This entire issue is quite complex. I believe we have to place ourselves in a position and remind ourselves what AnOpenSecret IS and what they represent. I do not believe AnOpenSecret is controlled opposition or an operation from the CIA. They do provide valuable insight into the horrors and tragedies that have occurred and are now occurring in Hollywood. What I DO believe however, is that Gabe Hoffman who runs the OpensSecret twitter account is a hardcore pragmatist and AnOpenSecret can not afford to speculate on matters that are muddied with inconsistencies and confusion that rely on a high degree of speculation (and as he says without material witnesses and provable victims), as well as for particular subjects being in the realm of true "conspiracy theory".
This is not an endorsement of his behavior on twitter I think it's simply a reminder of who we are dealing with. I get the feeling that, as a matter of the lifestyle he was raised in and chose he is woefully ignorant of popular conspiracy theory and purposefully avoids it and all mention of it for that reason AND so that he can shield his documentary from "conspiracy theory" that might harm the very real goal of destroying the predators that destroyed what I believe to be his Hollywood idols, the Corey Haim, Renfro, Phoenix crowd. If you haven't noticed even Enty and the Himmms are all stuck on that generation for some reason (ie, their hey days) and are primarily aimed at those sexual predators that run Hollywood like a boy brothel, which is the Bryan Singer, Marty Weiss, Michael Harrah, Bob Villard, Marc Collins-Rector, Chad Shackley, Garth Ancier, David Neuman, Gary Goddard crowd.
I think the biggest problem is that we expected too much from AnOpenSecret and many survivors of childhood sexual abuse came to them expecting them to help and endorse their stories and since the factors that I mentioned above come into play they can't put themselves in the position that would jeopardize the integrity of their claims. I know this seems like such a cop out and a very hard reality to accept, but I'm not ruling out the fact that Hoffman is simply just a dick too. I've witnessed him dismiss and block people with such disdain that it is highly insulting and aggravating, once again, I think this is only just Hoffman's personality as a pragmatist and businessman (not to mention his lifestyle choice).
I might be wrong but I see nothing indicating controlled opposition or psyop just woefully pragmatic and ignorant of conspiracy theory by choice, legality and simply just being an asshole.
I beg to differ. Why would he acknowledge the 'pedo triangle' as a pedo symbol then, even referring to the FBI, but deny the pedo swirl is a pedo symbol? So that he was able to defend Voodoo Doughnuts for putting pedo swirls on their doughnuts?
And the whole way in which he tried to portray Pizzagate as a 'hoax' sucks. This is not just someone who is a sceptic.
He moved the goalpost. First he talked about 'a creepy pic', then, when people pointed out it wasn't only a creepy pic, he said well that JA's Instagram was private anyway, so that it would be impossible to tell whether the archives were legit.
I mean, c'mon. I never met someone who fights pedophilia like Hoffman purportedly does, who didn't agree on first glance that JA is fishy as hell.
This is not a 'conspiracy theory' discussion like 'are aliens stored in are 54?'.
People who have spent time researching pedos - long before Pizzagate - instantly see all the red flags at Comet Pizza or when looking into JA.
When I read Hoffman's Tweets yesterday, I immediately thought these are the tweets only a predator could have written.
And mind you, I was someone who tended to defend Hoffman, since I used the documentary for redpilling. I wasn't biased, but open minded.
I understand that it is frustrating to see how many people have turned out to be limited hangouts, but please let's not close our eyes when we meet another one, only because it might be difficult to deal with it.
Yeah you do bring up good points on some of his denials, seems like he spends some time looking into it to try and understand it but then settle back on capitalizing HOAX. it's bullshit I agree the dude needs an attitude adjustment.
Question: Could it be possible that this is about taking Singer down (and maybe one or two other pedos) for totally different reasons than what Gabe Hoffman claims? Like it was with Harvey Weinstein?
I'm in awe what the #MeToo movement has achiieved in many, many countries, but I also think that it was a psy-op initially (that got ouf of hand, and backfired, lol), since people behind the scenes wanted to get rid of him.
Time will tell. I really hate to bring up Hoffman's homosexuality but wouldn't that be quite a sticking point with his family considering their Jewish heritage. You see I really don't want to mention these factors as to appear bigoted or antisemitic but they both really do have something to do with this entire saga but I do not know their place and proper way to present it without being trapped in a very precarious politically correct type setup. Could we speculate that maybe he was abused by someone in Singer's circle? Was he abused in some way by the same circles in general growing up in H-wood? I understand what you are saying that maybe it's an insider vendetta in a business sense, which it could very well be, but I'm wondering if there isn't something going on a bit more personal.
Well, I'm currently watching the video clip @letsdothis3 posted above, showing Gabe Hoffman and Alex Jones (how was anyone able to watch the latter's show I wonder - he's so terrible, lol).
First time I ever saw Gabe Hoffman, and the first thought I had that he is gay. Yes, he might be have been abused - who knows? But then it doesn't make sense to defend JA.
So I think this is a (personal) vendetta for reasons whatsoever, but Gabe Hoffman is certainly not a good guy.
As I said, all people I've shown the CPP and JA evidence, who were either survivors, and/or have been fighting pedophilia for a long time, immediately saw that JA and CPP are fishy as hell. No way a survivor (who isn't also a pedo) would defend him.
Watching it now too. Boy I'll tell you he sure is adamant bout getting credit for exposing Bryan Singer. Alot of people have been writing about Singer for a long time.
view the rest of the comments →
ASolo ago
This entire issue is quite complex. I believe we have to place ourselves in a position and remind ourselves what AnOpenSecret IS and what they represent. I do not believe AnOpenSecret is controlled opposition or an operation from the CIA. They do provide valuable insight into the horrors and tragedies that have occurred and are now occurring in Hollywood. What I DO believe however, is that Gabe Hoffman who runs the OpensSecret twitter account is a hardcore pragmatist and AnOpenSecret can not afford to speculate on matters that are muddied with inconsistencies and confusion that rely on a high degree of speculation (and as he says without material witnesses and provable victims), as well as for particular subjects being in the realm of true "conspiracy theory".
This is not an endorsement of his behavior on twitter I think it's simply a reminder of who we are dealing with. I get the feeling that, as a matter of the lifestyle he was raised in and chose he is woefully ignorant of popular conspiracy theory and purposefully avoids it and all mention of it for that reason AND so that he can shield his documentary from "conspiracy theory" that might harm the very real goal of destroying the predators that destroyed what I believe to be his Hollywood idols, the Corey Haim, Renfro, Phoenix crowd. If you haven't noticed even Enty and the Himmms are all stuck on that generation for some reason (ie, their hey days) and are primarily aimed at those sexual predators that run Hollywood like a boy brothel, which is the Bryan Singer, Marty Weiss, Michael Harrah, Bob Villard, Marc Collins-Rector, Chad Shackley, Garth Ancier, David Neuman, Gary Goddard crowd.
I think the biggest problem is that we expected too much from AnOpenSecret and many survivors of childhood sexual abuse came to them expecting them to help and endorse their stories and since the factors that I mentioned above come into play they can't put themselves in the position that would jeopardize the integrity of their claims. I know this seems like such a cop out and a very hard reality to accept, but I'm not ruling out the fact that Hoffman is simply just a dick too. I've witnessed him dismiss and block people with such disdain that it is highly insulting and aggravating, once again, I think this is only just Hoffman's personality as a pragmatist and businessman (not to mention his lifestyle choice).
I might be wrong but I see nothing indicating controlled opposition or psyop just woefully pragmatic and ignorant of conspiracy theory by choice, legality and simply just being an asshole.
think- ago
I beg to differ. Why would he acknowledge the 'pedo triangle' as a pedo symbol then, even referring to the FBI, but deny the pedo swirl is a pedo symbol? So that he was able to defend Voodoo Doughnuts for putting pedo swirls on their doughnuts?
http://archive.fo/u8qHk
And the whole way in which he tried to portray Pizzagate as a 'hoax' sucks. This is not just someone who is a sceptic.
He moved the goalpost. First he talked about 'a creepy pic', then, when people pointed out it wasn't only a creepy pic, he said well that JA's Instagram was private anyway, so that it would be impossible to tell whether the archives were legit.
I mean, c'mon. I never met someone who fights pedophilia like Hoffman purportedly does, who didn't agree on first glance that JA is fishy as hell.
This is not a 'conspiracy theory' discussion like 'are aliens stored in are 54?'.
People who have spent time researching pedos - long before Pizzagate - instantly see all the red flags at Comet Pizza or when looking into JA.
When I read Hoffman's Tweets yesterday, I immediately thought these are the tweets only a predator could have written.
And mind you, I was someone who tended to defend Hoffman, since I used the documentary for redpilling. I wasn't biased, but open minded.
I understand that it is frustrating to see how many people have turned out to be limited hangouts, but please let's not close our eyes when we meet another one, only because it might be difficult to deal with it.
ASolo ago
Yeah you do bring up good points on some of his denials, seems like he spends some time looking into it to try and understand it but then settle back on capitalizing HOAX. it's bullshit I agree the dude needs an attitude adjustment.
think- ago
Question: Could it be possible that this is about taking Singer down (and maybe one or two other pedos) for totally different reasons than what Gabe Hoffman claims? Like it was with Harvey Weinstein?
I'm in awe what the #MeToo movement has achiieved in many, many countries, but I also think that it was a psy-op initially (that got ouf of hand, and backfired, lol), since people behind the scenes wanted to get rid of him.
ASolo ago
Time will tell. I really hate to bring up Hoffman's homosexuality but wouldn't that be quite a sticking point with his family considering their Jewish heritage. You see I really don't want to mention these factors as to appear bigoted or antisemitic but they both really do have something to do with this entire saga but I do not know their place and proper way to present it without being trapped in a very precarious politically correct type setup. Could we speculate that maybe he was abused by someone in Singer's circle? Was he abused in some way by the same circles in general growing up in H-wood? I understand what you are saying that maybe it's an insider vendetta in a business sense, which it could very well be, but I'm wondering if there isn't something going on a bit more personal.
think- ago
Well, I'm currently watching the video clip @letsdothis3 posted above, showing Gabe Hoffman and Alex Jones (how was anyone able to watch the latter's show I wonder - he's so terrible, lol).
First time I ever saw Gabe Hoffman, and the first thought I had that he is gay. Yes, he might be have been abused - who knows? But then it doesn't make sense to defend JA.
So I think this is a (personal) vendetta for reasons whatsoever, but Gabe Hoffman is certainly not a good guy.
As I said, all people I've shown the CPP and JA evidence, who were either survivors, and/or have been fighting pedophilia for a long time, immediately saw that JA and CPP are fishy as hell. No way a survivor (who isn't also a pedo) would defend him.
ASolo ago
Watching it now too. Boy I'll tell you he sure is adamant bout getting credit for exposing Bryan Singer. Alot of people have been writing about Singer for a long time.
https://www.scribd.com/document/321661872/All-About-the-Jeffrey-Epstein-Pedo-Network