I've flaired this as Potential Security Risk for the lack of a better flair, per this post.
As a response to sticky requests for this posts, we will also never endorse pizzagate.com in any way on this subverse unless it changes ownership to someone trusted. Please take a look at the above link for the details.
explain please. could you give the tldr of your link? Idk about all of the small details of the business behind this but, if indeed someone is offering the reward for debunking PG then users should be made aware and reminded of that AT ALL TIMES while/before reading any PG posts be it pro-pg or not
The owners auctioned the site publicly to anyone willing to pay the buck for it. They were also sneaky about it, censored comments on the auction, and lied about some things including their motive, several times. They're in this for the money, they're monetizing the research done by the community, with an almost word-for-word copy of our executive summary. They will sell out to whoever offers more cash at any given time. Please read the link if you want an explanation beyond that, everything is documented in there.
thank you...I'm going to look into it. From what I know so far Idk if I'm against what I hear they are doing. It's not the coolest thing to do or the most respectable but, if you consider how evil the evil that we are up against is in comparison idk if I'm ready to start x'ing off friendlies over capitalism. If it takes bringing capitalism into the mix to bring more light to the issue then so be it imho
What has been "proved" so far? Red flags and theories aren't "proof" of anything. Some red flags are serious enough that warrants should be issued and formal investigations should occur, but that comes before anything is proved.
Off topic but I just realized that there should be a $25,000 reward for anyone who has info on Podesta/James Alefantis. Maybe this will get people talking
Accusations are generally not debunkable. If you make an insane interpretation of an email about some woman sending her kids to a pool party to be raped by the Clinton campaign or a Scania assassination indicated in an email, I can put the letters in context and prove to rational people that those letters had nothing to do with those things, but the guy with the $25,000 doesn't have to acknowledge my reasonable explanations.
There's almost nothing to debunk at pizzagate.com. It's all opinions.
If they were to write as a simple of list of falsifiable items, I would take a crack at it. However, currently the way they having it would be a debate about meanings of certain facts.
However, they do have some stuff that is straight out wrong.
Louis Bourgeois's art is not inspired by Jeffrey Dahmer.
For one she did a series of Arches of Hysteria in various shapes and poses and I believe you could show this series was conceived before the Dahmer case and she is explicitly clear what the inspiration for these is.
For two, her work is simply not the same position as the Dahmer photo. The arms and legs are completely different.
The first arch she did, the body has no arms and no head and is far less arched. She did this as part of her Cells series which started in the 80's
Thirdly, the crime scene photos were not released at the time of Dahmer's trial, but year later. Which would mean her work was exhibited first.
However, they do have some stuff that is straight out wrong. Louis Bourgeois's art is not inspired by Jeffrey Dahmer. For one she did a series of Arches of Hysteria in various shapes and poses and I believe you could show this series was conceived before the Dahmer case and she is explicitly clear what the inspiration for these is. For two, her work is simply not the same position as the Dahmer photo. The arms and legs are completely different.
Louis Bourgeois completed the particular Arch of Hysteria sculpture in question (now owned by Tony Podesta) in 1993, approx. two years after Jeffrey Dahmer's arrest in 1991.
It takes little stretch of the imagination to visualize an acute similarity between this sculpture and Jeffrey Dahmer's victim, if that victim were lifted at the waist, and suspended in the air.
If you could provide documentation as to the date when that Dahmer victim photo was released, it would be helpful.
Louis Bourgeois completed the particular Arch of Hysteria sculpture in question in 1993
No. She exbhited the sculpture for the first time in 1993. We do not know when she completed it. The previous year she exhibited a different sculpture in this series.
It takes little stretch of the imagination to visualize an acute similarity between this sculpture and Jeffrey Dahmer's victim, if that victim were lifted at the waist, and suspended in the air.
A. The only evidence connecting Dahmer to Louis Bourgeois is imagination.
B. You are not saying anything here. All you're saying is we have two headless average size male figures. Any average sized man would look this way if suspended in this way. The version that came a year before looks like Dahmer's victim if you put him in a different position and removed his arms.
C. We actually know her inspiration because she has talked about it many times. It's the work of Charcot a French neurologist who studied hysterics and . Bourgeois made it a male figure to indicate that hysteria is not limited to woman. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean-Martin_Charcot
If you could provide documentation as to the date when that Dahmer victim photo was released, it would be helpful.
I can provide documentation that Louis Bougeois was working on her arches in 1989, two years before Dahmer was arrested and thus conclusively debunk this. This is a sketch of the first sculpture in this series. It's dated 1989.
https://www.moma.org/collection_lb/browse_results.php?object_id=70922
Also personally I would see nothing wrong if she was inspired by Dahmer. Lots of great art came from horrible things.
Picasso's Guernica, The Boomtown Rats's I Don't Like Mondays, Saving Private Ryan any painting of St. Sebastian, these are all works of art inspired by horrific things. You need not be a monster to appreciate them.
But the Dahmer -Bourgeois connection was always nonsense and relied on people not knowing that Louise Bourgeoise is a major, major artist.
2) Role in Pizzagate - It is not believed that Louise Bourgeois has any direct role. Rather, her work, Arch of Hysteria, as well as her prior works with themes of cannibalism, are discussedin relation to the mindset of art collector Tony Podesta.
Your last statement - But the Dahmer -Bourgeois connectionwas alwaysnonsense and relied on people not knowing that Louise Bourgeoise is a major, major artist - is straight out wrong. (And pretty funny, that you perceive yourself as so much more enlightened than everyone else.)
The Dahmer -Bourgeois connection was always due to Tony Podesta's interest and investment in her work - relevant to pizzagate as one more piece of information about the Tony Podesta art collection to add to the pile. On it's own, this Bourgeois sculpture would have no relevance to pizzagate at all.
I think that sculpture is monstrous, and brings nothing new, particularly insightful, or GOOD to the world. But that's just me, and even so, I think it's a FAR sight more agreeable than Tony Podesta's other art "treasures" - such as his art by Biljana Djurdjevic.
I've noticed one of the common traits among pizzagate believers is that they think of art as "decorations" rather than something meant to be expressive and intellectually stimulating, so they assume that if you are fond of some artwork it must be because you find it pleasant and enjoyable to look at, rather than because you find it moving or thoughtful or am important expression of an important issue.
O my gosh! It should be $25,000,000! Just think how much attention that amount would get from some, and undoubtedly, like the lottery, the higher it goes, the more interest is generated. And THAT just may get some MSM press!!
I love this idea. Perhaps ironically the first time I heard of a reward like this was the one offered by James Randi to anyone who could prove a supernatural event or ability. (Ironic because Mr. Randi was at least accused of being a pedo.)
Morality and duty have no value to anyone who ridicules pizzagate, without sourced explanation.
Morality and duty have no value to anyone who indignantly defends James #49 Alefantis, without explaining why this powerful businessman would have the time, or interest, to participate in making base-adolescent sexual jokes, or posting pics of other people's babies, on his public (now private) Instagram account.
How does your "morality and duty" framing actually help us determine what is true? How does it help us evaluate the evidence? You seem to putting a lot of weight on Alefantis being #49 as if that is somehow sinister or indicative of guilt. It's not. It has no relation. You do understand that yes, James Alefantis was listed as Washington's 49th most powerful person in a magazine article in 2012, but no, he was not actually Washington's 49th most powerful person. Right? Because that article was never meant to be taken literally. Think of it as a who's hot/who's not article and you'll understand it better.
Most folks understand this. It was simply a magazine article, not an actual listing of who holds power in Washington, DC. It was a fluffy list of profile pieces.
Because if you don't understand that, it begs the question, how much power do you think he held. Because this silly list had him above all 9 Supreme Court Justices, about 95 Senators, the mayor, the police chief, the heads of most departments and their seconds in charge and other genuinely powerful people. He was not the only "fluffy" choice on the list. Another restaurant owner appeared as did three party planners. A blogger was at #34. #38 was the Washington Post's weather team. #47 was a baseball player. It was never intended as an actual, literal list of people's power. Also his power was social power, he was listed as a restaurateur and a bon vivant, this doesn't give you more power than the Chairman of the Ways and Means Committee.
There's absolutely nothing about being a powerful businessman running two restaurants that would prevent him from having the time or interest from messing around on Instagram. This is just an illogical argument. It's like saying why would a powerful businessman have the time or interest to watch every game played by his favorite food ball team? Also social media like instagram is an easy way to keep in touch with friends, when you don't really have time to get together.
Morality and Duty doesn't seem to me to make one a good investigator. It doesn't seem to me to help you understand what evidence is important and and what is not. Here's an example, if Alefantis being 49th on that list means he is likely to have committed this crimes, what about those weather bloggers? They are 38th on the list, are they more likely to traffick children because they are more powerful?
Skipping right past your plethora of silly (and insulting) assumptions... I'll just congratulate you for contributing the most indignant (and verbose) defense for James Alefantis' Instagram behavior I've seen yet.
Personally I would rather focus on both terms, and relentlessly on pizzagate in particular. Pedogate could in some ways be considered a limited hangout, because it involves stuff we've known for years, all of it will never see a courtroom. We have an eye witness to George Soros at human hunting parties and life goes on as if he's just a nice old man. MSM lets stuff leak out after elites are safe, like after they die of natural causes. With pizzagate - defined by its ties to the Podesta emails and the current DC crowd, including George Soros in no small way - we have a case to at least demand a legit investigation. We have a good argument for the fact that something is awry. We have a FOIA request showing that the DC police actually lied about having conducted an investigation. Why would they do that? We have pictures of the DC police chief with a very powerful pizza man, and evidence he covers for pedophiles, having once charged an 11 year old rape victim rather than the perp. The time is now to hone in on this. I have been told by a lawyer that there is indeed enough circumstantial evidence to begin an investigation, and that includes the pizza man.
It's great there's a reward, which I guess is both great and legit, but we should be aware that the related site "pizzagate.com" has showed signs of monetizing with free and open ciziten journalism done for example here on Voat, and they haven't been exactly open about where the material is from. It is useful what they do in our point of view (for the awareness), but personally I would not use this for red pilling, because I don't find this site worth my support (and also that we have a lot of better content on telling people why pizzagate is important)
Someone called "John Smith" has also tried to sell the whole page via an internet auction https://archive.is/FCGHH - I don't know is this related to the person offering the reward, or only to the related site. It's just another sign of monetazing.
wecanhelp ago
I've flaired this as Potential Security Risk for the lack of a better flair, per this post.
As a response to sticky requests for this posts, we will also never endorse pizzagate.com in any way on this subverse unless it changes ownership to someone trusted. Please take a look at the above link for the details.
Criticalthinker615 ago
this should be stickied at the top of the page at all times
V____Z ago
@wecanhelp what do you think of adding this somehow, where it might get more views?
wecanhelp ago
No. FYI @Criticalthinker615.
Criticalthinker615 ago
explain please. could you give the tldr of your link? Idk about all of the small details of the business behind this but, if indeed someone is offering the reward for debunking PG then users should be made aware and reminded of that AT ALL TIMES while/before reading any PG posts be it pro-pg or not
wecanhelp ago
The owners auctioned the site publicly to anyone willing to pay the buck for it. They were also sneaky about it, censored comments on the auction, and lied about some things including their motive, several times. They're in this for the money, they're monetizing the research done by the community, with an almost word-for-word copy of our executive summary. They will sell out to whoever offers more cash at any given time. Please read the link if you want an explanation beyond that, everything is documented in there.
Criticalthinker615 ago
thank you...I'm going to look into it. From what I know so far Idk if I'm against what I hear they are doing. It's not the coolest thing to do or the most respectable but, if you consider how evil the evil that we are up against is in comparison idk if I'm ready to start x'ing off friendlies over capitalism. If it takes bringing capitalism into the mix to bring more light to the issue then so be it imho
wecanhelp ago
You're misunderstanding the core issue here. Let me put it this way: they were willing to sell the site to "the evil that we are up against".
Death2Masons ago
Bad thread. You are asking people to argue back and forth if this is even real. Why would you do that? Don't answer. Down vote.
The_Crux ago
What has been "proved" so far? Red flags and theories aren't "proof" of anything. Some red flags are serious enough that warrants should be issued and formal investigations should occur, but that comes before anything is proved.
pizzagate3456 ago
Off topic but I just realized that there should be a $25,000 reward for anyone who has info on Podesta/James Alefantis. Maybe this will get people talking
Cigarette5mokingman ago
I have information on both of them. Be more specific.
The_Crux ago
Accusations are generally not debunkable. If you make an insane interpretation of an email about some woman sending her kids to a pool party to be raped by the Clinton campaign or a Scania assassination indicated in an email, I can put the letters in context and prove to rational people that those letters had nothing to do with those things, but the guy with the $25,000 doesn't have to acknowledge my reasonable explanations.
Are_we_sure ago
There's almost nothing to debunk at pizzagate.com. It's all opinions. If they were to write as a simple of list of falsifiable items, I would take a crack at it. However, currently the way they having it would be a debate about meanings of certain facts.
However, they do have some stuff that is straight out wrong. Louis Bourgeois's art is not inspired by Jeffrey Dahmer.
For one she did a series of Arches of Hysteria in various shapes and poses and I believe you could show this series was conceived before the Dahmer case and she is explicitly clear what the inspiration for these is. For two, her work is simply not the same position as the Dahmer photo. The arms and legs are completely different.
The first arch she did, the body has no arms and no head and is far less arched. She did this as part of her Cells series which started in the 80's
Thirdly, the crime scene photos were not released at the time of Dahmer's trial, but year later. Which would mean her work was exhibited first.
rooting4redpillers ago
Louis Bourgeois completed the particular Arch of Hysteria sculpture in question (now owned by Tony Podesta) in 1993, approx. two years after Jeffrey Dahmer's arrest in 1991.
It takes little stretch of the imagination to visualize an acute similarity between this sculpture and Jeffrey Dahmer's victim, if that victim were lifted at the waist, and suspended in the air.
If you could provide documentation as to the date when that Dahmer victim photo was released, it would be helpful.
Are_we_sure ago
A. The only evidence connecting Dahmer to Louis Bourgeois is imagination. B. You are not saying anything here. All you're saying is we have two headless average size male figures. Any average sized man would look this way if suspended in this way. The version that came a year before looks like Dahmer's victim if you put him in a different position and removed his arms. C. We actually know her inspiration because she has talked about it many times. It's the work of Charcot a French neurologist who studied hysterics and . Bourgeois made it a male figure to indicate that hysteria is not limited to woman.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean-Martin_Charcot
Also personally I would see nothing wrong if she was inspired by Dahmer. Lots of great art came from horrible things. Picasso's Guernica, The Boomtown Rats's I Don't Like Mondays, Saving Private Ryan any painting of St. Sebastian, these are all works of art inspired by horrific things. You need not be a monster to appreciate them.
But the Dahmer -Bourgeois connection was always nonsense and relied on people not knowing that Louise Bourgeoise is a major, major artist.
rooting4redpillers ago
See The Pizzagate Wiki - Louis Bourgeois. The first two pieces of information provided on that wiki are:
Your last statement - But the Dahmer -Bourgeois connection was always nonsense and relied on people not knowing that Louise Bourgeoise is a major, major artist - is straight out wrong. (And pretty funny, that you perceive yourself as so much more enlightened than everyone else.)
The Dahmer -Bourgeois connection was always due to Tony Podesta's interest and investment in her work - relevant to pizzagate as one more piece of information about the Tony Podesta art collection to add to the pile. On it's own, this Bourgeois sculpture would have no relevance to pizzagate at all.
I think that sculpture is monstrous, and brings nothing new, particularly insightful, or GOOD to the world. But that's just me, and even so, I think it's a FAR sight more agreeable than Tony Podesta's other art "treasures" - such as his art by Biljana Djurdjevic.
Are_we_sure ago
There is no Dahmer-Bourgeois connection. None.
Biljana Djurdjevic's art is about man's inhumanity to man and growing up during a time of genocide. All her work is influenced by the Bosnian War.
whatonearth ago
I've noticed one of the common traits among pizzagate believers is that they think of art as "decorations" rather than something meant to be expressive and intellectually stimulating, so they assume that if you are fond of some artwork it must be because you find it pleasant and enjoyable to look at, rather than because you find it moving or thoughtful or am important expression of an important issue.
druhill007 ago
1 down, 10,000,000 to go. you can do it!!!
Are_we_sure ago
write them out as falsifiable facts and I'd go for it.
druhill007 ago
If I had the money lol
janedoemadashell ago
O my gosh! It should be $25,000,000! Just think how much attention that amount would get from some, and undoubtedly, like the lottery, the higher it goes, the more interest is generated. And THAT just may get some MSM press!!
ansipizza ago
I love this idea. Perhaps ironically the first time I heard of a reward like this was the one offered by James Randi to anyone who could prove a supernatural event or ability. (Ironic because Mr. Randi was at least accused of being a pedo.)
rooting4redpillers ago
Morality and duty have no value to anyone who ridicules pizzagate, without sourced explanation.
Morality and duty have no value to anyone who indignantly defends James #49 Alefantis, without explaining why this powerful businessman would have the time, or interest, to participate in making base-adolescent sexual jokes, or posting pics of other people's babies, on his public (now private) Instagram account.
Are_we_sure ago
How does your "morality and duty" framing actually help us determine what is true? How does it help us evaluate the evidence? You seem to putting a lot of weight on Alefantis being #49 as if that is somehow sinister or indicative of guilt. It's not. It has no relation. You do understand that yes, James Alefantis was listed as Washington's 49th most powerful person in a magazine article in 2012, but no, he was not actually Washington's 49th most powerful person. Right? Because that article was never meant to be taken literally. Think of it as a who's hot/who's not article and you'll understand it better.
Most folks understand this. It was simply a magazine article, not an actual listing of who holds power in Washington, DC. It was a fluffy list of profile pieces.
Because if you don't understand that, it begs the question, how much power do you think he held. Because this silly list had him above all 9 Supreme Court Justices, about 95 Senators, the mayor, the police chief, the heads of most departments and their seconds in charge and other genuinely powerful people. He was not the only "fluffy" choice on the list. Another restaurant owner appeared as did three party planners. A blogger was at #34. #38 was the Washington Post's weather team. #47 was a baseball player. It was never intended as an actual, literal list of people's power. Also his power was social power, he was listed as a restaurateur and a bon vivant, this doesn't give you more power than the Chairman of the Ways and Means Committee.
There's absolutely nothing about being a powerful businessman running two restaurants that would prevent him from having the time or interest from messing around on Instagram. This is just an illogical argument. It's like saying why would a powerful businessman have the time or interest to watch every game played by his favorite food ball team? Also social media like instagram is an easy way to keep in touch with friends, when you don't really have time to get together.
Morality and Duty doesn't seem to me to make one a good investigator. It doesn't seem to me to help you understand what evidence is important and and what is not. Here's an example, if Alefantis being 49th on that list means he is likely to have committed this crimes, what about those weather bloggers? They are 38th on the list, are they more likely to traffick children because they are more powerful?
Here's that 2012 list. https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/the-top-10-of-gqs-50-most-powerful-in-washington/2012/01/18/gIQAE7sn7P_gallery.html?utm_term=.210072119044
rooting4redpillers ago
Skipping right past your plethora of silly (and insulting) assumptions... I'll just congratulate you for contributing the most indignant (and verbose) defense for James Alefantis' Instagram behavior I've seen yet.
sound_of_silence ago
looks like it's been $50,000 for the past month... http://archive.is/RP3vF
THAT'S $50,000 BIG ONES, SHILLS./
Laskar ago
Some people are saying that pizzagate is the American franchise of pedogate which is the world wide thing.
V____Z ago
Personally I would rather focus on both terms, and relentlessly on pizzagate in particular. Pedogate could in some ways be considered a limited hangout, because it involves stuff we've known for years, all of it will never see a courtroom. We have an eye witness to George Soros at human hunting parties and life goes on as if he's just a nice old man. MSM lets stuff leak out after elites are safe, like after they die of natural causes. With pizzagate - defined by its ties to the Podesta emails and the current DC crowd, including George Soros in no small way - we have a case to at least demand a legit investigation. We have a good argument for the fact that something is awry. We have a FOIA request showing that the DC police actually lied about having conducted an investigation. Why would they do that? We have pictures of the DC police chief with a very powerful pizza man, and evidence he covers for pedophiles, having once charged an 11 year old rape victim rather than the perp. The time is now to hone in on this. I have been told by a lawyer that there is indeed enough circumstantial evidence to begin an investigation, and that includes the pizza man.
dougG ago
How do you debunk opinions?
sound_of_silence ago
https://voat.co/v/AskPizzagate/1764064 check it out..
V____Z ago
Thumbs up to you.
And please read this, it is most important right now, and could be the main subject of a chat https://voat.co/v/pizzagate/1779789
sound_of_silence ago
share it around...
. . .
commented...
Baconmon ago
Might as well be $25,000,000, because it can't be debunked..
anonOpenPress ago
It's great there's a reward, which I guess is both great and legit, but we should be aware that the related site "pizzagate.com" has showed signs of monetizing with free and open ciziten journalism done for example here on Voat, and they haven't been exactly open about where the material is from. It is useful what they do in our point of view (for the awareness), but personally I would not use this for red pilling, because I don't find this site worth my support (and also that we have a lot of better content on telling people why pizzagate is important)
Someone called "John Smith" has also tried to sell the whole page via an internet auction https://archive.is/FCGHH - I don't know is this related to the person offering the reward, or only to the related site. It's just another sign of monetazing.
Read also https://voat.co/v/pizzagate/1592743
PurpleReign ago
OMFG https://voat.co/v/pizzagate/1779712
ER93030URJ32-34HGWEF**
PurpleReign ago
OMFG https://voat.co/v/pizzagate/1779712 ......
ELKHRLWEKHRLHERLKHWLKE
FckPizza3 ago
^^This. I have been using this same argument with my red pilling tactics 😁 it works pretty well
PurpleReign ago
OMFG https://voat.co/v/pizzagate/1779712