Most of it would seem benign or at most edgelordish to me, if it weren't for the part where she splatters real or symbolic (paint) blood on a child effigy in the corner.
And in addition to the other things she paints on the walls, she does paint
SPIRIT COOKING
So this is spirit cooking to her, and again it includes heavily splattering real or fake blood onto the child effigy in the corner.
Now even that all by itself could be interpreted as just some edgy art stuff, except that she has direct connections to people in political power, like John Podesta.
Like I'm not sure what you think that we think Spirit Cooking is, but she spells it out pretty clearly that, for her, it's a recipe of semen, breast milk, etc, self-mutilation instructions and for some reason involves the symbolic element of a child being splattered in blood.
Why are people in powerful political connections getting together for this?
People in powerful political positions (I mean look up the Podestas, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Podesta_Group)) get together for this ritual, why? Do they believe in it? Is it a symbolic cover for something? What explanation is there that doesn't reek of these powerful people either being into the occult or worse?
And then when you look at the Podestas' taste in art, it's like.. there is a trend here, yeah?
As far as relevance to the pizzagate investigation, I might dismiss it if it wasn't for the part, again, splattering real or fake blood all over a child effigy in a corner.
Look at the recipes in my link. Many of them don't even include blood. That was basically one performance of one recipe, but that actually isn't what Spirit Cooking is more broadly. It's a snapshot of one recipe, and people ignore this. If Spirit Cooking is about Satanism, why do so many of the recipes having nothing to do with Satanism?
Like I'm not sure what you think that we think Spirit Cooking is, but she spells it out pretty clearly that, for her, it's a recipe of semen, breast milk, etc, self-mutilation instructions and for some reason involves the symbolic element of a child being splattered in blood.
Ah, so it's clear, you really didn't even click the links. Why are you even bothering to respond when you didn't even read what my post was about? What you are explaining Spirit Cooking to be is exactly what I was thinking you thought it was. In fact, you are wrong. That is one recipe. There are many more that have nothing to do with blood, semen, or any of that. For instance:
Spit inside your naval
until the lake is filled
lie motionless
listen to the heartbeat
of a dog
Where's the blood, semen, or breast milk in that one? Where's the self-mutilation?
We actually have no evidence that this is the specific ritual they got together for, but of course, you don't know that because you refuse to even bother clicking the link before responding to see the other recipes. And if she's hiding all these secrets, why is she not worth more than $10M? That's about the worth I would expect a top artist to have.
And then when you look at the Podestas' taste in art, it's like.. there is a trend here, yeah?
We're talking about Marina, not the Podestas. If you create a flimsy foundation and then make a connection to others and say she's guilty by association then you end up with something very flimsy. If there was something that was a strong connection okay, but you haven't explained anything that is any sort of strong connection.
As far as relevance to the pizzagate investigation, I might dismiss it if it wasn't for the part, again, splattering real or fake blood all over a child effigy in a corner.
So to be clear, you might dismiss her connection if it wasn't for one aspect (blood splattered on a child effigy) of one performance of one cherry-picked recipe that completely ignores all of the other very innocent recipes. Just think about that.
The only difference is that you are referencing a book by her.
I am referencing what I have actually seen her do, on camera.
And I did look at the book pages you linked, but they don't make a case for you. Your claim is that, ""Spirit Cooking" isn't what you think it is" presumably referring to all of us at once.
Are you getting extra sassy with me because I engaged you in a respectful and thoughtful debate, with video evidence? Hmm?
It seems like the way you think is..
Apples are a type of fruit.
Peaches are a type of fruit.
Therefore since peaches are fruit, apples are not fruit.
I'm not getting "sassy" with you at all. I'm asking you to deal with the information, or at least look at it, which you clearly did not. If you had, you wouldn't have parroted the information of the one recipe without even attempting to address the other recipes. Also, your analogy is so ridiculous I'm not even going to bother with it.
your analogy is so ridiculous I'm not even going to bother with it.
You're not going to bother with it, because you're being illogical and got backed into a corner. Is it so hard to just gracefully concede on a debate when that happens?
Your stance was that spirit cooking isn't what we think it is, specifically referring to what I described.
Your evidence was other examples of what she calls spirit cooking.
That doesn't show that spirit cooking isn't what we think it is. It just shows that she has some pages in a book of other things that she also calls spirit cooking, in addition to what we have focused on primarily (as shown in the video).
Your stance was that spirit cooking isn't what we think it is, specifically referring to what I described.
Yes, because it's much broader. People think that the one recipe is Spirit Cooking, when that's really just an individual recipe, and it's not what Spirit Cooking is more broadly. It's like pointing to a room and saying it's a house. Well, the room is a part of the house, but it's not the house.
I think it's very telling how hung up on the title you are, rather than the facts.
view the rest of the comments →
SheSaidDestroy ago
Most of it would seem benign or at most edgelordish to me, if it weren't for the part where she splatters real or symbolic (paint) blood on a child effigy in the corner.
Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g9ys-Lfu4Sc
And in addition to the other things she paints on the walls, she does paint
So this is spirit cooking to her, and again it includes heavily splattering real or fake blood onto the child effigy in the corner.
Now even that all by itself could be interpreted as just some edgy art stuff, except that she has direct connections to people in political power, like John Podesta.
https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/15893
Like I'm not sure what you think that we think Spirit Cooking is, but she spells it out pretty clearly that, for her, it's a recipe of semen, breast milk, etc, self-mutilation instructions and for some reason involves the symbolic element of a child being splattered in blood.
Why are people in powerful political connections getting together for this?
This email heavily implies that Tony Podesta actually went and that Marina has spent time with John Podesta before: https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/25325
People in powerful political positions (I mean look up the Podestas, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Podesta_Group)) get together for this ritual, why? Do they believe in it? Is it a symbolic cover for something? What explanation is there that doesn't reek of these powerful people either being into the occult or worse?
And then when you look at the Podestas' taste in art, it's like.. there is a trend here, yeah?
As far as relevance to the pizzagate investigation, I might dismiss it if it wasn't for the part, again, splattering real or fake blood all over a child effigy in a corner.
atheist4thecause ago
Look at the recipes in my link. Many of them don't even include blood. That was basically one performance of one recipe, but that actually isn't what Spirit Cooking is more broadly. It's a snapshot of one recipe, and people ignore this. If Spirit Cooking is about Satanism, why do so many of the recipes having nothing to do with Satanism?
Ah, so it's clear, you really didn't even click the links. Why are you even bothering to respond when you didn't even read what my post was about? What you are explaining Spirit Cooking to be is exactly what I was thinking you thought it was. In fact, you are wrong. That is one recipe. There are many more that have nothing to do with blood, semen, or any of that. For instance:
Where's the blood, semen, or breast milk in that one? Where's the self-mutilation?
We actually have no evidence that this is the specific ritual they got together for, but of course, you don't know that because you refuse to even bother clicking the link before responding to see the other recipes. And if she's hiding all these secrets, why is she not worth more than $10M? That's about the worth I would expect a top artist to have.
We're talking about Marina, not the Podestas. If you create a flimsy foundation and then make a connection to others and say she's guilty by association then you end up with something very flimsy. If there was something that was a strong connection okay, but you haven't explained anything that is any sort of strong connection.
So to be clear, you might dismiss her connection if it wasn't for one aspect (blood splattered on a child effigy) of one performance of one cherry-picked recipe that completely ignores all of the other very innocent recipes. Just think about that.
SheSaidDestroy ago
So sassy.
The only difference is that you are referencing a book by her.
I am referencing what I have actually seen her do, on camera.
And I did look at the book pages you linked, but they don't make a case for you. Your claim is that, ""Spirit Cooking" isn't what you think it is" presumably referring to all of us at once.
Are you getting extra sassy with me because I engaged you in a respectful and thoughtful debate, with video evidence? Hmm?
It seems like the way you think is..
Apples are a type of fruit.
Peaches are a type of fruit.
Therefore since peaches are fruit, apples are not fruit.
But that's.. not how most of us think here.
atheist4thecause ago
I'm not getting "sassy" with you at all. I'm asking you to deal with the information, or at least look at it, which you clearly did not. If you had, you wouldn't have parroted the information of the one recipe without even attempting to address the other recipes. Also, your analogy is so ridiculous I'm not even going to bother with it.
SheSaidDestroy ago
You're not going to bother with it, because you're being illogical and got backed into a corner. Is it so hard to just gracefully concede on a debate when that happens?
Your stance was that spirit cooking isn't what we think it is, specifically referring to what I described.
Your evidence was other examples of what she calls spirit cooking.
That doesn't show that spirit cooking isn't what we think it is. It just shows that she has some pages in a book of other things that she also calls spirit cooking, in addition to what we have focused on primarily (as shown in the video).
My analogy is very fitting.
Have a nice day.
atheist4thecause ago
Yes, because it's much broader. People think that the one recipe is Spirit Cooking, when that's really just an individual recipe, and it's not what Spirit Cooking is more broadly. It's like pointing to a room and saying it's a house. Well, the room is a part of the house, but it's not the house.
I think it's very telling how hung up on the title you are, rather than the facts.