[Pizzagaters believe that] Hillary Clinton and her top aides were running a child-trafficking ring out of a Washington pizza parlor"
The false narrative was created by the New York Times' Cecilia Kang, November 21. 2016 where she characterized the pizzagate theory as such, apparently based solely on messages supposedly posted to James' Instagram feed. "All of them" said Comet was the base of a child abuse ring "led by" Hillary Clinton and Podesta.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Cx61Nv1VIAE4gBk.jpg
In his recent charade, Alex Jones posits himself as the voice of the pizzagate investigation, taking responsibility for "creating the false narrative" https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C8CNE7SVAAAfnzA.jpg
In his well-covered video, Alex said 'we all ran over to Comet, looking into this innocent pizza place, instead of looking at the real perps [Weiner, Epstein, etc]'.
I am asking the crowd here whether my observations of our pizzagate investigation are correct. What I have observed is a large group of serious, intelligent, caring people of all age groups and from all backgrounds, looking into any obvious (and many not at all obvious) leads that have come from the Podesta leaked emails, and from mainstream media (such as the Silsby/Clinton/33 children evidence).
I have NOT observed any serious bias towards Alefantis in lieu of other leads, like the ones Alex Jones and now Mike Cernovich 'advise' we focus on.
People who are running with the false, MSM-derived narrative which defines pizzagate as a belief that Hillary ran a sex slave ring out of the basement of Comet Pizza, are doing so in error and in defiance of the facts.
At the time of her article, I was unable to find anything to back up Cecilia Kang's assertion that our group believed what she claimed. I had read virtually every pizzagate-related blog post, every thread on the various subs, and had my ear to the ground on other forums up to that point, and her definition of our movement was completely novel to me. NO WHERE was our group claiming this shit.
We did ask obvious questions that were related to anything that came up in those emails, though James' Instagram provided a lot of fodder for our investigation to be sure, but we did not focus on Comet as Alex suggests.
Claims that we have focused on Comet, and ignored other leads and locations, and that we were led astray, and that we believe something crazy about Comet's basement & Hillary are all Fake News.
Anyone promulgating these claims and not correcting them (perhaps tweeting @ceciliakang with requests for some kind of reliable source for her article... did she even see the Insta messages? did she make sure they were from real people? did she look on other forums as well, to gauge the opinions of pizzagaters?), is on the wrong side of this thing and doing this investigation a great disservice.
The actual origin of pizzagate is being virtually erased by allowing the NYT, and alt media icons, to create fake news and effectively smear us in the process.
We need to get back to our roots. Look at what they are trying to hide, and GO THERE. I also think we should make a lot of noise about this Fake News from the NYT/AlexJones so that it cannot continue, and so that the public is made aware simultaneously of what they are not saying, made aware of what pizzagate really is.
The media, and now alt media aren't addressing the emails, the use of code, the donations to Comet by Soros and Clinton, Alefantis calling babies "hotards", Alefantis threatening Ryan's life, Alefantis saying he doesn't like children at all, yet is taking a baby to "the farm".
On December 10th, in the spirit of 'hiding in plain site', the New York Times printed:
In the span of a few weeks, a false rumor that Hillary Clinton
and her top aides were involved in various crimes snowballed
into a wild conspiracy theory that they were running a
child-trafficking ring out of a Washington pizza parlor.
view the rest of the comments →
ZalesMcMuffin ago
The "hotard" thing is a mistaken interpretation. JA and a friend were calling each other that, not calling the baby in the picture that.
I also am not sure about Alefantis vs. Ryan. I'm skeptical about anything which I can't observe, and I can't observe the phone call(s) Ryan claims happened. The rest could be faked and he could be working with JA, for all I know. I'm not at all saying I think that's true, just that I have no way to be sure what is true there, so I'm withholding judgement and, as a result of my uncertainty, I don't push that storyline.
Aside from those criticisms, I absolutely love this posting and you are 100% on target with the gist of it. I wish I could give it a few more upvoats.
V____Z ago
Thanks! On what do you base the claim that hotard was in reference to an adult?
Also, Ryan has pretty well vetted the claims of the death threats https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pAhyvLPZy_4
ZalesMcMuffin ago
If you look at the IG page, you'll see that Alefantis posted something, then later a friend of Alefantis says Alefantis is "becoming my favorite hashtag #hotard". Then in the next comment, Alefantis says simply "#hotard". So his posting of that word was prompted by his friend's usage of it first. They are taking friendly jabs at each other.
This is how anybody sympathetic to JA will interpret that page, and I believe it is what actually happened. Even if I'm wrong, it's not a good item to push, because skeptics will dismiss it.
This is an example of why we are having trouble making progress: we need good quality control, and we don't have it. So a lot of weak -- and even false -- stuff circulates longer than it should. The villains use that as a weak point to attack us over, but that doesn't mean we should stop investigating, it just means we have something we need to improve on.
V____Z ago
You had me until the last paragraph. I haven't seen example of "a lot" of false info. I also wonder why you are the first person Ive seen correct the accepted interpretation of that IG hashtag. Would yo u insider making a standalone post about this? No one wants to be working under false assumptions, and I think we need to hash this out and get on the same page. I have heard from Alex Jones and now from you that we have a lot of falsities in our investigation. What other examples are you thinking of?
ZalesMcMuffin ago
The #hotard thing has been discussed a few times before. I might have been the first one to go into detail; I can dig up that post if a search feature is kind today. :-)
Other examples of bad info: whether or not "James Alefantis" is his real name; whether or not it sounds like the French for "I love children"; that the pic of drag queen "MsSummerCamp" on the CPP floor is actually Alefantis; that the digging up of the dirt floor in a couple of photos was digging trenches; whether or not Alefantis took the photo of Obama playing ping pong in the White House.
I'm not including the idea that the photo was of Obama playing ping pong at CPP, because (thankfully) that obviously retarded idea never really caught on, but at least one person apparently thought it was so at some point (and in a move which should surprise nobody, the media used THAT in one of their shitty hit pieces on us).
The items I listed which are ambiguous are examples where we have people believing both ways; whichever answer is correct, a portion of the PG community must, logically, be wrong.
There are more examples, but I think that should suffice to make the point. Despite many efforts to "correct the record" (argh... damn Brock fagging up that perfectly useful phrase), some errors persist among at least some of us. Also, when assertions are made that PG researchers think X, it's a challenge to disprove that without some central resource to look it up. The lack of central authority is both a strength and a weakness for us, leading to articles like this one you wrote, drawing on your own knowledge (which I attest is correct from my own similar knowledge) to gainsay false allegations. I'd love for it to be seen by everyone, but we don't have newspapers and media megaliths at our disposal to make that happen, so the message trickles out instead of getting blasted out.
V____Z ago
As for my attempt to correct the record, I agree it does need to be blasted out. I think there are ways to do it, for instance tweeting this to Mike Cernovich letting him know he's been caught furthering fake news. His ego would force him to respond, and then we would get some attention.
My other thought was that someone could make a video, or a steemit. I think grouping Alex and Mike with the NYT would be a wake up call and possibly make this post, or one based on it, go viral, because at least one of them would perhaps respond publically, and there's our audience!
You're right, of course, we simply don't have the media presence. At the same time, I can't just sit by watch us being lied about. I tried to confront Celilia Kang the day after she wrote it, demanding she cite proper sources, but she ignored me and I gave up. It was Mike Cernovich who put me over the edge today. And he's probably more responsive than the NYT. He might even apologize and correct his mistake.