The code words in the infographic and the summary in the sidebar state the code as if it were fact. The summary says at one point: " "Cheese" is a known pedophile codeword for little girls, whereas "pasta" is a known codeword for little boys" . This is echoed as a refrain all across this board that the emails contain "known pedophile code words", but there is NO evidence of this. If there is evidence of it I am willing to believe it but have never seen it. I think that it's a serious problem that everyone on this board seems to believe it when they clearly have never seen the evidence.
Just look at the cognitive dissonance in this conversation between me (JUNOAK) and whitehand. He first claims, and I think truly believes, that you can find citations for the code words with a simple search. But after asking him to show me specifically where he finally gives me instructions that leads to the FBI pedophile symbols, but this is obviously not what I asked for.
After that exchange I created this post asking for citations for the words. It got only a couple of upvotes and one downvote for some reason. No one was able to provide citations and even someone repeated the claim that it was easy to find. IAMWHOIAM provided some links, but they must not have read them because none of them showed an explanation for the code words and even had evidence against it. From the voat thread about the man claiming to be a pedophile he says:
Pizza being used for a little girl i've never heard it used in that context. Nor have I ever heard hotdog used in that context
Either the infographic and the summary in the sidebar need to be changed to remove "the code", or more appropriate language needs to be used to talk about it, or everyone on here needs to stop complaining about being called fake news. I thought that the fake news accusation wasn't exactly deserved despite being a skeptic, but if this remains it is an outright lie.
People are being accused of the most heinous crimes based on it and people really believe it on here. It's irresponsible to a group that claims to be "investigators".
EDIT: Look at the cognitive dissonance in this thread and tell me that pizzagate doesn't have a serious problem.
view the rest of the comments →
jonnythaiwongy9 ago
I'm sorry that this will sound condescending but let me be real: you have poor critical thinking skills. Your post is full of assumptions and biased word choices.
"it stands to reason that when Podesta talks about pizza and is clearly not talking about actual pizza, there is a good chance that this is what he's talking about."
Right, consider this. Clearly Podesta was not talking about pizza. Now we know that Alefantis, and many of Alefantis friends use pizza as a sexual reference. We know the Podesta's are friends with Brock and Alefantis. So you tell me, what conclusion do you come to regarding his use of the word pizza, if he isn't talking about pizza. I think it would be fair to assume, that if people he knows use pizza as a reference to sex, and he didn't mean something sexual that he would avoid using 'pizza'. Is that not a reasonable assumption?
JUNOAK ago
The first point of your reasoning I actually would not agree with. I wish you had provided at least one or two example emails of instances when it was "clear" he was not talking about pizza. But for arguments sake let me assume that there are emails that mention pizza but clearly aren't about pizza.
The only email that sounds confusing to me is the map-related handkerchief one, however that email wasn't written by Podesta although it is directly addressing him. Actually if you search for the term "pizza" in emails sent by john podesta I only ever see him say the word once and that is in response to someone else who is talking about pizza. Maybe I'm not doing the search correctly. Can you provide one or two emails where you think it is clear he mentions pizza but it is clear he is not talking about pizza? Your final conclusion relies heavily on Podesta using the term pizza.
But are the other people in the email list talking about pizza or something else? As I said for me the handkerchief email is the most confusing one. Although I'm not at all convinced that this person is definitely not referring to pizza. I think the simplest answer and the conclusion most people would come to is that the handkerchief has graphics on it of a map (like this one) and that the map or the artwork on it has something to do with pizza. If this is not the explanation and they are referring to something else it could be any number of reasons for why it sounds confusing to us. 1. We have no other context besides the emails. People listening to you talk to your friends might seem confusing to outsiders because they are completely left out of shared references, inside jokes, short hand talk. 2. Auto-correct. 3. Distracted typing which might cause awkward sentence structure. There are any number of things that are far more probable before we got to coded language.
Take a look at this image from the sidebar summary. Although I don't know where it actually comes from it seems plausible that this could be from an actual dark web pedophile site. Look at how clear and obvious it is that they are not talking about pizza, the podesta emails do not sound at all like this. Although I'm definitely not an expert in this area I would think that the point of using coded language like this is to make it harder for police to investigate. If you came right out and said "we are selling child pornography" that would be extremely damning. But if you distributed only to people you knew and never explicitly said what it is your selling anyone investigating could not prove it was child porn you were selling. they would still be one step removed from proving that. It does not seem like this coded language is meant to be a perfect smoke screen, since that would be nearly impossible.
I think you could agree that even if you thought the Podesta emails were talking about a child sex ring, they clearly are not coordinating it through their dnc email. Keep in mind whenever you are talking about the emails that there are thousands upon thousands of emails spanning more than a decade.
Show me something from Alefantis himself where he is using pizza as a sexual reference.
"Use pizza as a sexual reference". Something that involves sex and pizza is not "using pizza as a sexual reference". I would think that the term "pizza" would have to be substituted for something sexual for you to be able to say that. Also common sense should apply here since these are people who work at a pizza shop.
I actually found it difficult to find actual conversations that mention pizza at all. Most mentions of pizza are in passing and could not possibly be talking about pedophilia. Some mentions ,like these (1 , 2 ,3 ) , are directly addressed to Podesta but I think we can agree aren't referring to anything but pizza. When they talk about actual pizza how do they not confuse the terms? But I don't know maybe these people aren't apart of it. How do you tell who is apart of it?
Your reasoning falls down on key points since 1. Podesta doesn't seem to talk about pizza. And 2. I've never seen alefantis use pizza to refer to anything other than pizza. IF alefantis used the word pizza to refer to sex and then Podesta also used pizza in the same way then THAT would be something to look into. The facts are that someone tagged comet to dirty pictures involving pizza and that someone emailing John Podesta used pizza in an odd way (1 email out of thousands). It is completely unreasonable to connect those things.