OK I am making a new thread for this because 1: the last thread died and 2: it's discussion-worthy.
I am responding to @AreWeSure, who disputes the Silsby connection and is probably a shill, but will give the benefit of doubt.
Maccoby wrote a book about Silsby's boss
This I hadn't heard of. Any link.
So I did a bit of timeline and here's what I got:
Original image: http://i.magaimg.net/img/2zys.png
Here it lays out that many people involved in pizzagate come from HP in Boise, Idaho, including:
Laura Silsby, worked at HP Boise for 6 years in 1990s
Von Hansen, ex-Vice President at HP Boise, head of AlertSense, hired sex-dancers tied to Alefantis
James Hammons, co-founded PersonalShopper.com with Silsby, worked at HP Boise
Andy Moore, another child-stealer, worked in Distribution at HP Boise for 4 years (1991-1995), also PersonalShopper
And then comes Richard Hackborn, former HP Chairman, also was Vice President of HP Boise Printer Division from 1990, so literally Silsby's boss.
Michael Maccoby wrote a book about Hackborn: The Gamesman: The New Corporate Leaders
Described by Mr. Young as the "consummate strategist," Mr. Hackborn was profiled under the name Jack Wakefield in "The Gamesman," the 1976 book about corporate leaders by Michael Maccoby, who portrayed him as the model of a new breed of manager who views business as a game, adapts rapidly to change and excels at crafting strategies and motivating teams to win.
Is it safe to say that they might know each other, @AreWeSure?
Alefantis and Maccobys - close friends, lawyer
Maccoby and Silsby - connected through Friends of the Orphans and HP Boise (Maccoby wrote a book about Silsby's boss)
Trey McIntyre and Silsby - connected through Von Hansen (HP, Alertsense)
Trey McIntyre and Alefantis - connected through Comet Ping Pong (attended same party)
Kasky and Silsby - connected through Haiti adoption racket, FAC
all tied to clintons
Also a great refresher for Silsby/Alefantis for those who forgot~ recommended by @OhRutherfordBehave
Previous thread: https://voat.co/v/pizzagate/2478562
view the rest of the comments →
Are_we_sure ago
This is false, I debunked this. This rests on the word of a conman and I showed that all the evidence shows the conman was lying.
Original image: http://i.magaimg.net/img/2zys.png
OMG. You think I'm going to decipher that?
Wow. Is that really the description you are going with? Do you really think that's an honest description? Do you think they were giving lap dances in the HP offices?
OK. This is more like it.
No. It's not safe to say this at all. First of all this book came out in 1977. The AP story about Silsby says she graduated in 1991 and "took a job with Hewlett Packard in Boise, working for six years in financing and Internet marketing positions." So no, I don't believe it's safe to say Maccoby knows Silsby. Is it possible yes, but this evidence points to it being highly unlikely.
For one, it points to Richard Hackborn being a corporate power in 1977.
Eventually he became head of the printer division, do you know how many employees would be in that division? Do you think he knew them all? Unlikely in my experience.
Can you even show that Hackborn knew who Silsby was? Let alone MacCoby?
Silsby was never high up at HP and she worked in finance and internet marketing. To me, Silsby's boss is who she directly reports to, the person who writes her employee evaluations, not someone much higher up in the organization. Is everyone in Boise in the same division? Was she in printers?
So MacCoby interviews Hackborn in 1977. 14 years later Silsby is hired at HP. There's no evidence that Hackborn knows about Silsby's tenure at HP, why would you think it's safe to say that MacCoby knows low level employees at Boise, HP? This doesn't make sense. It makes it highly unlikely in my Alefantis and Maccobys - close friends, lawyer. This feels like you doing nothing more 6 Degrees of Separation and not showing meaningful connections between people at all.
Let's look at your connections. Most of them do not prove the people knew Silsby. Six Degrees of Separations is a pretty useless standard of evidence. For example, I can be connected to Hillary Clinton in four links and to President Trump in 5 links, but I have never met them and they don't know who I am. In this a meaningful connection in any way? It is not.
Absolutely false, on Friends of Orphans. The connection through HP Boise is weak at best. It doesn't prove they know each other whatsoever, so it doesn't have much value
Again, do you think Silsby knows Trey McIntyre? Because this is not proof they do.
agreed.
agreed
this is pretty much nonsense. Are you claiming Silsby was part of an ongoing racket? Because the evidence is just a one time event in Jan 2010 that failed.
Also nobody has connected Kasky to Haiti. I saw that claimed, but the evidence was about something else entirely.
More nonsense. There's still no evidence that anyone in DC knew who Laura Silsby was prior to her being arrested in Haiti, as I have shown multiple times.
https://voat.co/v/pizzagate/2153386/10615474 https://voat.co/v/pizzagate/2058303/10193707 https://voat.co/v/pizzagate/2122876 https://voat.co/v/pizzagate/2122947
If you want to engage my evidence with a substantive argument, I'd be up for that. I didn't know about Maccoby's book, but I, frankly, don't understand why you think it's meaningful.
EvaEverywhere ago
I am always the only one to do this but thanks for the skepticism. That being said I've tried to send all the disbelievers here because the board needs skeptics from all walks of life, or people who would have info (even biased the other way) that would enlighten the understanding of the people we investigate. But they don't stick around.
darkknight111 ago
The skeptic argument does not hold water when it comes to this shill.
His "skepticism" only applies one way. When suspiscion is directed at people on the left. When the same suspiscions are applied to the right, note that he never defends them.
His views only ever match what the MSM tells him is the truth. He's very quick to believe them when someone on the right is accused of foul play, refer to selective skepticism above.
His political views are that he's liberal (thus against us purely for political reasons). Profiling of shills indicates that most of them are liberals.
Conclusion: He is not a "skeptic", he's a shill. He's not in anyway interested in protecting children nor in busting elites. Likely because Are We Sure is either a pedophile himself or an active accomplice in this shit to begin with.
SoSpricyHotDog ago
While I agree with your assessment, generally speaking... a true "shill" does not function like this. @Are_we_sure is 99% against the vast majority of the research posted here on Voat - but you've got to give credit where credit is due. Sure, he takes the MSM bait 100% of the time and almost never walks back his claims as they erode over time, but he does* do his homework and provides a number of compelling counterpoints.
I've argued/discussed/debated with him a number of times and I must say... I've come up against shills before, but, he's wayyyyy beyond that. He offers us an opportunity to solidify research by poking holes in it. Giving us a chance to dig deeper and disprove the information he is presenting.
Plus, he's respectful while doing it. Criticism is healthy. I know this won't be a popular response for the crowd, but @Are_We_Sure is a great "litmus test" to have here with us. When we get to a point at which @Are_We_Sure can no longer 'debunk' the intel/leads... that's when it happens.
Many, many people will have a very hard time accepting the truth re: Pedogate when it is unveiled, he gives us a preemptive opportunity to lock this all up and make it bulletproof.
Are_we_sure ago
Thanks Spricy. It's because I'm not a shill this is 100% organic. And, of course, my mode is based in skepticism, logic, evidence and a aversion to witchhunts. And I do have a political point of view but beyond my politics. I have a deeper aversion to terrible thinking and disinformation.
People accuse me of not wanting to protect children, my response is that is not what this board is about. This board is about using pedophilia as a weapon to promote the disinformation of overarching grand conspiracy of elites who all share the same goals. This is simplistic, but very comforting thinking. I often point out how conspiratorial thinking affects all people, some more than others, but it's not a left right thing. It's not a smart/dumb thing. It's the way the human brain works. It's the stories we like to tell ourselves. That someone out there is in charge and pulling the strings behind all of these random events. In fact, people on here do not what to drop the conspiracy thinking to actually help children, so all this energy is wasted and has helped no one. Notice that Darknight puts the two on equal footing. Darknight claims "He's not in anyway interested in protecting children nor in busting elites." And then demonizes me as a pedophile. Demonization of people is a giant part of the witchhunting on here. Pedophilia is a super emotional issues and it's politicized by pizzagate to an ideological tool. A highly effective one, since super emotional topics shut down our logical thinking. This is one of the cause of the broad and wide net being cast on here. It's a pizza place with artwork. They must be part of a connected network of pedophiles!
I think your litmus test is wrong. I most often engage on factual claims because I can disprove them. Beliefs in a Moloch cult or Masons and Rothchilds run the world with the Venetian black nobility I often skip because that's just folks who already gone. I can get behind the criticism of the Catholic Church ala Spotlight. I can't get behind straight up anti-Catholic bigotry. And often someone does research that lays out a series of facts and then come to a dubious conclusion. Such as Alefantis knows MacCoby, Macoby wrote a book on Richard Hackborn. Later Hackborn became a bigshot in HP Boise. 16 years after Maccoby's book Silsby worked at HP. All Facts. Alefantis knows Silsby? A highly dubious conclusion. Hackborn knows Silsby? Also unsupported. Hackborn knows Silsby? Maybe. Hackborn knows Silsby well enough to be involved with her a decade after she left HP? Comletely unsupported. If someone just leaves it as a bunch of facts, I would be less likely to engage. Another funny thing is people think when I do engage it convey some meaning. WE MUST BE CLOSE TO THE TRUTH!!!! More likely you just said something that is easy to refute.
I'm curious as to which of my claims have eroded over time.
I still stand by my research that
the alleged "Clinton Silsby relationship" is a fantasy based on not understanding the role of the State Department and some deliberate lies
all claims of code in the Podesta emails have fallen through
None of the orignal claims of Pizzagate have stood up.......this is why people want to claim genuine events like Harvey Weinstein as part of it. Silly claims like Louise Bourgeois was influenced by Jeffrey Dahmer are not true.
The story about the NYPD having Wiener's laptop was a campaign of disinformation by people close to the Trump team and the claims of dozens of others being arrested in Nonsense. (As I showed many times, the FBI had the laptop. Not the NYPD.)