The primary strategy the media are using to prevent awareness of Pizzagate from spreading is to paint it as a partisan, biased narrative with no factual basis. The CIA and its media lackeys know that people who are anti-Trump will generally uncritically accept that narrative, and that it will also be persuasive to people who are neutral toward Trump.
One of our top priorities right now needs to be attacking this media strategy of painting Pizzagate as biased. The most effective way to fight this strategy is to show that Pizzagate is connected to Republicans/conservatives as well as Democrats/liberals. Some examples off the top of my head are Dennis Hastert, Mark Foley, and Margaret Thatcher's coverup of elite/government pedophilia in the UK. Let's find more examples and make some powerful memes to spread on Twitter, Facebook, and Reddit!
NOTE: It's important to include both Republicans/conservatives and Democrats/liberals in these memes. If it's all Republicans/conservatives, it looks partisan against the right.
view the rest of the comments →
wecanhelp ago
I agree, but I'd go one step further and try to avoid the words Republicans/conservatives and Democrats/liberals altogether if possible. What we need to emphasize is that this is not a political cause. Sure, its implications are political, but the core boils down to human conscience and responsibility, and we need everyone on our side who's otherwise alienated by the slightest hint of a political movement.
Millennial_Falcon ago
I think we need to use those words to counter the media narrative that it's a partisan hoax.
wecanhelp ago
Wouldn't something along the lines of "this goes beyond our political stances" suffice, without explicitly spelling out those words? I know I'm so resistant to political blabla thanks to a continuous disappointment and frustration that if I see one of those words mentioned anywhere I scroll right past. And I know many do the same. Also, this is global, and as @Yuke very smartly pointed it out, this dichotomy doesn't necessarily make sense for everybody.
Millennial_Falcon ago
Maybe with just labeling "R," "D," etc? They have to be labeled in some way, in order to prove the point that Pizzagate is unbiased.
UglyTruth ago
It's not important to prove that we are unbiased. An unbiased or credentialed source is only important when you are using opinion in your argument, it doesn't matter who the source is when you are arguing with facts.
Facts that show that the issue is real are the roles of people like Jeffrey Epstein, Dennis Hastert, Jimmy Savile, Cyril Smith, Leon Brittan, and the testimony of people like Det. Jim Rothstein, Wayne Masden, Sibel Edmonds, and the misrepresention of the corporate media eg "that PizzaGate is a debunked conspiracy theory about Hillary Clinton running a child sex ring from Comet Ping Pong and Celia Kang's fictional account about the Vigilant Citizen article.
Sibel Edmonds made a valuable observation that when the FBI were collecting evidence about paedophilia, the people implicated were from both sides of the political fence, i.e. both republican and democrat.
Millennial_Falcon ago
We aren't just dealing with facts. We are promoting what we feel is a reasonable interpretation of the facts. Even just suggesting that PG is worthy of looking into is an opinion-based claim, albeit one based on facts.
UglyTruth ago
Interpretations can be justified rationally by using Occam's Razor. The argument that the most reasonable explanation for the known facts is that a high level paedophile ring is operating in Washington DC and that it is being covered up by corporate media is derived from the minimal number of assumptions necessary to explain the facts as compared to alternative explanations.
Occam's Razor doesn't tell us that the most reasonable explanation is actually true, only that it is the best working hypothesis given what we know so far. This argument is essentially a appeal to reason, and it relates to the duty of care at common law (as compared to the ceremonial "Cremation of Care" of the Bohemian Grove elites).