showing abuse of children of which some are in Tony Podesta house
Invent demonstrably false allegations, then complain about how people don't get arrested over the demonstrably false allegations you made up. Hurr durr pizzagate =))
Are you inbred? Look at few comments above your own. Artistic description of those exhibitions is simple, those are children to whom something bad happened and very likely in pedophilic manner. Tony Podesta has at least three paintings from such described collection and is personal friend of the author, James Alefantis is her personal friend as well.
those are children to whom something bad happened and very likely in pedophilic manner
This sentence alone(that is an opinion, a personal interpretation of the paintings by the way) disproves the claim that the paintings are "showing abuse of children".
You're simply trying to distort facts as much as possible in order to fit your agenda.
Why is James Alefantis personal friend of the artist as his Facebook friends evidence?
And btw, that is not personal opinion, that's exhibition description from years ago, Djurdjevic must have agreed to such description, she didn't protest. So that's at least something she ALLOWED because all of her art at some point must be allowed by her to be on any exhibition.
So from the invention of "showing abuse of children" you have moved to the invention of
Podesta has paintings of dead kids
The level of detachment from reality surrounding pizzagate is absurd. Dealing with pizzagaters is like dealing with someone who is clearly mentally challenged and blatantly disregards or simply can't get a grasp on reality.
Biljana Djurdjevic allowed her art to be shown under such description, back in 2006/2007 exhibition:
The eyes are those of the young teenagers in the paintings Living in Oblivion (2006), Hanging On (2006), and Dummies (2006). Something appears to have happened to the children.Perhaps something sinister. They seem to be the victims of some act of cruelty. But we don’t know what. Apart from the eyes and the body language, there are no indications of vulnerability.
Hardly a day goes by without a paedophile ring or a child labour scandal being exposed somewhere in the world. Are there more paedophiles and more child workers today than before?
Pay intention that it mentions Living in Oblivion, Hanging On and Dummies. And to be precise - Tony Podesta owns 2 paintings from all 7 from Living in Oblivion, which are "School Girl" and "Synchronized Swimming". So he owns such described art and James Alefantis is personal friend of Biljana, I would like you to address this issue as James himself has some interesting in taping kids on his own. What is interesting too is that Djurdjevic doesnt show duct taped boy in any of her site shows. Why is that? If it's normal art? Tony also own one painting showing two underage dead girls from collection of her called "Hotbed".
So why they were approved by Biljana to be shown under such description? ->
Something appears to have happened to the children. Perhaps something sinister. They seem to be the victims of some act of cruelty. But we don’t know what. Apart from the eyes and the body language, there are no indications of vulnerability.
Hardly a day goes by without a paedophile ring or a child labour scandal being exposed somewhere in the world. Are there more paedophiles and more child workers today than before?
In order for the Biljana paintings owned by Podesta to show abuse of children like you claimed, they would have to show children being abused, which is demonstrably not the case.
Case closed.
And let me get this straight, what did the pizzagaters accuse Podesta of exactly? mass raping and murdering of children in satanic rituals? claiming that they had mountains of evidence to prove it?
After 4 years since pizzagate came out, what are the pizzagaters still doing? distorting facts about some paintings that he owns?
Let me burst out laughing at you pizzagaters again.
This type of conspiracy beliefs are based on faith and are impervious to facts and reason.
So why they were approved by Biljana to be shown under such description? ->
How does your retarded loaded question change the demonstrable fact that the Biljana paintings owned by Podesta do not show abuse of children, like you claimed?
Something appears to have happened to the children. Perhaps something sinister. They seem to be the victims of some act of cruelty. But we don’t know what. Apart from the eyes and the body language, there are no indications of vulnerability.
Hardly a day goes by without a paedophile ring or a child labour scandal being exposed somewhere in the world. Are there more paedophiles and more child workers today than before?
Demonstrable reality is that she allowed to her work be described as showing abused children - which is btw visible even without her approval - Years before Pizzagate. And James Alefantis seems to be interested in this type of art, why would he have her in friends otherwise?
No it doesn't. Your continaly distorting facts, whics is irrelevant anyway.
Like I preiously said, in order for the Biljana paintings owned by Podesta to show abuse of children like you claimed, they would have to show the act of children being abused, which is demonstrably not the case.
Something appears to have happened to the children. Perhaps something sinister. They seem to be the victims of some act of cruelty. But we don’t know what. Apart from the eyes and the body language, there are no indications of vulnerability.
Hardly a day goes by without a paedophile ring or a child labour scandal being exposed somewhere in the world. Are there more paedophiles and more child workers today than before?
Even "pedo" word is used. If she disagrees with that, why she allows that to be description of her official exhibition.
view the rest of the comments →
PGIssStupid2 ago
Invent demonstrably false allegations, then complain about how people don't get arrested over the demonstrably false allegations you made up. Hurr durr pizzagate =))
Heisenberg123 ago
Are you inbred? Look at few comments above your own. Artistic description of those exhibitions is simple, those are children to whom something bad happened and very likely in pedophilic manner. Tony Podesta has at least three paintings from such described collection and is personal friend of the author, James Alefantis is her personal friend as well.
PGIssStupid2 ago
This sentence alone(that is an opinion, a personal interpretation of the paintings by the way) disproves the claim that the paintings are "showing abuse of children".
You're simply trying to distort facts as much as possible in order to fit your agenda.
Angelis_Solaris ago
There comes a point when the number of morbid and sick paintings says more about the buyer than the artist's intent.
Heisenberg123 ago
This is true too.
Heisenberg123 ago
Why is James Alefantis personal friend of the artist as his Facebook friends evidence?
And btw, that is not personal opinion, that's exhibition description from years ago, Djurdjevic must have agreed to such description, she didn't protest. So that's at least something she ALLOWED because all of her art at some point must be allowed by her to be on any exhibition.
PGIssStupid2 ago
So from the invention of "showing abuse of children" you have moved to the invention of
The level of detachment from reality surrounding pizzagate is absurd. Dealing with pizzagaters is like dealing with someone who is clearly mentally challenged and blatantly disregards or simply can't get a grasp on reality.
Heisenberg123 ago
So from losing arguments you have moved to ignoring my arguments. So let's state it again:
https://www.modernamuseet.se/stockholm/en/exhibitions/the-1st-at-moderna-biljana-djurdjevic/
Biljana Djurdjevic allowed her art to be shown under such description, back in 2006/2007 exhibition:
Pay intention that it mentions Living in Oblivion, Hanging On and Dummies. And to be precise - Tony Podesta owns 2 paintings from all 7 from Living in Oblivion, which are "School Girl" and "Synchronized Swimming". So he owns such described art and James Alefantis is personal friend of Biljana, I would like you to address this issue as James himself has some interesting in taping kids on his own. What is interesting too is that Djurdjevic doesnt show duct taped boy in any of her site shows. Why is that? If it's normal art? Tony also own one painting showing two underage dead girls from collection of her called "Hotbed".
PGIssStupid2 ago
PHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Hey you reality denying psycho, the Biljana paintings owned by Podesta DO NOT SHOW THE ABUSE OF CHILDREN like you claimed.
Your statement:
Is demonstrably false. Period. No matter how much you try moving the goalposts.
Heisenberg123 ago
So why they were approved by Biljana to be shown under such description? ->
PGIssStupid2 ago
In order for the Biljana paintings owned by Podesta to show abuse of children like you claimed, they would have to show children being abused, which is demonstrably not the case.
Case closed.
And let me get this straight, what did the pizzagaters accuse Podesta of exactly? mass raping and murdering of children in satanic rituals? claiming that they had mountains of evidence to prove it?
After 4 years since pizzagate came out, what are the pizzagaters still doing? distorting facts about some paintings that he owns?
Let me burst out laughing at you pizzagaters again.
This type of conspiracy beliefs are based on faith and are impervious to facts and reason.
PGIssStupid2 ago
How does your retarded loaded question change the demonstrable fact that the Biljana paintings owned by Podesta do not show abuse of children, like you claimed?
Heisenberg123 ago
How is that not description of abuse?
PGIssStupid2 ago
You have a problem in accepting demonstrable reality.
Heisenberg123 ago
Demonstrable reality is that she allowed to her work be described as showing abused children - which is btw visible even without her approval - Years before Pizzagate. And James Alefantis seems to be interested in this type of art, why would he have her in friends otherwise?
PGIssStupid2 ago
What a stupid made up statement. You are a disgrace for the human species.
Heisenberg123 ago
Made up? 2006/2007 exhibition description disagrees.
PGIssStupid3 ago
No it doesn't. Your continaly distorting facts, whics is irrelevant anyway.
Like I preiously said, in order for the Biljana paintings owned by Podesta to show abuse of children like you claimed, they would have to show the act of children being abused, which is demonstrably not the case.
Case closed, stop being a retard.
Heisenberg123 ago
Even "pedo" word is used. If she disagrees with that, why she allows that to be description of her official exhibition.