Have you guys seen the following mails from the famous thinly sliced pizza? (pizzagate)

submitted ago by catladies

Hi guys, I joined two minutes ago, been following the case for a couple of weeks. I was just reading trough some pizza mail when i found the famous mail : Title Here.

So i followed the chain and noticed this mail: Title Here Shouldn't we consider the simpler explanation here?That they were simply ordering pizza for the guys in the office?

Notice i'm not a shill, but i think it's important to sort the shady mails from the maybe innocent mails? I agree that the term pizza in Podesta emails sound like code. [email protected] looks like a email that everyone at Stratfor Austin office get right? Are all of them Pedos? or is this simply an actual pizza event?

If someone have more information on why this mail has stuck as an example of mysterious emails , can you clearify?

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

pontagon ago

yeh this has been posted a lot, mainly a couple of weeks ago - still pretty good evidence to suggest its definitely some kind of code

catladies ago

Why? if it's reference to actual pizza (food) why is this good evidence for code?

pontagon ago

edit: I done fucked up, pls ignore - evidence has changed my rather strong opinion on this, thanks OP.

please read the 2nd email people.

catladies ago

"There's apparently been some confusion: we're not reserving slices here. Everybody gets one slice, according to their needs, just as the glorious tenets of Marxism would tell us." As i linked in the latter email. ALSO: "Number of employees 100 (2015)[1]" (wikipedia) do you think startfor would send a mail to all of it's employers about possible pizza (CP) This to me seems like a mail about actual pizza(food) My point being that we need to have some standards for what we see as evidence of offence...

pontagon ago

my apologies - I fucked up here, and thought you were just dismissing the original mail (which has been reposted here countless times).

I hadn't actually read your post in full, and I jumped to conclusions. I don't often do this, I should be asleep right now. The second email really does pull apart any claims of that email being weird; and my opinion on the original email has changed as necessary.

Thanks for being patient, and for shining some light on this, I feel stupid for this. Apologies.

catladies ago

Awesome. I just wanted some clarification on this issue. the only narrative I'm pushing is being fair when deducting what we consider as evidence of code. Context is important, and this is maybe the most important aspect of defining what we read as code. I should also go to sleep.

pontagon ago

no, totally - you played this correctly, I had already made up my opinion on that email, and I think I jumped to make a comment without finishing your post - again it just shows how we can form emotional reactions to some of this stuff easily, or atleast I have. I think everyone here should be willing to change their assumption thus far when presented with credible info to the contrary.

catladies ago

thanks, I'm not doing this to be a pain, we MUST sort real info from possible innocent communication.