It’s not “Stratfor” we’re so much concerned with, it’s the 650k Weiner emails. It’s there where we part ways.

    We’re not in disagreement. All the Wikipedia mails and the Weiner mails need to be investigated for the corruption and crimes they’re likely to reveal. But starting from the viewpoint that they’ll lead to the killers of Maddie McCann seems daft. Is this viewpoint so hard to understand?

    Oh, and NoseytheDuke … it helps if you leaven each post with a little relevant discussion in addition to your sycophancy and abuse towards other posters … if you want to be considered relevant at all.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Erebus
    Rod may be out of the loop now, but I couldn't let his comments at #156 stand unanswered.

    They seem to be nurturing their own fake news about ‘Russia did it’ to great effect and in line with their traditional agenda
     
    I have no idea how it's playing amongst Englishmen-in-Japan, but it ain't playing anywhere else to any positive effect. Rather, it seems to have lowered the MSM's already low standing in the USA, and a laughingstock everywhere else. A point from which, I daresay, they may well never recover.
    It worked once (when Iraq was hacking America in 2002/3). It saw lukewarm success on the 2nd go-round (when it was Iran turn in 2013/4), but the most recent version (Russia) is a fiasco from where I sit.
    In any case, my point was that the Neocon-MSM complex might actually rescue themselves from their public confidence freefall by focusing on, and prosecuting a genuine instance of "fake news" rather than turning into caricatures of themselves with scare-stories-for-idiots of ghostly Russian subversions of "American Democracy".
    Parenthetically, the real threat to the Republic is that the "Russia did it" noise is nothing more than cover for the real deal - namely, the genuinely terrifying fact that, in recent weeks, the Legislative Branch of the Neocon-MSM complex has recently enshrined in law the power to silence political dissent under the rubric of "fake news". That is what is being successfully obfuscated, and here indeed your words "to great effect" ring true.

    It would draw much unwanted attention to a lot of stuff.
     
    Indeed it would.

    But starting from the viewpoint that they’ll lead to the killers of Maddie McCann seems daft. Is this viewpoint so hard to understand?
     
    Another, from your apparently inexhaustible stable of straw men. What does it matter what starting viewpoint is used to begin the investigation, as long as it proceeds in a thorough, professional manner to evidenced conclusions? In any case, "viewpoint" is an odd term here. Investigators start with hypothesis, and sometimes abandon them for others as the investigation proceeds. Hypotheses, and the testing thereof, are tools used by investigators and scientists to come to conclusions. Insofar, they are more, or less useful and "daftness" doesn't really come into it. Starting with the hypothesis that the investigation of the Weiner/Wikileaks emails will lead to McCann's killers may, or may not be useful to the investigation but it ain't "daft" if it is not. If it turns out not useful, a professional investigator, like a professional scientist will recognize he's on the wrong trail and abandon it in favour of a more useful hypothesis. It really is as simple as that.

    As a final adieu, if anything's "so hard to understand", it's how to accommodate the fact that as obviously literate a person as yourself encounters such difficulty understanding simple arguments without abandoning the hypothesis that you are not a troll.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  157. Erebus says:

    Well, whaddya know. People do occasionally sue when slandered with paedophelia.

    http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/nation-world/national/article124566504.html

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  158. RodW says:

    People do occasionally sue when slandered with paedophelia.

    Context and timing are key. Innocence also helps.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Seamus Padraig

    Innocence also helps.
     
    I'll say!
    , @Skeptikal
    "Innocence also helps.'

    Isn't that exactly the argument that is being made?
    People who are innocent are more likely to sue for libel/slander/defamation of character.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  159. @RodW

    People do occasionally sue when slandered with paedophelia.
     
    Context and timing are key. Innocence also helps.

    Innocence also helps.

    I’ll say!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  160. Skeptikal says:
    @Eagle Eye
    "REDPILLED" - short answer: pop culture reference, rough meaning is "having the scales lifted off of one's eyes."

    Thanks for the short answer.
    The long answer didn’t make much sense to me.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  161. In 1993 Ralph Underwager

    Read that as Underager.
    What a depressing topic.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  162. Skeptikal says:
    @RodW

    He’s on a crusade of some sort.
     
    Yes. A crusade against arrant nonsense on a website I've read everyday for a year or so. As I said, I haven't encountered this sort of rubbish before.

    It's worth taking a look at who Aedon Cassiel is. This is what he says about himself.

    Originally from South Carolina, at first he identified with the rebellious spirit of the Left during the Bush years. Years of actual first–hand experience with the Left, however, have now turned him into a sworn enemy.
     
    From https://www.righton.net/author/aedoncassiel/
    In other words, a self-professed zealot. Fortunately, most of the other authors on Unz.com have more to their CVs than hatred of 'the Left'. As I've pointed out, repeating slander against people you've chosen to hate is morally reprehensible, even if it is 'for the children'.

    Perhaps they’re named in Weiner’s 650k emails.
     
    Oh sure. An English person living in Japan on Weiner's email list. Very likely. Don't start making stuff up like a nutter.

    “In other words, a self-professed zealot.”

    More ad hominem crap and “wild” namecalling (as in “shooting wild”).

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  163. Skeptikal says:
    @RodW

    People do occasionally sue when slandered with paedophelia.
     
    Context and timing are key. Innocence also helps.

    “Innocence also helps.’

    Isn’t that exactly the argument that is being made?
    People who are innocent are more likely to sue for libel/slander/defamation of character.

    Read More
    • Replies: @NoseytheDuke
    What is interesting to me is that none of the commenters in opposition to RodW and his 'merry band' have pronounced anyone involved in Pizzagate as guilty but are simply making a case for an investigation being warranted. This RodW on the other hand not only is most adamant that no investigation at all is warranted but now he posits that they are in fact innocent, and all without even an investigation.

    Methinks the troll doth protest too much! (and too often).

    RodW either is a pedophile himself, has an prurient interest in the subject or KNOWS that it is used as a tool to control people in power to influence political matters in support of an ideology that he supports. I suspect the latter but any combination of the three could be the case.

    RodW has done at least as much as anyone to convince me that this matter has substance and should be vigorously pursued.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  164. FKA Max says: • Website
    @RodW

    The angle, that personally interests me the most about Pizzagate
    is the connection of the Clintons to Jeffrey Epstein, and the potential link to Israeli/Mossad drug/weapons trafficking and the Podestas’ potential involvement with tax-evasion and the laundering of this drug/dark money (pay for play, etc.) through modern artwork purchases, charitable foundations, etc.
     
    That's got nothing to do with 'Pizzagate', and linking it with Pizzagate makes it less likely to receive the attention it deserves.

    The evidence for these things doesn't appear to be completely made up as it is for Pizzagate, so I'd like to see it investigated. Fox does sometimes do some real journalism, so I'm glad to see they're pursuing it.

    As to RodW and his merry band of Pizzagate debunkers
     
    There is no 'merry band'. A couple of other participants in this forum apparently aren't persuaded by the 'evidence' for Pizzagate, that's all.

    That’s got nothing to do with ‘Pizzagate’, and linking it with Pizzagate makes it less likely to receive the attention it deserves.

    I think precisely the opposite is true, Rod.

    Recently American voters were polled, and nearly half of Republicans and almost 20% (!!!) of Democrats stated, that they thought, there was some validity to Pizzagate.

    Nearly half of Donald Trump voters believe in “Pizzagate,” according to a new poll from The Economist/YouGov.

    Interestingly, 17 percent of Clinton supporters also agreed that the leaked emails from Clinton campaign chair John Podesta used code words to discuss a pedophilia and human trafficking ring, a disproven theory that began circulating online shortly before the election.

    http://dcist.com/2016/12/poll.php

    Pizzagate
    has become an umbrella term and rallying cry for a movement of investigators and activists from both sides of the aisle, who are suspicious of the dealings and fed up with the corruption in D.C.. Just like the term Alt Right has become an umbrella term for a movement in which not everybody considers themselves to be a race realist and/or ‘red-pilled’ on the ‘Jewish Question,’ when these are the two main tenets/pillars of the ‘core’ Alt Right movement/world view.

    Pizzagate is a ‘gateway drug’ for ‘normies’ into a much bigger and wider field of elite corruption research.

    Case in point: PizzagateWiki http://pizzagate.wiki/Main_Page

    PizzaGate Update: DynCorp Hacked PizzaGate Website?

    Streamed live 15 hours ago

    New evidence suggests DynCorp may have hacked the PizzaGate Wiki website. Dyncorp is a company that has been mentioned by PizzaGate researchers as it has been engaged in several crimes including child trafficking for decades, yet the company continues to receive massive amounts of money from the U.S government. More recently, a number of their employees were also recorded exploiting an adolescent boy under the approval of a company manager. Clinton and the media worked together to cover up this incident in order to protect the company responsible for these actions. There are other potential connections between this company, the government, and the pizzagate scandal through possible connections to Jeffrey Epstein and child trafficking in Haiti.

    Connection to aircraft shared by Jeffrey Epstein, the CIA, and DynCorp

    http://pizzagate.wiki/DynCorp#Connection_to_aircraft_shared_by_Jeffrey_Epstein.2C_the_CIA.2C_and_DynCorp

    For the record: I am not at all a fan of ‘super patriot’ Erik Price, nor of his sister Betsy DeVos.

    The infiltration and invasion of the ‘Alt Lite’ (not the Alt Right) by the Zionist-Vatican alliance intensifies:
    An Honest Conversation About Blackwater | Erik Prince and Stefan Molyneux [...] Infowars has tons of Vatican connections just like the Murdoch media empire [...] This is a somewhat ‘kooky’ website, but he has been documenting Alex Jones’ connection to the Vatican for years

    http://www.unz.com/article/npis-spencer-vs-politcos-hirsh-etc/#comment-1665634

    Not being Donald Trump, but especially not being Steve Bannon fanboys is the key to Make America truly Great Again… in my humble opinion.

    Ann Coulter is doing a great job of putting pressure on Trump, Bannon, et al. [...] I tried to give Steve Bannon the benefit of the doubt, but I think you are pretty much spot on with your characterization of him ‘He sounds very much like a Catholic neocon type.

    http://www.unz.com/article/the-empire-strikes-back-the-msms-3-point-plan-to-recapture-the-narrative/#comment-1673513

    Read More
    • Replies: @RodW

    Pizzagate is a ‘gateway drug’ for ‘normies’ into a much bigger and wider field of elite corruption research.
     
    These polls with their vague language don't count for much, and this mass of 'research' with its scattershot accusations isn't going to persuade the majority of 'normies'.

    Let's take one example;

    More recently, a number of their employees were also recorded exploiting an adolescent boy under the approval of a company manager.
     
    What does that mean? Does that mean that ten employees took turns to bugger a five year old while a manager watched? Or does it mean that the manager agreed with the staff it was fair to ask the 16-old data input intern to wash their cars too as part of 'job experience'? Because 'exploiting an adolescent boy' could mean either of those things.

    20% or 30% of all people might get overly-stimulated by the very words "exploiting an adolescent", but the rest of us want to know the facts before we do anything else.

    I try to persuade my 80-year old father, who still enjoys the franchise, votes without fail and takes concrete action where he can, that there's more hidden evil in the world than he's led to believe by the BBC news. My father prides himself on what he believes is intellectual rigour. It makes it all the harder to persuade him that John Podesta is up to no good if you say hot dog means little boys, or DynCorp is up to no good because they exploit adolescents, wink wink.

    In this long and overwrought discussion, I've suggested two things - looking hard at the 'evidence' ourselves, and asking somebody like Judge Napolitano to evaluate the Pizzagate claims. The first suggestion was taken as trolling, and the second suggestion was ignored completely.

    So what exactly do you want to do? Keep on piling up the 'evidence' and abusing all doubters? That won't get us very far.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  165. @Skeptikal
    "Innocence also helps.'

    Isn't that exactly the argument that is being made?
    People who are innocent are more likely to sue for libel/slander/defamation of character.

    What is interesting to me is that none of the commenters in opposition to RodW and his ‘merry band’ have pronounced anyone involved in Pizzagate as guilty but are simply making a case for an investigation being warranted. This RodW on the other hand not only is most adamant that no investigation at all is warranted but now he posits that they are in fact innocent, and all without even an investigation.

    Methinks the troll doth protest too much! (and too often).

    RodW either is a pedophile himself, has an prurient interest in the subject or KNOWS that it is used as a tool to control people in power to influence political matters in support of an ideology that he supports. I suspect the latter but any combination of the three could be the case.

    RodW has done at least as much as anyone to convince me that this matter has substance and should be vigorously pursued.

    Read More
    • Agree: Amasius
    • Replies: @RodW
    More baseless accusations and raving. It's won you a little gold box! Well done. Who hands out these gold rims? What are they supposed to represent?

    When will you acknowledge that calling for 'investigations' of people based on wild accusations is inherently corrupt behaviour?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  166. RodW says:
    @FKA Max

    That’s got nothing to do with ‘Pizzagate’, and linking it with Pizzagate makes it less likely to receive the attention it deserves.
     
    I think precisely the opposite is true, Rod.

    Recently American voters were polled, and nearly half of Republicans and almost 20% (!!!) of Democrats stated, that they thought, there was some validity to Pizzagate.

    Nearly half of Donald Trump voters believe in "Pizzagate," according to a new poll from The Economist/YouGov.

    Interestingly, 17 percent of Clinton supporters also agreed that the leaked emails from Clinton campaign chair John Podesta used code words to discuss a pedophilia and human trafficking ring, a disproven theory that began circulating online shortly before the election.
     
    - http://dcist.com/2016/12/poll.php

    Pizzagate
    has become an umbrella term and rallying cry for a movement of investigators and activists from both sides of the aisle, who are suspicious of the dealings and fed up with the corruption in D.C.. Just like the term Alt Right has become an umbrella term for a movement in which not everybody considers themselves to be a race realist and/or 'red-pilled' on the 'Jewish Question,' when these are the two main tenets/pillars of the 'core' Alt Right movement/world view.

    Pizzagate is a 'gateway drug' for 'normies' into a much bigger and wider field of elite corruption research.

    Case in point: PizzagateWiki http://pizzagate.wiki/Main_Page

    PizzaGate Update: DynCorp Hacked PizzaGate Website?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KLVZ9sxdVRM

    Streamed live 15 hours ago

    New evidence suggests DynCorp may have hacked the PizzaGate Wiki website. Dyncorp is a company that has been mentioned by PizzaGate researchers as it has been engaged in several crimes including child trafficking for decades, yet the company continues to receive massive amounts of money from the U.S government. More recently, a number of their employees were also recorded exploiting an adolescent boy under the approval of a company manager. Clinton and the media worked together to cover up this incident in order to protect the company responsible for these actions. There are other potential connections between this company, the government, and the pizzagate scandal through possible connections to Jeffrey Epstein and child trafficking in Haiti.

    Connection to aircraft shared by Jeffrey Epstein, the CIA, and DynCorp
    http://pizzagate.wiki/DynCorp#Connection_to_aircraft_shared_by_Jeffrey_Epstein.2C_the_CIA.2C_and_DynCorp

    For the record: I am not at all a fan of 'super patriot' Erik Price, nor of his sister Betsy DeVos.

    The infiltration and invasion of the ‘Alt Lite’ (not the Alt Right) by the Zionist-Vatican alliance intensifies:
    An Honest Conversation About Blackwater | Erik Prince and Stefan Molyneux [...] Infowars has tons of Vatican connections just like the Murdoch media empire [...] This is a somewhat ‘kooky’ website, but he has been documenting Alex Jones’ connection to the Vatican for years
     
    - http://www.unz.com/article/npis-spencer-vs-politcos-hirsh-etc/#comment-1665634

    Not being Donald Trump, but especially not being Steve Bannon fanboys is the key to Make America truly Great Again… in my humble opinion.

    Ann Coulter is doing a great job of putting pressure on Trump, Bannon, et al. [...] I tried to give Steve Bannon the benefit of the doubt, but I think you are pretty much spot on with your characterization of him ‘He sounds very much like a Catholic neocon type.
     
    - http://www.unz.com/article/the-empire-strikes-back-the-msms-3-point-plan-to-recapture-the-narrative/#comment-1673513

    Pizzagate is a ‘gateway drug’ for ‘normies’ into a much bigger and wider field of elite corruption research.

    These polls with their vague language don’t count for much, and this mass of ‘research’ with its scattershot accusations isn’t going to persuade the majority of ‘normies’.

    Let’s take one example;

    More recently, a number of their employees were also recorded exploiting an adolescent boy under the approval of a company manager.

    What does that mean? Does that mean that ten employees took turns to bugger a five year old while a manager watched? Or does it mean that the manager agreed with the staff it was fair to ask the 16-old data input intern to wash their cars too as part of ‘job experience’? Because ‘exploiting an adolescent boy’ could mean either of those things.

    20% or 30% of all people might get overly-stimulated by the very words “exploiting an adolescent”, but the rest of us want to know the facts before we do anything else.

    I try to persuade my 80-year old father, who still enjoys the franchise, votes without fail and takes concrete action where he can, that there’s more hidden evil in the world than he’s led to believe by the BBC news. My father prides himself on what he believes is intellectual rigour. It makes it all the harder to persuade him that John Podesta is up to no good if you say hot dog means little boys, or DynCorp is up to no good because they exploit adolescents, wink wink.

    In this long and overwrought discussion, I’ve suggested two things – looking hard at the ‘evidence’ ourselves, and asking somebody like Judge Napolitano to evaluate the Pizzagate claims. The first suggestion was taken as trolling, and the second suggestion was ignored completely.

    So what exactly do you want to do? Keep on piling up the ‘evidence’ and abusing all doubters? That won’t get us very far.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Skeptikal
    "overwrought discussion,"

    More of the troll tips. Try to deligitimize any discussion whatsoever in as many ways as you can.
    The discussion is not "overwrought."
    RodW has continually attempted to make it so by misrepresenting what is actually said here and repeatedly characterizing reasonable commenters as loonies.
    Saying it again and again and again doesn't make it so, RodW.
    Despite many attempts to explain things to RodW, he still has not given up, still using the loony meme and now actually trying something new that I didn't see in the tips for trolls: dragooning his dear old 80-year-old dad as a touchstone for assaying the advisability of an investigation into the various suggestively intertwined (but we don't know exactly how) Wiener/Podesta/Clinton threads.
    No, RodW, we really do not expect your dear old dad to understand or even be interested the vocabulary of the contemporary gay world---although Britain is of courseknown for its own brand of "nauthtiness." Wonder whether dear old Dad has ever heard of Jimmy Savile. . . .
    , @FKA Max
    My father prides himself on what he believes is intellectual rigour.

    Maybe you need to reconsider/redefine your perception/definition of rigour, Rod. Rigour Rod!!!, that is a cool nickname, isn't it!!!

    Would you mind if I call you Rigour Rod from now on, Rigour Rod?

    A New Definition of Rigo[u]r


    There it is. Rigo[u]r is the result of work that challenges students' thinking in new and interesting ways. It occurs when they are encouraged toward a sophisticated understanding of fundamental ideas and are driven by curiosity to discover what they don't know. [...]

    Let us aspire to something greater than making difficult work for our students. Let's take them to that intersection of encouragement and engagement, where they confront ideas and problems that are meaningful. Let's stretch their thinking. Let's unleash their sophistication. And let's foster a love of deep knowledge.
     
    - https://www.edutopia.org/blog/a-new-definition-of-rigor-brian-sztabnik

    I believe, investigating and debating Pizzagate ``stretches'' people's thinking and broadens their horizons, Rigour Rod. That is why I encourage and participate in the Pizzagate investigation and debate.

    See, what most people associate with your type of rigour, Rigour Rod, is this:


    We don't need no education
    We don't need no thought control
    No dark sarcasm in the classroom
    Teachers leave them kids alone
    Hey! Teachers! Leave them kids alone
    [...]
    "Wrong, do it again!"
    "If you don't eat yer meat, you can't have any pudding[/or pizzagate]
    How can you have any pudding[/or pizzagate] if you don't eat yer meat?"
    "You! Yes, you behind the bike sheds, stand still laddy!"
     
    The Japanese are a very rigours people and culture, as well, and that is probably why you feel at home there, Rigour Rod; but not all peoples and cultures are like yours, your dad's and/or the Japanese's, Rigour Rod.

    Much attention has been given to the rigo[u]r of the Japanese education system and workplace, both of which have certainly contributed to the country’s economic and technological growth. Japanese are expected from a young age to work hard and succeed in a highly competitive environment.
     
    - http://afe.easia.columbia.edu/at/contemp_japan/cjp_education_02.html

    There is a mythical place, Rigour Rod, known as Silicon Valley, I believe Mr. Unz lives in that legendary place, where making mistakes and failure is not automatically punished and looked down upon, but actually often celebrated and encouraged, because it fosters innovation and progress. I know, that does not seem and sound to be very rigo[u]rous and proper, Rigour Rod, but those lads in Silicon Valley, also called ``disrupters'' by some, are quite successful with their approach; some even claim, believe or not, those lads have changed the world, Rigour Rod!
    People all over the world are trying to replicate this miracle known as Silicon Valley, but if you don't have right ingredients and the rigo[u]rous and proper disrupter vibe/spirit, it won't happen and manifest. And most don't have or understand this Silicon Valley disrupter vibe and spirit properly; including yourself, unfortunately, Rigour Rod. But there is always hope. Hope dies last! I have hope for you and your dad, Rigour Rod, even though you are both waaaayyyy too rigo[u]rous, at the moment:

    To succeed here, one needed to tap into this vibe. Unlike the keep-your-head-down mentality of Washingtonians, strangers in Silicon Valley are inclined to interact based on a common mission to design the next great thing. [...]
    To understand what a pro-entrepreneur policy might look like, one must first understand what it means to be a tech startup. These hyper-caffeinated folks think of themselves as “great disrupters,” tearing down the establishment and building back the world in their vision.
     
    - http://www.forbes.com/sites/halsinger/2013/06/26/the-great-disrupters-of-silicon-valley/#5d4a66486916

    I understand and see the Unz Review as a journalistic extension and projection of this innovative Silicon Valley ``disrupter'' vibe and spirit beyond the physical/geographical borders of the Silicon Valley, Rigour Rod.

    Arigato, for your attention, Rigour Rod.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  167. RodW says:
    @NoseytheDuke
    What is interesting to me is that none of the commenters in opposition to RodW and his 'merry band' have pronounced anyone involved in Pizzagate as guilty but are simply making a case for an investigation being warranted. This RodW on the other hand not only is most adamant that no investigation at all is warranted but now he posits that they are in fact innocent, and all without even an investigation.

    Methinks the troll doth protest too much! (and too often).

    RodW either is a pedophile himself, has an prurient interest in the subject or KNOWS that it is used as a tool to control people in power to influence political matters in support of an ideology that he supports. I suspect the latter but any combination of the three could be the case.

    RodW has done at least as much as anyone to convince me that this matter has substance and should be vigorously pursued.

    More baseless accusations and raving. It’s won you a little gold box! Well done. Who hands out these gold rims? What are they supposed to represent?

    When will you acknowledge that calling for ‘investigations’ of people based on wild accusations is inherently corrupt behaviour?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  168. Eagle Eye says:
    @Erebus

    Oh sure. An English person living in Japan on Weiner’s email list. Very likely. Don’t start making stuff up like a nutter.
     
    I think you've misread something. The word "they're" in my sentence refers to Eagle Eye's unnamed suspects.

    Interesting slip by RodW. Japan, eh?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Skeptikal
    What does Japan have to do with anything?

    Where does that come from?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  169. JoeLB says:

    RodW,

    What is YOUR interpretation of the “Handkerchief” and “Map” references in the Podesta emails?

    Simple question.

    Your answer will speak volumes.

    Joe

    Read More
    • Replies: @RodW
    This?

    https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/32795

    It seems like somebody left a handkerchief somewhere, possibly a freebie from a pizza joint, and friends and business acquaintances of somebody to whom it might belong are following up, although they're aware that it's probably unimportant. Nobody cares much about spelling.

    I think the email is exactly what it appears to be, and doesn't seem sinister in the least.

    Your answer will speak volumes.
     
    No it won't, although I daresay you'll speak volumes about it anyway.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  170. RodW says:
    @JoeLB
    RodW,

    What is YOUR interpretation of the "Handkerchief" and "Map" references in the Podesta emails?

    Simple question.

    Your answer will speak volumes.

    Joe

    This?

    https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/32795

    It seems like somebody left a handkerchief somewhere, possibly a freebie from a pizza joint, and friends and business acquaintances of somebody to whom it might belong are following up, although they’re aware that it’s probably unimportant. Nobody cares much about spelling.

    I think the email is exactly what it appears to be, and doesn’t seem sinister in the least.

    Your answer will speak volumes.

    No it won’t, although I daresay you’ll speak volumes about it anyway.

    Read More
    • Replies: @JoeLB
    So your conclusion is that this handkerchief is some promotional item from a pizza joint?

    OK, then there should be plenty of them floating around DC. In fact, with all of the notoriety this situation has stirred up, there should be dozens and dozens of photos on the Internet of this promotional pizza handkerchief.

    There isn't one. Not one single photo of this handkerchief you say was handed out by a pizza joint as a promotional item. Doesn't it seem odd to you that this entire thing could be put to rest by one person (such as the owner of said pizza joint) coming forward with this promotional pizza hanky? That would be it! End of "pizzagate". But it hasn't happened. Gee, I wonder why?

    You know why there isn't and won't be? Because it's BULLSHIT, that's why.

    Nice try, though, but next time, try to consider the utter ridiculousness of a restaurant that serves slightly messy finger foods to children handing out handkerchiefs as a promotional item. Perhaps next time you won't look so...foolish.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  171. Ron Unz says:

    Well, glancing through this long comment-thread, I’ve noticed something a bit intriguing…

    A couple of times that “RodW” fellow claims he’s been a fairly enthusiastic follower of this webzine, having read it every day for the last year or so. He also claims to have a very strong (positive) interest in “conspiracy theories” like 9/11 and the JFK Assassination, and is very concerned that our slight coverage of the Pizzagate suspicions might damage the case for those very legitimate “conspiracy theories.”

    Yet it appears that in an entire year of devouring our webzine on a daily basis he’s never before left a single comment. And now in the space of just a few days he’s quickly posted 43(!) (rather vacuous) comments, all harshly denouncing the Pizzagate conspiracy-nonsense and urging everyone to stop paying any attention to it. Isn’t it a bit odd that an enthusiastic conspiracy-theorist would read this website every day for a full year without being moved to leave a single comment? Then suddenly pour forth so many thousands of words attacking and ridiculing some other “conspiracy theory”?

    I noticed that a mainstream public poll recently came out indicating that roughly 1/3 of the American public (including nearly half of all Trump supporters) basically believe in “Pizzagate.” That’s despite vehement 100% opposition from the MSM and almost no public support by the alternative-media or Trump people, plus unprecedented YouTube and Social Media censoring. Maybe it’s true and maybe it isn’t, but the behavior of the MSM and the unified elites makes me very suspicious.

    Unfortunately, I’m much too busy with my difficult software work right now to look into the topic, but once I have a little more time, perhaps I should.

    Read More
    • Replies: @RodW

    Yet it appears that in an entire year of devouring our webzine on a daily basis he’s never before left a single comment.
     
    People on this thread aren't at all afraid to be straight out wrong about what they say. In June, I had the temerity to post several comments on some of Jonathan Revusky's excesses, and that little exercise reminded me of what a waste of time it is participating in online forums. There's nothing quite as vacuous as being wrong and not even caring.

    And now in the space of just a few days he’s quickly posted 43(!) (rather vacuous) comments,
     
    Perhaps you didn't notice that this is the holiday season? There are other factors at play in the world, and the cleverer sorts of people try to take them into account wherever possible.

    It's now the end of the holiday season, and I too have work to do. I've also been reminded that posting on forums is pointless, and learned that in person, Ron Unz is graceless and not particularly bright.
    , @NoseytheDuke
    Thanks Ron for all of your efforts. I made the mistake of referring to RonW as a conspiracy theorist (which I subsequently corrected) whereas you more accurately described him as having a very strong interest in such theories.

    He described himself as being a student of conspiracy theories and his detailed reply to the question of "what is a red pill" ( I had pondered that too) shows that he is very much involved in the subject.

    Whatever label applies, beyond that of being a troll, he has actually outed himself as a person who is determined to shut down discussion, misdirect, misinform and essentially cover up the very sort of topics that are frequently featured and discussed here at unz and make it such a valuable website. The more he does it the more my interest is piqued.

    This is a very driven but neither a principled nor a very smart individual.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  172. RodW says:
    @Ron Unz
    Well, glancing through this long comment-thread, I've noticed something a bit intriguing...

    A couple of times that "RodW" fellow claims he's been a fairly enthusiastic follower of this webzine, having read it every day for the last year or so. He also claims to have a very strong (positive) interest in "conspiracy theories" like 9/11 and the JFK Assassination, and is very concerned that our slight coverage of the Pizzagate suspicions might damage the case for those very legitimate "conspiracy theories."

    Yet it appears that in an entire year of devouring our webzine on a daily basis he's never before left a single comment. And now in the space of just a few days he's quickly posted 43(!) (rather vacuous) comments, all harshly denouncing the Pizzagate conspiracy-nonsense and urging everyone to stop paying any attention to it. Isn't it a bit odd that an enthusiastic conspiracy-theorist would read this website every day for a full year without being moved to leave a single comment? Then suddenly pour forth so many thousands of words attacking and ridiculing some other "conspiracy theory"?

    I noticed that a mainstream public poll recently came out indicating that roughly 1/3 of the American public (including nearly half of all Trump supporters) basically believe in "Pizzagate." That's despite vehement 100% opposition from the MSM and almost no public support by the alternative-media or Trump people, plus unprecedented YouTube and Social Media censoring. Maybe it's true and maybe it isn't, but the behavior of the MSM and the unified elites makes me very suspicious.

    Unfortunately, I'm much too busy with my difficult software work right now to look into the topic, but once I have a little more time, perhaps I should.

    Yet it appears that in an entire year of devouring our webzine on a daily basis he’s never before left a single comment.

    People on this thread aren’t at all afraid to be straight out wrong about what they say. In June, I had the temerity to post several comments on some of Jonathan Revusky’s excesses, and that little exercise reminded me of what a waste of time it is participating in online forums. There’s nothing quite as vacuous as being wrong and not even caring.

    And now in the space of just a few days he’s quickly posted 43(!) (rather vacuous) comments,

    Perhaps you didn’t notice that this is the holiday season? There are other factors at play in the world, and the cleverer sorts of people try to take them into account wherever possible.

    It’s now the end of the holiday season, and I too have work to do. I’ve also been reminded that posting on forums is pointless, and learned that in person, Ron Unz is graceless and not particularly bright.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Ron Unz

    It’s now the end of the holiday season, and I too have work to do. I’ve also been reminded that posting on forums is pointless, and learned that in person, Ron Unz is graceless and not particularly bright.
     
    Bye-bye!
    , @Skeptikal
    "It’s now the end of the holiday season, and I too have work to do."


    Ha ha ha, dog ate my homework, anyone?
    A convenient but pretty transparent excuse for withdrawing with ruffled feathers, since he has gotten no traction except with his own pseudonyms such as Corporal Clegg.
    We all work---for example, I have been working through most of the holiday--- but we still follow all sorts of events and threads on different blogs and have and take time to comment.

    "In June, I had the temerity to post several comments on some of Jonathan Revusky’s excesses, and that little exercise reminded me of what a waste of time it is participating in online forums. There’s nothing quite as vacuous as being wrong and not even caring."

    Yep, everyone else is "wrong" and "loony" if they don't accept RodW's viewpoins unquestioningly and 150%. Yet RodW is the one who IMO has shown himself to be incapable of participating in a genuine discussion. All he does is bash the participants and the discussion itself and then sling around epithets such a "loony" and "overwrought." A bit of pushback from those he is browbeating drives RodW to ever more grandiose scope of derision: Now not only this thread and this blog and this blog's host, Ron Unz, but ALL blogs. And no one cares about the truth like RodW and so he is going to collect his toys and go home to suck his thumb (in private). Well, RodW, I guess the world is just not your oyster.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  173. Skeptikal says:
    @RodW

    Pizzagate is a ‘gateway drug’ for ‘normies’ into a much bigger and wider field of elite corruption research.
     
    These polls with their vague language don't count for much, and this mass of 'research' with its scattershot accusations isn't going to persuade the majority of 'normies'.

    Let's take one example;

    More recently, a number of their employees were also recorded exploiting an adolescent boy under the approval of a company manager.
     
    What does that mean? Does that mean that ten employees took turns to bugger a five year old while a manager watched? Or does it mean that the manager agreed with the staff it was fair to ask the 16-old data input intern to wash their cars too as part of 'job experience'? Because 'exploiting an adolescent boy' could mean either of those things.

    20% or 30% of all people might get overly-stimulated by the very words "exploiting an adolescent", but the rest of us want to know the facts before we do anything else.

    I try to persuade my 80-year old father, who still enjoys the franchise, votes without fail and takes concrete action where he can, that there's more hidden evil in the world than he's led to believe by the BBC news. My father prides himself on what he believes is intellectual rigour. It makes it all the harder to persuade him that John Podesta is up to no good if you say hot dog means little boys, or DynCorp is up to no good because they exploit adolescents, wink wink.

    In this long and overwrought discussion, I've suggested two things - looking hard at the 'evidence' ourselves, and asking somebody like Judge Napolitano to evaluate the Pizzagate claims. The first suggestion was taken as trolling, and the second suggestion was ignored completely.

    So what exactly do you want to do? Keep on piling up the 'evidence' and abusing all doubters? That won't get us very far.

    “overwrought discussion,”

    More of the troll tips. Try to deligitimize any discussion whatsoever in as many ways as you can.
    The discussion is not “overwrought.”
    RodW has continually attempted to make it so by misrepresenting what is actually said here and repeatedly characterizing reasonable commenters as loonies.
    Saying it again and again and again doesn’t make it so, RodW.
    Despite many attempts to explain things to RodW, he still has not given up, still using the loony meme and now actually trying something new that I didn’t see in the tips for trolls: dragooning his dear old 80-year-old dad as a touchstone for assaying the advisability of an investigation into the various suggestively intertwined (but we don’t know exactly how) Wiener/Podesta/Clinton threads.
    No, RodW, we really do not expect your dear old dad to understand or even be interested the vocabulary of the contemporary gay world—although Britain is of courseknown for its own brand of “nauthtiness.” Wonder whether dear old Dad has ever heard of Jimmy Savile. . . .

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  174. Ron Unz says:
    @RodW

    Yet it appears that in an entire year of devouring our webzine on a daily basis he’s never before left a single comment.
     
    People on this thread aren't at all afraid to be straight out wrong about what they say. In June, I had the temerity to post several comments on some of Jonathan Revusky's excesses, and that little exercise reminded me of what a waste of time it is participating in online forums. There's nothing quite as vacuous as being wrong and not even caring.

    And now in the space of just a few days he’s quickly posted 43(!) (rather vacuous) comments,
     
    Perhaps you didn't notice that this is the holiday season? There are other factors at play in the world, and the cleverer sorts of people try to take them into account wherever possible.

    It's now the end of the holiday season, and I too have work to do. I've also been reminded that posting on forums is pointless, and learned that in person, Ron Unz is graceless and not particularly bright.

    It’s now the end of the holiday season, and I too have work to do. I’ve also been reminded that posting on forums is pointless, and learned that in person, Ron Unz is graceless and not particularly bright.

    Bye-bye!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  175. Skeptikal says:
    @Eagle Eye
    Interesting slip by RodW. Japan, eh?

    What does Japan have to do with anything?

    Where does that come from?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  176. @Ron Unz
    Well, glancing through this long comment-thread, I've noticed something a bit intriguing...

    A couple of times that "RodW" fellow claims he's been a fairly enthusiastic follower of this webzine, having read it every day for the last year or so. He also claims to have a very strong (positive) interest in "conspiracy theories" like 9/11 and the JFK Assassination, and is very concerned that our slight coverage of the Pizzagate suspicions might damage the case for those very legitimate "conspiracy theories."

    Yet it appears that in an entire year of devouring our webzine on a daily basis he's never before left a single comment. And now in the space of just a few days he's quickly posted 43(!) (rather vacuous) comments, all harshly denouncing the Pizzagate conspiracy-nonsense and urging everyone to stop paying any attention to it. Isn't it a bit odd that an enthusiastic conspiracy-theorist would read this website every day for a full year without being moved to leave a single comment? Then suddenly pour forth so many thousands of words attacking and ridiculing some other "conspiracy theory"?

    I noticed that a mainstream public poll recently came out indicating that roughly 1/3 of the American public (including nearly half of all Trump supporters) basically believe in "Pizzagate." That's despite vehement 100% opposition from the MSM and almost no public support by the alternative-media or Trump people, plus unprecedented YouTube and Social Media censoring. Maybe it's true and maybe it isn't, but the behavior of the MSM and the unified elites makes me very suspicious.

    Unfortunately, I'm much too busy with my difficult software work right now to look into the topic, but once I have a little more time, perhaps I should.

    Thanks Ron for all of your efforts. I made the mistake of referring to RonW as a conspiracy theorist (which I subsequently corrected) whereas you more accurately described him as having a very strong interest in such theories.

    He described himself as being a student of conspiracy theories and his detailed reply to the question of “what is a red pill” ( I had pondered that too) shows that he is very much involved in the subject.

    Whatever label applies, beyond that of being a troll, he has actually outed himself as a person who is determined to shut down discussion, misdirect, misinform and essentially cover up the very sort of topics that are frequently featured and discussed here at unz and make it such a valuable website. The more he does it the more my interest is piqued.

    This is a very driven but neither a principled nor a very smart individual.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Skeptikal
    "He described himself as being a student of conspiracy theories and his detailed reply to the question of “what is a red pill” ( I had pondered that too) shows that he is very much involved in the subject. "

    Yes, I noticed that, too. He said the expression was very important to any one who studies conspiracy theories. Kind of implying, I thought, that if I asked the question I must not be a serious student of conspiracy theories, whereas RodW apparently is. Well, I would not consider myself a student of conpsiracy theories at all, the idea is kind of ludicrous---I question the very concept and "conspiracy theory" framing from the get-go as loaded and agenda driven and to be avoided. But RodW seems to accept the conspiracy theory frame.

    I also thought it was a bit weird, the length to which RodW went on the simple red-pilled question, using it as a springboard to go wandering IMO way off topic. But while doing so getting I think the basic point wrong, which is that red-pilled does not as far as I can see mean the same thing as drinking the Kool Aid. RodW also repeated what I had already pointed out (I think on a diff. thread) re the advent of the term "conspiracy theory" and then went on to explain the origin of the expression "drink the Kool Aid." Of course I know perfectly well the origin of this term. I remember it well! Plus the meaning, which RodW doesn't seem to understand, since he equates it with "redpilling." Thus, I infer that RodW is maybe about half my age but wants to present himself as an elder authority in all things to those he considers to be young, naive, and clueless and his intellectual inferiors.

    The fact is, however, that RodW has used up a lot of the oxygen on this thread and has managed to, to a certain extent, make himself the topic, or, drawn a lot of energy to himself. That must have been fun for him during the holidays. I hope he has given up on slumming with the drivel on this thread/site/Internet now and gone back to the salt mines where his own ideas are the only ones he has to deal with. Bye-bye!!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  177. Skeptikal says:
    @RodW

    Yet it appears that in an entire year of devouring our webzine on a daily basis he’s never before left a single comment.
     
    People on this thread aren't at all afraid to be straight out wrong about what they say. In June, I had the temerity to post several comments on some of Jonathan Revusky's excesses, and that little exercise reminded me of what a waste of time it is participating in online forums. There's nothing quite as vacuous as being wrong and not even caring.

    And now in the space of just a few days he’s quickly posted 43(!) (rather vacuous) comments,
     
    Perhaps you didn't notice that this is the holiday season? There are other factors at play in the world, and the cleverer sorts of people try to take them into account wherever possible.

    It's now the end of the holiday season, and I too have work to do. I've also been reminded that posting on forums is pointless, and learned that in person, Ron Unz is graceless and not particularly bright.

    “It’s now the end of the holiday season, and I too have work to do.”

    Ha ha ha, dog ate my homework, anyone?
    A convenient but pretty transparent excuse for withdrawing with ruffled feathers, since he has gotten no traction except with his own pseudonyms such as Corporal Clegg.
    We all work—for example, I have been working through most of the holiday— but we still follow all sorts of events and threads on different blogs and have and take time to comment.

    “In June, I had the temerity to post several comments on some of Jonathan Revusky’s excesses, and that little exercise reminded me of what a waste of time it is participating in online forums. There’s nothing quite as vacuous as being wrong and not even caring.”

    Yep, everyone else is “wrong” and “loony” if they don’t accept RodW’s viewpoins unquestioningly and 150%. Yet RodW is the one who IMO has shown himself to be incapable of participating in a genuine discussion. All he does is bash the participants and the discussion itself and then sling around epithets such a “loony” and “overwrought.” A bit of pushback from those he is browbeating drives RodW to ever more grandiose scope of derision: Now not only this thread and this blog and this blog’s host, Ron Unz, but ALL blogs. And no one cares about the truth like RodW and so he is going to collect his toys and go home to suck his thumb (in private). Well, RodW, I guess the world is just not your oyster.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  178. Skeptikal says:
    @NoseytheDuke
    Thanks Ron for all of your efforts. I made the mistake of referring to RonW as a conspiracy theorist (which I subsequently corrected) whereas you more accurately described him as having a very strong interest in such theories.

    He described himself as being a student of conspiracy theories and his detailed reply to the question of "what is a red pill" ( I had pondered that too) shows that he is very much involved in the subject.

    Whatever label applies, beyond that of being a troll, he has actually outed himself as a person who is determined to shut down discussion, misdirect, misinform and essentially cover up the very sort of topics that are frequently featured and discussed here at unz and make it such a valuable website. The more he does it the more my interest is piqued.

    This is a very driven but neither a principled nor a very smart individual.

    “He described himself as being a student of conspiracy theories and his detailed reply to the question of “what is a red pill” ( I had pondered that too) shows that he is very much involved in the subject. ”

    Yes, I noticed that, too. He said the expression was very important to any one who studies conspiracy theories. Kind of implying, I thought, that if I asked the question I must not be a serious student of conspiracy theories, whereas RodW apparently is. Well, I would not consider myself a student of conpsiracy theories at all, the idea is kind of ludicrous—I question the very concept and “conspiracy theory” framing from the get-go as loaded and agenda driven and to be avoided. But RodW seems to accept the conspiracy theory frame.

    I also thought it was a bit weird, the length to which RodW went on the simple red-pilled question, using it as a springboard to go wandering IMO way off topic. But while doing so getting I think the basic point wrong, which is that red-pilled does not as far as I can see mean the same thing as drinking the Kool Aid. RodW also repeated what I had already pointed out (I think on a diff. thread) re the advent of the term “conspiracy theory” and then went on to explain the origin of the expression “drink the Kool Aid.” Of course I know perfectly well the origin of this term. I remember it well! Plus the meaning, which RodW doesn’t seem to understand, since he equates it with “redpilling.” Thus, I infer that RodW is maybe about half my age but wants to present himself as an elder authority in all things to those he considers to be young, naive, and clueless and his intellectual inferiors.

    The fact is, however, that RodW has used up a lot of the oxygen on this thread and has managed to, to a certain extent, make himself the topic, or, drawn a lot of energy to himself. That must have been fun for him during the holidays. I hope he has given up on slumming with the drivel on this thread/site/Internet now and gone back to the salt mines where his own ideas are the only ones he has to deal with. Bye-bye!!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  179. Erebus says:
    @RodW
    Please excuse my misreading. I did wonder about “they’re” in that context.

    Be that as it may, it would mesh beautifully with the “fake news” meme they’re nurturing so lovingly.
     
    They seem to be nurturing their own fake news about 'Russia did it' to great effect and in line with their traditional agenda, so why complicate the narrative now by going after a 'veteran', one of the official sacred cows of America? And as a mercenary herself, how would Clinton look actively persecuting one? It would draw much unwanted attention to a lot of stuff.

    It’s not “Stratfor” we’re so much concerned with, it’s the 650k Weiner emails. It’s there where we part ways.
     
    We're not in disagreement. All the Wikipedia mails and the Weiner mails need to be investigated for the corruption and crimes they're likely to reveal. But starting from the viewpoint that they'll lead to the killers of Maddie McCann seems daft. Is this viewpoint so hard to understand?

    Oh, and NoseytheDuke ... it helps if you leaven each post with a little relevant discussion in addition to your sycophancy and abuse towards other posters ... if you want to be considered relevant at all.

    Rod may be out of the loop now, but I couldn’t let his comments at #156 stand unanswered.

    They seem to be nurturing their own fake news about ‘Russia did it’ to great effect and in line with their traditional agenda

    I have no idea how it’s playing amongst Englishmen-in-Japan, but it ain’t playing anywhere else to any positive effect. Rather, it seems to have lowered the MSM’s already low standing in the USA, and a laughingstock everywhere else. A point from which, I daresay, they may well never recover.
    It worked once (when Iraq was hacking America in 2002/3). It saw lukewarm success on the 2nd go-round (when it was Iran turn in 2013/4), but the most recent version (Russia) is a fiasco from where I sit.
    In any case, my point was that the Neocon-MSM complex might actually rescue themselves from their public confidence freefall by focusing on, and prosecuting a genuine instance of “fake news” rather than turning into caricatures of themselves with scare-stories-for-idiots of ghostly Russian subversions of “American Democracy”.
    Parenthetically, the real threat to the Republic is that the “Russia did it” noise is nothing more than cover for the real deal – namely, the genuinely terrifying fact that, in recent weeks, the Legislative Branch of the Neocon-MSM complex has recently enshrined in law the power to silence political dissent under the rubric of “fake news”. That is what is being successfully obfuscated, and here indeed your words “to great effect” ring true.

    It would draw much unwanted attention to a lot of stuff.

    Indeed it would.

    But starting from the viewpoint that they’ll lead to the killers of Maddie McCann seems daft. Is this viewpoint so hard to understand?

    Another, from your apparently inexhaustible stable of straw men. What does it matter what starting viewpoint is used to begin the investigation, as long as it proceeds in a thorough, professional manner to evidenced conclusions? In any case, “viewpoint” is an odd term here. Investigators start with hypothesis, and sometimes abandon them for others as the investigation proceeds. Hypotheses, and the testing thereof, are tools used by investigators and scientists to come to conclusions. Insofar, they are more, or less useful and “daftness” doesn’t really come into it. Starting with the hypothesis that the investigation of the Weiner/Wikileaks emails will lead to McCann’s killers may, or may not be useful to the investigation but it ain’t “daft” if it is not. If it turns out not useful, a professional investigator, like a professional scientist will recognize he’s on the wrong trail and abandon it in favour of a more useful hypothesis. It really is as simple as that.

    As a final adieu, if anything’s “so hard to understand”, it’s how to accommodate the fact that as obviously literate a person as yourself encounters such difficulty understanding simple arguments without abandoning the hypothesis that you are not a troll.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Skeptikal
    Don't forget the parting words of Tips for Troll, part I:

    "Remember: these techniques are only effective if the forum participants do not know about them

    Once they are aware of these techniques the operation can completely fail, and the forum can become uncontrolled."

    "Uncontrolled" by the troll, that is.
    That's kind of poetic . . .

    http://whowhatwhy.org/2016/01/27/disinformation-part-1-how-trolls-control-an-internet-forum/
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  180. I’m somewhat late to the game here, but I do think that your explanation of why there is genuine “evidence” for Pizzagate really hits the mark.
    What I find disturbing about this issue is that I have yet to see anyone (and I am speaking of myself – it is quite reasonable to suppose I have missed many things) take seriously this evidence as evidence, and argue that it fails to ground any justified belief in the more serious “pizzagate” contentions. This doesn’t meant that the evidence establishes the case – of course not. But the evidence really is evidence, and ought to be taken seriously.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  181. Skeptikal says:
    @Erebus
    Rod may be out of the loop now, but I couldn't let his comments at #156 stand unanswered.

    They seem to be nurturing their own fake news about ‘Russia did it’ to great effect and in line with their traditional agenda
     
    I have no idea how it's playing amongst Englishmen-in-Japan, but it ain't playing anywhere else to any positive effect. Rather, it seems to have lowered the MSM's already low standing in the USA, and a laughingstock everywhere else. A point from which, I daresay, they may well never recover.
    It worked once (when Iraq was hacking America in 2002/3). It saw lukewarm success on the 2nd go-round (when it was Iran turn in 2013/4), but the most recent version (Russia) is a fiasco from where I sit.
    In any case, my point was that the Neocon-MSM complex might actually rescue themselves from their public confidence freefall by focusing on, and prosecuting a genuine instance of "fake news" rather than turning into caricatures of themselves with scare-stories-for-idiots of ghostly Russian subversions of "American Democracy".
    Parenthetically, the real threat to the Republic is that the "Russia did it" noise is nothing more than cover for the real deal - namely, the genuinely terrifying fact that, in recent weeks, the Legislative Branch of the Neocon-MSM complex has recently enshrined in law the power to silence political dissent under the rubric of "fake news". That is what is being successfully obfuscated, and here indeed your words "to great effect" ring true.

    It would draw much unwanted attention to a lot of stuff.
     
    Indeed it would.

    But starting from the viewpoint that they’ll lead to the killers of Maddie McCann seems daft. Is this viewpoint so hard to understand?
     
    Another, from your apparently inexhaustible stable of straw men. What does it matter what starting viewpoint is used to begin the investigation, as long as it proceeds in a thorough, professional manner to evidenced conclusions? In any case, "viewpoint" is an odd term here. Investigators start with hypothesis, and sometimes abandon them for others as the investigation proceeds. Hypotheses, and the testing thereof, are tools used by investigators and scientists to come to conclusions. Insofar, they are more, or less useful and "daftness" doesn't really come into it. Starting with the hypothesis that the investigation of the Weiner/Wikileaks emails will lead to McCann's killers may, or may not be useful to the investigation but it ain't "daft" if it is not. If it turns out not useful, a professional investigator, like a professional scientist will recognize he's on the wrong trail and abandon it in favour of a more useful hypothesis. It really is as simple as that.

    As a final adieu, if anything's "so hard to understand", it's how to accommodate the fact that as obviously literate a person as yourself encounters such difficulty understanding simple arguments without abandoning the hypothesis that you are not a troll.

    Don’t forget the parting words of Tips for Troll, part I:

    “Remember: these techniques are only effective if the forum participants do not know about them

    Once they are aware of these techniques the operation can completely fail, and the forum can become uncontrolled.”

    “Uncontrolled” by the troll, that is.
    That’s kind of poetic . . .

    http://whowhatwhy.org/2016/01/27/disinformation-part-1-how-trolls-control-an-internet-forum/

    Read More
    • Replies: @NoseytheDuke
    Very useful, thanks. I love the pics of the trolls and thought maybe one should be used as a reply to signify exposure whenever one is attempting to hijack "our" discussions.

    So many discussion forums are ruined by tactics such as those listed and it's my hope that we can all contribute to keeping this one as useful and valuable as it is now. Cheers
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  182. JoeLB says:
    @RodW
    This?

    https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/32795

    It seems like somebody left a handkerchief somewhere, possibly a freebie from a pizza joint, and friends and business acquaintances of somebody to whom it might belong are following up, although they're aware that it's probably unimportant. Nobody cares much about spelling.

    I think the email is exactly what it appears to be, and doesn't seem sinister in the least.

    Your answer will speak volumes.
     
    No it won't, although I daresay you'll speak volumes about it anyway.

    So your conclusion is that this handkerchief is some promotional item from a pizza joint?

    OK, then there should be plenty of them floating around DC. In fact, with all of the notoriety this situation has stirred up, there should be dozens and dozens of photos on the Internet of this promotional pizza handkerchief.

    There isn’t one. Not one single photo of this handkerchief you say was handed out by a pizza joint as a promotional item. Doesn’t it seem odd to you that this entire thing could be put to rest by one person (such as the owner of said pizza joint) coming forward with this promotional pizza hanky? That would be it! End of “pizzagate”. But it hasn’t happened. Gee, I wonder why?

    You know why there isn’t and won’t be? Because it’s BULLSHIT, that’s why.

    Nice try, though, but next time, try to consider the utter ridiculousness of a restaurant that serves slightly messy finger foods to children handing out handkerchiefs as a promotional item. Perhaps next time you won’t look so…foolish.

    Read More
    • Replies: @RodW

    OK, then there should be plenty of them floating around DC. In fact, with all of the notoriety this situation has stirred up, there should be dozens and dozens of photos on the Internet of this promotional pizza handkerchief.
     
    It may come as news to you, but a very large segment of the analogue world never makes it onto the Web. The internet isn't an exhaustive catalogue of reality. And since Pizzagate 'investigators' are clearly people who rely entirely on the web for their 'evidence', they're never going to be able to falsify the claims of debunkers who use logic.

    Let's use some now.

    Doesn’t it seem odd to you that this entire thing could be put to rest by one person (such as the owner of said pizza joint) coming forward with this promotional pizza hanky? That would be it! End of “pizzagate”. But it hasn’t happened. Gee, I wonder why?
     
    Well, I can assume from this that you've never run a business yourself. I myself run several, so I can tell you that anyone who wants to enjoy their life and make some honest money wouldn't step right into the middle of a frenzy of loonies and announce "That's actually my hanky! The one all the paedophiles use as code! They like my pizza joint! It's great, here's the map to it! We serve chicken too, if you don't like pizza!". Do you think you can possibly stop wondering about that now?

    Nice try, though, but next time, try to consider the utter ridiculousness of a restaurant that serves slightly messy finger foods to children handing out handkerchiefs as a promotional item. Perhaps next time you won’t look so…foolish.
     
    As I mentioned, there's lots of stuff that doesn't make it onto the web, and one possible reason this hanky hasn't is that it's one of very few such hankies. Again, my experience in business has exposed me to many kinds of business promotion, and a one-time small run of say 50 promotional handkerchiefs for a local pizzeria doesn't seem implausible. It's a much simpler explanation than that 'pizza' means 'small child for sexual uses', that there are tens or maybe hundreds of abused and even dead children who have yet to be found, and that these children are suffering even as we speak. Have you heard of Occam's Razor?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  183. @Skeptikal
    Don't forget the parting words of Tips for Troll, part I:

    "Remember: these techniques are only effective if the forum participants do not know about them

    Once they are aware of these techniques the operation can completely fail, and the forum can become uncontrolled."

    "Uncontrolled" by the troll, that is.
    That's kind of poetic . . .

    http://whowhatwhy.org/2016/01/27/disinformation-part-1-how-trolls-control-an-internet-forum/

    Very useful, thanks. I love the pics of the trolls and thought maybe one should be used as a reply to signify exposure whenever one is attempting to hijack “our” discussions.

    So many discussion forums are ruined by tactics such as those listed and it’s my hope that we can all contribute to keeping this one as useful and valuable as it is now. Cheers

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  184. Skeptikal says:

    It has been educational to see the troll tips and tricks in action and to see others deconstructing them, so one must be grateful (in a way) to RodW for providing this opportunity.

    One can encounter these “trollish” gambits in social situations, too, where they are a lot harder to call out. Some people just like to debunk—and some of these debunkers are sincere, even though they end up acting just like trolls and having the exact same effect of totally taking over and wrecking productive discussions (and also being quite rude and derisory and sure that they are right). It is complicated when, say, your brother-in-law acts just like a troll in a conversation around the dinner table!

    But as for this kind of forum, I think the troll tips list is really handy for developing a more effective and focused “troll patrol” (more poesy).

    Read More
    • Replies: @RodW
    Good morning everybody. It's a long weekend here in Japan, and so I have time to address some of the posts directed at me. The notion that I'd left the forum was mistaken. Let's start with Skeptikal.

    You're the troll. Let's call you an 'anti-troll troll', possibly a species of the genus 'concern troll'. You've posted reams of stuff that's totally irrelevant to the topic (i.e., unproductive), while praising Unz.com for its productiveness. Nice try, as we like to say here. You also display the personal hatefulness typical of trolls.

    I'm also accused of being several posters (I'm not). A strong but probably incorrect case could also be made for positing that Skeptikal, NoseytheDuke, Eagle Eye, and JoeLB are all the same 20-something girl.

    Now onto matters of more substance.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  185. I agree. Although RodW hopefully has been seen off he did succeed somewhat in creating a distraction which could be off-putting especially to newcomers to the site.

    I’d like to see a “Possible trolling warning”‘ precursor to posts appearing at the top the way other existing admonishments are shown. Perhaps it could be followed by “2nd Warning” etc and include a link to an abridged version of the info on tips on how to identify and deal with a troll.

    This would serve both to educate and possibly immunise everyone on here but also diminish the credibility and enthusiasm of those who persist.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  186. RodW says:
    @Skeptikal
    It has been educational to see the troll tips and tricks in action and to see others deconstructing them, so one must be grateful (in a way) to RodW for providing this opportunity.

    One can encounter these "trollish" gambits in social situations, too, where they are a lot harder to call out. Some people just like to debunk---and some of these debunkers are sincere, even though they end up acting just like trolls and having the exact same effect of totally taking over and wrecking productive discussions (and also being quite rude and derisory and sure that they are right). It is complicated when, say, your brother-in-law acts just like a troll in a conversation around the dinner table!

    But as for this kind of forum, I think the troll tips list is really handy for developing a more effective and focused "troll patrol" (more poesy).

    Good morning everybody. It’s a long weekend here in Japan, and so I have time to address some of the posts directed at me. The notion that I’d left the forum was mistaken. Let’s start with Skeptikal.

    You’re the troll. Let’s call you an ‘anti-troll troll’, possibly a species of the genus ‘concern troll’. You’ve posted reams of stuff that’s totally irrelevant to the topic (i.e., unproductive), while praising Unz.com for its productiveness. Nice try, as we like to say here. You also display the personal hatefulness typical of trolls.

    I’m also accused of being several posters (I’m not). A strong but probably incorrect case could also be made for positing that Skeptikal, NoseytheDuke, Eagle Eye, and JoeLB are all the same 20-something girl.

    Now onto matters of more substance.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  187. RodW says:
    @JoeLB
    So your conclusion is that this handkerchief is some promotional item from a pizza joint?

    OK, then there should be plenty of them floating around DC. In fact, with all of the notoriety this situation has stirred up, there should be dozens and dozens of photos on the Internet of this promotional pizza handkerchief.

    There isn't one. Not one single photo of this handkerchief you say was handed out by a pizza joint as a promotional item. Doesn't it seem odd to you that this entire thing could be put to rest by one person (such as the owner of said pizza joint) coming forward with this promotional pizza hanky? That would be it! End of "pizzagate". But it hasn't happened. Gee, I wonder why?

    You know why there isn't and won't be? Because it's BULLSHIT, that's why.

    Nice try, though, but next time, try to consider the utter ridiculousness of a restaurant that serves slightly messy finger foods to children handing out handkerchiefs as a promotional item. Perhaps next time you won't look so...foolish.

    OK, then there should be plenty of them floating around DC. In fact, with all of the notoriety this situation has stirred up, there should be dozens and dozens of photos on the Internet of this promotional pizza handkerchief.

    It may come as news to you, but a very large segment of the analogue world never makes it onto the Web. The internet isn’t an exhaustive catalogue of reality. And since Pizzagate ‘investigators’ are clearly people who rely entirely on the web for their ‘evidence’, they’re never going to be able to falsify the claims of debunkers who use logic.

    Let’s use some now.

    Doesn’t it seem odd to you that this entire thing could be put to rest by one person (such as the owner of said pizza joint) coming forward with this promotional pizza hanky? That would be it! End of “pizzagate”. But it hasn’t happened. Gee, I wonder why?

    Well, I can assume from this that you’ve never run a business yourself. I myself run several, so I can tell you that anyone who wants to enjoy their life and make some honest money wouldn’t step right into the middle of a frenzy of loonies and announce “That’s actually my hanky! The one all the paedophiles use as code! They like my pizza joint! It’s great, here’s the map to it! We serve chicken too, if you don’t like pizza!”. Do you think you can possibly stop wondering about that now?

    Nice try, though, but next time, try to consider the utter ridiculousness of a restaurant that serves slightly messy finger foods to children handing out handkerchiefs as a promotional item. Perhaps next time you won’t look so…foolish.

    As I mentioned, there’s lots of stuff that doesn’t make it onto the web, and one possible reason this hanky hasn’t is that it’s one of very few such hankies. Again, my experience in business has exposed me to many kinds of business promotion, and a one-time small run of say 50 promotional handkerchiefs for a local pizzeria doesn’t seem implausible. It’s a much simpler explanation than that ‘pizza’ means ‘small child for sexual uses’, that there are tens or maybe hundreds of abused and even dead children who have yet to be found, and that these children are suffering even as we speak. Have you heard of Occam’s Razor?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  188. RodW says:
    @Erebus
    I wrote this earlier (at post #136), but was unable to publish it. It's probably obsolete now, but here it is anyway.

    Yes, but which children are you talking about? For them to have interests to put first, you have to be able to specify the children and their interests. So who are they, and what are their interests?
    If the answer is “I don’t know”, then you’ve got a major obstacle to an investigation.
     
    Utter bollocks. Similar to your "challenge" that I addressed above (http://www.unz.com/article/precedents-for-pizzagate/#comment-1713738), that's another false frame. Someone "highly qualified" in "text analysis" would, of course know that, so one is (not) surprised to see you resorting to it again.
    The victim is often unknown at the start of an investigation. If a cop finds a human hand in a garbage can, he doesn't need to know the victim's identity to start an investigation. Likewise, if a couple of guys are inadvertently overheard discussing a heinous criminal act and it is reported to the police, an investigation will be opened. To be sure, the investigation would attempt, inter alia, to determine the identity of the victim(s), but even if that is never determined the investigation will normally proceed until it reaches trial, or goes cold.

    Likewise, we here at Unz don't know, and make no claims to knowing the identities of the victims. Indeed, depending on the nature of the possible crimes, they may never be known.
    As for "their interests", surely these would include not being sexually, or otherwise abused.
    As others have pointed out, the state also has interests in this case. Inter alia, they include knowing that the persons entrusted with making decisions and acting on its behalf are not criminals or vulnerable to extraordinary influence from parties hostile to the state's function and well-being.

    OTOH, we do have a public claim from a high profile source that the NYPD and the FBI are in possession of evidence of "great evil" in high places, including sexual abuse of children.
    Neither of those agencies have denied his claims, much less demanded that Prince retract his statements. Nobody has brought a libel suit against him, and Prince would know that his statements are libelous in the extreme if they were false. Ergo, the claim stands.
    Depending on the nature of the evidence, we may never learn the identities of the victims, but we may well learn the identities of the perpetrators and the nature of their crimes against both the victims and against the state. That is enough to proceed, no?

    What I, and I believe others, here at Unz are saying is that the evidence that is apparently in hand must not be allowed to moulder on the shelf until forgotten or destroyed, but to become the basis of a real, immediate investigation.
    Thanks to Wikileaks, we have the "Pizza codes" serving as a dimly recognized public tip protruding from what appears, as evidenced from a variety of sources, to be a fetid swamp of the most heinous corruption at the highest levels. That's why we can talk about it at all.

    @BucephalusXYZ

    There seems to be some confusion about what evidence is. Let’s address the matter.

    In response to my key objection that the evidence of actual victims is very thin (consisting principally of poor Maddie McCann as far I can tell), Erebus says;

    The victim is often unknown at the start of an investigation. If a cop finds a human hand in a garbage can, he doesn’t need to know the victim’s identity to start an investigation. Likewise, if a couple of guys are inadvertently overheard discussing a heinous criminal act and it is reported to the police, an investigation will be opened. To be sure, the investigation would attempt, inter alia, to determine the identity of the victim(s), but even if that is never determined the investigation will normally proceed until it reaches trial, or goes cold.

    A human hand in a garbage can is what’s called ‘physical evidence’, or more tellingly perhaps, ‘real evidence’. The hand alone powerfully suggests what’s called ‘foul play’. There’s due cause for concern about the health and well-being of the person who used to be attached to the hand. One could easily posit that a crime has been committed.

    If we overheard talk of a heinous crime, we would know it was heinous because the words themselves would suggest heinousness – things like “burnt”, “crushed”, “ripped apart”, “greetin’”, “jailbait” etc. I expect you have your own favourites. These are NOT everyday expressions that are open to much confusion. We’d know its heinousness by its name (a rather powerful evidentiary concept, no?) Again, we would naturally have concern for the victim or victims.

    In these examples, there’s little room for doubt about foul play, and the existence of victims. It’s all very prima facie as we’d say if we thought using dead language was helpful. If we were to investigate further, in the first case we’d do DNA testing of the hand, search for human and camera witnesses to the crime, look for bodies missing a hand. In the second case, we’d interview the thugs and so on.

    Contrast this with Pizzagate. One has to put ‘evidence’ in parenthesis because there isn’t any. There’s no real evidence, only the claim that commonly used words for food don’t mean what they normally mean. When each example is examined in context, its validity as supporting evidence of the claim falls apart. Just because there’s lots of it doesn’t increase its validity, when each example falls apart on inspection. The only victims suggested by this ‘evidence’ are the unfortunate pigs, cows and chickens who provided the meat.

    It may be argued that it’s not just words, there are the efits. But those are of one man, not two, and before they were said to be the spitting image of the Podestas, they were said with equal validity to be the spitting image of Maddie’s father. Not very good evidence of much.

    So what kind of ‘investigation’ could we have based on this ‘evidence’? Maybe waterboard John and Tony Podesta? Perhaps dig around some pizzerias with a big spade? Or maybe pay some of our hottest ‘internet citizen sleuths’ to stay up even later at night to comb the Web even more thoroughly until it all becomes clear. Seriously, what do you want? Where would you start? What is your hypothesis?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  189. Eagle Eye says:

    URGENT REQUEST!

    Please DO NOT RESPOND TO RodW’s TROLLING ANY FURTHER! Simply let his rantings wither on the vine. He has intentionally wasted enough bandwidth and sucked up unwarranted attention, and our gentle host Ron Unz has bidden him goodbye.

    Going forward, what would be much more helpful to advance the discussion in a positive way is to have everyone’s INSIGHTS on further lines of enquiry.

    A useful “primer” of pertinent facts and observations is found here:

    https://dcpizzagate.wordpress.com/

    Familiarity with the sequence of events, conduct of investigations of pedophile rings in other countries (especially the dynamics of organizational responses, e.g. by the BBC and police forces in the UK) may help to focus organizational energies here.

    We already know from RodW’s tireless effusions that
    (1) there is far too much smoke here for there to be no fire; and
    (2) possible U.S. suspects and their paid propaganda operatives here and throughout the MSM are working overtime to DISCOURAGE EVEN PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATIONS.)

    Clearly, there are many further areas that can and should be looked into.

    Thank you.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Skeptikal
    I agree.
    That said, what is one to make of comment 193?

    Is the author Aidan Cassiel working on part 3?

    I believe the admonition "Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone" is designed to put a stop to snark and derision directed at other commenters, which taints any potentially useful material or ideas both the "snark shooter" puts forth.
    , @JoeLB
    I had a long reply to RodW's long reply, but I'm taking your advice.

    DO NOT FEED THE TROLLS!

    Thank you, Eagle Eye.

    Joe
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  190. FKA Max says:
    @RodW

    Pizzagate is a ‘gateway drug’ for ‘normies’ into a much bigger and wider field of elite corruption research.
     
    These polls with their vague language don't count for much, and this mass of 'research' with its scattershot accusations isn't going to persuade the majority of 'normies'.

    Let's take one example;

    More recently, a number of their employees were also recorded exploiting an adolescent boy under the approval of a company manager.
     
    What does that mean? Does that mean that ten employees took turns to bugger a five year old while a manager watched? Or does it mean that the manager agreed with the staff it was fair to ask the 16-old data input intern to wash their cars too as part of 'job experience'? Because 'exploiting an adolescent boy' could mean either of those things.

    20% or 30% of all people might get overly-stimulated by the very words "exploiting an adolescent", but the rest of us want to know the facts before we do anything else.

    I try to persuade my 80-year old father, who still enjoys the franchise, votes without fail and takes concrete action where he can, that there's more hidden evil in the world than he's led to believe by the BBC news. My father prides himself on what he believes is intellectual rigour. It makes it all the harder to persuade him that John Podesta is up to no good if you say hot dog means little boys, or DynCorp is up to no good because they exploit adolescents, wink wink.

    In this long and overwrought discussion, I've suggested two things - looking hard at the 'evidence' ourselves, and asking somebody like Judge Napolitano to evaluate the Pizzagate claims. The first suggestion was taken as trolling, and the second suggestion was ignored completely.

    So what exactly do you want to do? Keep on piling up the 'evidence' and abusing all doubters? That won't get us very far.

    My father prides himself on what he believes is intellectual rigour.

    Maybe you need to reconsider/redefine your perception/definition of rigour, Rod. Rigour Rod!!!, that is a cool nickname, isn’t it!!!

    Would you mind if I call you Rigour Rod from now on, Rigour Rod?

    A New Definition of Rigo[u]r

    There it is. Rigo[u]r is the result of work that challenges students’ thinking in new and interesting ways. It occurs when they are encouraged toward a sophisticated understanding of fundamental ideas and are driven by curiosity to discover what they don’t know. [...]

    Let us aspire to something greater than making difficult work for our students. Let’s take them to that intersection of encouragement and engagement, where they confront ideas and problems that are meaningful. Let’s stretch their thinking. Let’s unleash their sophistication. And let’s foster a love of deep knowledge.

    https://www.edutopia.org/blog/a-new-definition-of-rigor-brian-sztabnik

    I believe, investigating and debating Pizzagate “stretches” people’s thinking and broadens their horizons, Rigour Rod. That is why I encourage and participate in the Pizzagate investigation and debate.

    See, what most people associate with your type of rigour, Rigour Rod, is this:

    We don’t need no education
    We don’t need no thought control
    No dark sarcasm in the classroom
    Teachers leave them kids alone
    Hey! Teachers! Leave them kids alone
    [...]
    “Wrong, do it again!”
    “If you don’t eat yer meat, you can’t have any pudding[/or pizzagate]
    How can you have any pudding[/or pizzagate] if you don’t eat yer meat?”
    “You! Yes, you behind the bike sheds, stand still laddy!”

    The Japanese are a very rigours people and culture, as well, and that is probably why you feel at home there, Rigour Rod; but not all peoples and cultures are like yours, your dad’s and/or the Japanese’s, Rigour Rod.

    Much attention has been given to the rigo[u]r of the Japanese education system and workplace, both of which have certainly contributed to the country’s economic and technological growth. Japanese are expected from a young age to work hard and succeed in a highly competitive environment.

    http://afe.easia.columbia.edu/at/contemp_japan/cjp_education_02.html

    There is a mythical place, Rigour Rod, known as Silicon Valley, I believe Mr. Unz lives in that legendary place, where making mistakes and failure is not automatically punished and looked down upon, but actually often celebrated and encouraged, because it fosters innovation and progress. I know, that does not seem and sound to be very rigo[u]rous and proper, Rigour Rod, but those lads in Silicon Valley, also called “disrupters” by some, are quite successful with their approach; some even claim, believe or not, those lads have changed the world, Rigour Rod!
    People all over the world are trying to replicate this miracle known as Silicon Valley, but if you don’t have right ingredients and the rigo[u]rous and proper disrupter vibe/spirit, it won’t happen and manifest. And most don’t have or understand this Silicon Valley disrupter vibe and spirit properly; including yourself, unfortunately, Rigour Rod. But there is always hope. Hope dies last! I have hope for you and your dad, Rigour Rod, even though you are both waaaayyyy too rigo[u]rous, at the moment:

    To succeed here, one needed to tap into this vibe. Unlike the keep-your-head-down mentality of Washingtonians, strangers in Silicon Valley are inclined to interact based on a common mission to design the next great thing. [...]
    To understand what a pro-entrepreneur policy might look like, one must first understand what it means to be a tech startup. These hyper-caffeinated folks think of themselves as “great disrupters,” tearing down the establishment and building back the world in their vision.

    http://www.forbes.com/sites/halsinger/2013/06/26/the-great-disrupters-of-silicon-valley/#5d4a66486916

    I understand and see the Unz Review as a journalistic extension and projection of this innovative Silicon Valley “disrupter” vibe and spirit beyond the physical/geographical borders of the Silicon Valley, Rigour Rod.

    Arigato, for your attention, Rigour Rod.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Skeptikal
    Re Silicon Valley,
    Ron Unz mentioned earlier that he was working on some programming or software or something.
    The comment function at this site seems to be quite a bit more sophisticated than what I have seen at other sites, with features I have not seen elsewhere.

    I am definitely an "anti-techie," so I have no idea.
    But wonder whether this comment interface or whatever it is called is a creation of our host Ron Unz.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  191. This is, of course, What Trump should tell the incoming justice department to focus on.

    A few tens of thousands fired, no benefits , prosecuted and jailed would be a clearly visible drainig of the swamp.

    Who could complain?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  192. RodW says:

    Leave a Reply – Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone

    Given that the last few posts have been nothing but the most puerile ad hominem and make-believe, it’s hard to take this warning seriously. I’m assuming a yellow rim on a post is some sort of award for the most hysterical attack on another poster.

    (2) possible U.S. suspects and their paid propaganda operatives here and throughout the MSM are working overtime to DISCOURAGE EVEN PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATIONS.)

    Eagle Eye/Skeptikal, your eagle eye perhaps missed the fact that I’m probably the only person on this thread who is actually doing any investigating. I’m looking at the ‘evidence’ that’s already been presented, and I’m providing critical insight. I don’t see you doing that.

    Also, I suggested that the Stratfor “waitresses” thing would be a good place to start some sort of investigation, because that does appear to be code for something.

    Finally, I proposed that asking the very fair-minded and rigorous Judge Andrew Napolitano to weigh in on the matter would be a good start. Since the good judge already writes for the site, I thought it might be relatively easy to achieve. Or is he just another one of my operatives perhaps?

    Familiarity with the sequence of events, conduct of investigations of pedophile rings in other countries (especially the dynamics of organizational responses, e.g. by the BBC and police forces in the UK) may help to focus organizational energies here.

    Go knock yourself out. It’s no skin off my nose, and I’m not stopping you. I suggest if you don’t want to see criticism of your valuable findings, just ignore my posts.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  193. RodW says:

    Having looked through the summary of the https://dcpizzagate.wordpress.com/, I have to agree that it’s hard to find an innocent explanation for the pedophile symbols appearing in various places. Alefantis’ Instagram is also suggestive enough to warrant investigation of some sort.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  194. Skeptikal says:
    @FKA Max
    My father prides himself on what he believes is intellectual rigour.

    Maybe you need to reconsider/redefine your perception/definition of rigour, Rod. Rigour Rod!!!, that is a cool nickname, isn't it!!!

    Would you mind if I call you Rigour Rod from now on, Rigour Rod?

    A New Definition of Rigo[u]r


    There it is. Rigo[u]r is the result of work that challenges students' thinking in new and interesting ways. It occurs when they are encouraged toward a sophisticated understanding of fundamental ideas and are driven by curiosity to discover what they don't know. [...]

    Let us aspire to something greater than making difficult work for our students. Let's take them to that intersection of encouragement and engagement, where they confront ideas and problems that are meaningful. Let's stretch their thinking. Let's unleash their sophistication. And let's foster a love of deep knowledge.
     
    - https://www.edutopia.org/blog/a-new-definition-of-rigor-brian-sztabnik

    I believe, investigating and debating Pizzagate ``stretches'' people's thinking and broadens their horizons, Rigour Rod. That is why I encourage and participate in the Pizzagate investigation and debate.

    See, what most people associate with your type of rigour, Rigour Rod, is this:


    We don't need no education
    We don't need no thought control
    No dark sarcasm in the classroom
    Teachers leave them kids alone
    Hey! Teachers! Leave them kids alone
    [...]
    "Wrong, do it again!"
    "If you don't eat yer meat, you can't have any pudding[/or pizzagate]
    How can you have any pudding[/or pizzagate] if you don't eat yer meat?"
    "You! Yes, you behind the bike sheds, stand still laddy!"
     
    The Japanese are a very rigours people and culture, as well, and that is probably why you feel at home there, Rigour Rod; but not all peoples and cultures are like yours, your dad's and/or the Japanese's, Rigour Rod.

    Much attention has been given to the rigo[u]r of the Japanese education system and workplace, both of which have certainly contributed to the country’s economic and technological growth. Japanese are expected from a young age to work hard and succeed in a highly competitive environment.
     
    - http://afe.easia.columbia.edu/at/contemp_japan/cjp_education_02.html

    There is a mythical place, Rigour Rod, known as Silicon Valley, I believe Mr. Unz lives in that legendary place, where making mistakes and failure is not automatically punished and looked down upon, but actually often celebrated and encouraged, because it fosters innovation and progress. I know, that does not seem and sound to be very rigo[u]rous and proper, Rigour Rod, but those lads in Silicon Valley, also called ``disrupters'' by some, are quite successful with their approach; some even claim, believe or not, those lads have changed the world, Rigour Rod!
    People all over the world are trying to replicate this miracle known as Silicon Valley, but if you don't have right ingredients and the rigo[u]rous and proper disrupter vibe/spirit, it won't happen and manifest. And most don't have or understand this Silicon Valley disrupter vibe and spirit properly; including yourself, unfortunately, Rigour Rod. But there is always hope. Hope dies last! I have hope for you and your dad, Rigour Rod, even though you are both waaaayyyy too rigo[u]rous, at the moment:

    To succeed here, one needed to tap into this vibe. Unlike the keep-your-head-down mentality of Washingtonians, strangers in Silicon Valley are inclined to interact based on a common mission to design the next great thing. [...]
    To understand what a pro-entrepreneur policy might look like, one must first understand what it means to be a tech startup. These hyper-caffeinated folks think of themselves as “great disrupters,” tearing down the establishment and building back the world in their vision.
     
    - http://www.forbes.com/sites/halsinger/2013/06/26/the-great-disrupters-of-silicon-valley/#5d4a66486916

    I understand and see the Unz Review as a journalistic extension and projection of this innovative Silicon Valley ``disrupter'' vibe and spirit beyond the physical/geographical borders of the Silicon Valley, Rigour Rod.

    Arigato, for your attention, Rigour Rod.

    Re Silicon Valley,
    Ron Unz mentioned earlier that he was working on some programming or software or something.
    The comment function at this site seems to be quite a bit more sophisticated than what I have seen at other sites, with features I have not seen elsewhere.

    I am definitely an “anti-techie,” so I have no idea.
    But wonder whether this comment interface or whatever it is called is a creation of our host Ron Unz.

    Read More
    • Replies: @FKA Max
    Corrections for my above comment: The Japanese are a very *rigo[u]rous* people and culture... ...if you don’t have *the* right ingredients...

    This is a tweet Steve Sailer retweeted yesterday:


    Steve Sailer Retweeted
    John Rivers ‏@JohnRiversX7 Jan 5

    http://Unz.com has grown into a pretty popular website.
    Ron Unz hand codes it.
     
    - https://twitter.com/JohnRiversX7/status/817224384633012224

    Flexibility and taking risks instead of rigidity and playing it safe, are the hallmarks of the Silicon Valley spirit, in my opinion and in my experience.

    One of my father's friends (who actually speaks Japanese and is married to a Japanese, with whom he has two daughters, and who also happens to work in the Silicon Valley) put it this way recently:

    As Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe looks for ways to reboot Abenomics, he could do worse than heed the advice of Kurt Kelty. Delivering a public speech on a recent Friday evening in Osaka, Tesla's director of battery technology captured all that's wrong with the Japanese economy. "We need to take risks, otherwise there will be no prosperity in business,” Kelty said in fluent Japanese. “We take risks, but it seems not the case in Japan.”
     
    - https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2015-04-02/japan-s-battery-powered-recovery

    This is what I wrote a couple of months ago:

    Whomever has the ”smarts” to sustainably, fairly, and ethically tap into this significant, yet unexploited, renewable natural resource, will strike it rich, in monetary as well as in political terms. The technology/mindset to successfully tap these deposits/reserves with, is a mysterious and magical formula. Akin to discovering the Holy Grail. I feel Mr. Unz is one of the very few people close to discovering/formulating it. Peter Thiel is another person on the right(eous) path.
     
    - http://www.unz.com/runz/when-viacom-ceo-philippe-dauman-still-had-an-iq-of-260/#comment-1525753

    As some commenters have pointed out above, even though the interactions and the exchanges with Rigour Rod have been extremely tiresome, I feel as well, that this comment thread has served a useful purpose and has been extremely educational, in my opinion, on several different levels and in many different ways.

    But what if higher education is really just the final stage of a competitive tournament? From grades and test results through the U.S. News & World Report rankings of the colleges themselves, higher education sorts us all into a hierarchy. Kids at the top enjoy prestige because they’ve defeated everybody else in a competition to reach the schools that proudly exclude the most people. All the hard work at Harvard is done by the admissions officers who anoint an already-proven hypercompetitive elite. If that weren’t true — if superior instruction could explain the value of college — then why not franchise the Ivy League?
     
    - https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/peter-thiel-thinking-too-highly-of-higher-ed/2014/11/21/f6758fba-70d4-11e4-893f-86bd390a3340_story.html?utm_term=.381d023d0889

    I think Rigour Rod is a product of this increasingly impotent and obsolete, hyper-competitive, rigo[u]rous system and elitist hierarchy, and he believes this somehow makes him better than others, but I think he is wrong about that.

    The internet has the same effect as the printing press had over 500 years ago.


    Significantly, if one wanted to make an analogy, much more relevant to American history, of a once-infallible religious leader facing threats from multiple schools of thought using a new technology to spread their message, Martin Luther, not Mohammed comes to mind.

    The Alt Right is not looking to reform corrupt Conservatism Inc. It wants to destroy it.

    In this respect, it’s revealing that Continetti celebrates the high costs and “barriers to entry” during the Buckley’s heyday. Rather than religion, this brings to mind economics—the classic description of a monopoly.

    For all Continetti’s fretting about the Alt Right bringing “another conservative dark age,”, the Alt Right’s top institution’s likely have an annual budget of less than half a million dollars combined. In contrast, Conservatism Inc. has literally billions of dollars.

    So what does it say about the “conservative” movement’s value in the marketplace of ideas when its very existence is threatened by a few small institutions, some anonymous trolls on Twitter, and a few writers who National Review thought they had already destroyed?

    The Alt Right is not like Islamists waging jihad against Conservatism Inc.—it’s like Netflix unleashing creative destruction upon Blockbuster.
     
    - http://www.vdare.com/articles/neocons-want-to-destroy-alt-right-bring-back-buckley-style-excommunications-too-bad
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  195. Skeptikal says:
    @Eagle Eye
    URGENT REQUEST!

    Please DO NOT RESPOND TO RodW's TROLLING ANY FURTHER! Simply let his rantings wither on the vine. He has intentionally wasted enough bandwidth and sucked up unwarranted attention, and our gentle host Ron Unz has bidden him goodbye.

    Going forward, what would be much more helpful to advance the discussion in a positive way is to have everyone's INSIGHTS on further lines of enquiry.

    A useful "primer" of pertinent facts and observations is found here:

    https://dcpizzagate.wordpress.com/

    Familiarity with the sequence of events, conduct of investigations of pedophile rings in other countries (especially the dynamics of organizational responses, e.g. by the BBC and police forces in the UK) may help to focus organizational energies here.

    We already know from RodW's tireless effusions that
    (1) there is far too much smoke here for there to be no fire; and
    (2) possible U.S. suspects and their paid propaganda operatives here and throughout the MSM are working overtime to DISCOURAGE EVEN PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATIONS.)

    Clearly, there are many further areas that can and should be looked into.

    Thank you.

    I agree.
    That said, what is one to make of comment 193?

    Is the author Aidan Cassiel working on part 3?

    I believe the admonition “Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone” is designed to put a stop to snark and derision directed at other commenters, which taints any potentially useful material or ideas both the “snark shooter” puts forth.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  196. JoeLB says:
    @Eagle Eye
    URGENT REQUEST!

    Please DO NOT RESPOND TO RodW's TROLLING ANY FURTHER! Simply let his rantings wither on the vine. He has intentionally wasted enough bandwidth and sucked up unwarranted attention, and our gentle host Ron Unz has bidden him goodbye.

    Going forward, what would be much more helpful to advance the discussion in a positive way is to have everyone's INSIGHTS on further lines of enquiry.

    A useful "primer" of pertinent facts and observations is found here:

    https://dcpizzagate.wordpress.com/

    Familiarity with the sequence of events, conduct of investigations of pedophile rings in other countries (especially the dynamics of organizational responses, e.g. by the BBC and police forces in the UK) may help to focus organizational energies here.

    We already know from RodW's tireless effusions that
    (1) there is far too much smoke here for there to be no fire; and
    (2) possible U.S. suspects and their paid propaganda operatives here and throughout the MSM are working overtime to DISCOURAGE EVEN PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATIONS.)

    Clearly, there are many further areas that can and should be looked into.

    Thank you.

    I had a long reply to RodW’s long reply, but I’m taking your advice.

    DO NOT FEED THE TROLLS!

    Thank you, Eagle Eye.

    Joe

    Read More
    • Replies: @Eagle Eye
    Thank YOU and everyone for their attention and contributions.

    And yes, "DO NOT FEED THE TROLLS" would have been a more succinct way of putting it.

    It strikes me that more thought should be given to exactly WHOM the intense covering fire here (and the blanket "D Notice"* keeping any mention of Pizzagate out of most of the MSM) is supposed to protect?

    In the UK and in Belgium, one saw long-established networks of pedophiles across party lines, spanning all branches of government and reaching into the supra-national EU organizations. International connections and access to unprotected youth in Third World countries (e.g. Haiti, Africa, South and SE Asia) would seem to be the holy grail for any ambitious pedophile.

    Ironically, perhaps because of its handy food association, PG does seem to have become something of an underground meme even among those inclined to blue-pill obeisance to the rules of governmen