Post: #676

Paul J. Watson just came out with his video today.

Post: #677

Apparently, Alex Jones is now saying that PizzaGate was a false flag operation to divert attention from the real pedo gang operating in Washington.

Post: #678

How is it a false flag operation? Didn't it start from 4chan digging through the podesta emails and making a connection with the weird pizza/pasta referrals?

Post: #679

They are pressuring him to give these new statements.

Post: #680

My personal opinion is that Alefantis and his buddies weren't actually torturing and abusing children. They were just pretending to, by collecting art that depicted children in violent or borderline sexualized situations, engaging in faux-occult rituals with stand-ins or actors for children, and otherwise skirting the line on the whole thing. Alefantis' bullying reaction to the accusations was way too defensive for someone who was innocent. I think he was hoping to turn his "Pegasus Museum" into some kind of private club for he and his friends to play around with that occult tomfoolery, and he was really upset that the public scrutiny forced him to back off of it.

Post: #681

"False flag" I'm not convinced of.

As stated before I don't believe they would do something as easy to bust as a pizza chain in a strip mall. All these markers and symbols don't exist to serve as a big "shit is going down here" sign. It's how people in those communities identify each other and know where to go to form associations.

Same way in other fringe group I've spent time around. With bikers you are NEVER going to find meth at biker's clubhouse and simply because the 13 patch (a 13 inside a square "diamond" shape) refers to meth doesn't mean that you are ever going to find meth on someone wearing that patch. However I can damn well guarantee that guy knows where to get some and will send you to the right place once he knows you're not a narc.

Post: #682

(04-06-2017 09:29 AM)C-Note Wrote:  Apparently, Alex Jones is now saying that PizzaGate was a false flag operation to divert attention from the real pedo gang operating in Washington.

I'm starting to get fed up with Jones and his BS. All he does is redirect patriot angst to dead ends. This also feeds into the paranoia news that is fed from common blogs such as Zerohedge, SHTFplan, and Martin Armstrong.

All of our supposed "alt right" news sources are a waste of time. You'll get better news and covered from ROK and Cernovich than the two bit hacks I mentioned previously.

Post: #683

Hey now....ZeroHedge is somewhat "ranty" politically but they're a great source of contrarian finance data. You'd be surprised how many Wall Street and hedge fund types read it religiously.

SHTF plan and Natural News seem mostly nuts to me. I'm somewhat hestitant to call Martin Armstrong "paranoid" because he's attributed ideas to "sources" such as the plan to blame Russia if Hillary lost and the EU's efforts to get rid of physical cash months or years before awareness of those issues hit the general public.

Post: #684

^^ Believe me, ZH is great for contrarian news. I just get sick of their articles claiming a massive "drop" when the actual drop is 1.2%. They then blow up the chart scales to make it seem extreme and do their best to blur the numbers so one can't tell the actual scale.

They then go further and repost crap from shtf plan and natural news which further dilutes their journalistic currency in my mind. Anytime i see a post on ZH with that blue "reposted from X" i immediately skip over.

I miss the old ZH. It's definitely not the same blog anymore.

Post: #685

Post: #686

(04-19-2017 12:33 PM)Gmac Wrote:  

"Child" was 15 at the time.

Also:

Quote:All three of the accusers reportedly have criminal records involving drug abuse and other crimes.

I looked like this when I was 15:



The one on the right. I started working out a lot since age 14.

I highly doubt a gay 15yo teenager is easy to rape.

Confounding this with the likely existing international pedophiles is wrong. Also fake-news media is again calling anyone below a certain threshold a child. 16 is age of consent for women and they are far easier to rape at age 25 than boys at 15.

My guess it is a twink who fell on hard times and needs some meth money since his old fuck-buddy has become mayor and can certainly spare a few dollars.

Post: #687

Doesn't really matter the reasoning (in fact I find it odd you seem to defend him), it's illegal here in the US.

Post: #688

(04-19-2017 01:48 PM)Gmac Wrote:  Doesn't really matter the reasoning (in fact I find it odd you seem to defend him), it's illegal here in the US.

It's illegal in some states for an 18yo to fuck a 17.99 year old girl.

Arresting that 18yo boy does not make it right, even if you stick to the law.

The gay scene is notorious for young boys.

I don't care about this politician - he is probably scum anyway, but I would personally define pedophilia as something else than this. That is all.

I am an advocate of common sense and not letter of law. I would not punish a high-school teacher either for fucking a 16yo - regardless whether male or female. Sure - he or she may lose the job, because the behavior is not what you expect a teacher to do with the students, but criminally persecuting is another thing.

All I am saying is that this is not pedophilia a la Pizzagate.

Post: #689

(04-19-2017 01:22 PM)Zelcorpion Wrote:  I highly doubt a gay 15yo teenager is easy to rape.

Confounding this with the likely existing international pedophiles is wrong. Also fake-news media is again calling anyone below a certain threshold a child. 16 is age of consent for women and they are far easier to rape at age 25 than boys at 15.

Pedos have coercive and subversive ways to sexually molest their boy victim without having to physically overwhelm them. They know how to take advantage of vulnerable young teens, who being more independent than younger boys, are more accessible to homo pedo freaks.

This perv has apparently molested a 13yo boy, and those are just the ones that did come forward. Hope he pays for this despicable crime.

Post: #690

Talking of pedophilia, didn't want to start a new thread on this. Probably should, but just throwing this out there...

There's been a lot of fuss lately about vigilante groups ensnaring pedos via facebook and whatnot. Personally, I'd string the cunts up myself, and the parents too that let their children use the net unsupervised. Don't get me wrong, I'd also string up the pedos, but I have a problem with people taking the law in to their own hands, when they won't even write a fucking letter to their MP, for fear of having their bins gone through (it's a UK thing).

And so, I was wondering. How does the law stand for a grown man of 40/50 years of age to befriend a young girl, all in the name of being a father figure? Steady on! Steady on! Hear me out.

So what if I wanted to contact and become friends with 13/14 year olds say? Is that actually against the law? Obviously it would only be in a nurturing capacity and making sure they are ok. Do they have enough food to eat, clothes on their back, are they not being abused by family members, kind of thing? Just checking that they are good. Is that against the law? I really would like to know. Not that I am even thinking about doing this in the real world, but it's more of a thought experiment.

If nothing else, I could show them not to trust older adults or those that claim to be kids like them. I could provide genuine protection for them via advice, and even possibly through personal hands-on support. Is it illegal for a 40/50 year old man to meet with a 13/14 year old child to offer her protection? It doesn't seem to be. Can a 40/50 year old man be friends with a 13/14 year old child? Is it actually against the law? What law would that be?

I remember bouncing my little Italian sister on my knee (she was about 6/7 years old) and she loved me to bits. It wasn't a father/daughter relationship. Many women looked on with suspicion. She also came from a family that had suffered parental abuse. This made her more loving of older brothers that had her best interests at heart - she saw them as protection.

I'm genuinely curious where the law stands with all of this.

I think it's not against the law. And if that is the case, I might actually try to befriend some 13/14 year old girls to warn them of the dangers of dealing with strangers on the net.

I wonder how the pedo hunters would deal with me? Seeing every man as a fucking predatory scum fucker?

As I get older, I only want to see young children be protected. I don't think they should be using the net at all. But they are. Their mothers and fathers are stoned and drunk to the gills, and there they are, poor little darlings, looking for love and protection.

It may even be that we have reached a point in our cancerous society where it is illegal to protect children - only the state has that right.

That is what I am wondering.

Have at me. I'm thinking if I can get a legal clearance for this, I'm going to end up meeting up with some young 13/14 year old girls, or even boys as well - coz they need our protection too, right?

What could go wrong?

Is it against the law to want to protect children and make sure they are safe? Is there a cut off point in age for doing so? Are men not allowed to protect children?

Sorry for going off thread. Maybe this is worth starting a new one if you think so. I really am genuinely curious about this.

Post: #691

@Rigsby

Are you kidding?

You are, aren't you, and I am being gullible?

What would happen the first time she asked you to do something and you refused?

Might she blow off some steam by complaining to her friends that there is a creepy older guy who is bothering her?

Might a parent not overhear this or read it on a phone?

Might not our dear innocent friend Rigsby have trouble connecting to the forum from a cellblock?

Fucking hell man. I lived in fear of a stepdaughter who I treated better than her own father did, crossing my fingers and hoping it never occurred to her that she could ruin my life because I told her not to torture her little brother.

Who cares if it's legal or not? Risky as hell. Let her dad and her big brother look after her. You got a nanny state over there, let the nanny deal with it.

Unless you are joking, and then you got me.

Post: #692

(04-19-2017 01:22 PM)Zelcorpion Wrote:  "Child" was 15 at the time.

Also:

Quote:All three of the accusers reportedly have criminal records involving drug abuse and other crimes.

I think turning to substance abuse is a fairly common way for people to try to cope with the mental problems that come with being abused as a kid.

Post: #693

(04-19-2017 04:44 PM)Rigsby Wrote:  Is it against the law to want to protect children and make sure they are safe? Is there a cut off point in age for doing so? Are men not allowed to protect children?

Look Holden Caulfield, unless you want to get involved with an organization like Big Brothers Big Sisters, this sounds like a catastrophically bad idea.

Post: #694

Whoa....^

Post: #695

(04-19-2017 12:33 PM)Gmac Wrote:  

We're skeptical of the Cosby rape allegations from 30 years ago. Why shouldn't we be skeptical of this allegation?

Post: #696

(04-19-2017 08:01 PM)kmhour Wrote:  

(04-19-2017 04:44 PM)Rigsby Wrote:  Is it against the law to want to protect children and make sure they are safe? Is there a cut off point in age for doing so? Are men not allowed to protect children?

Look Holden Caulfield, unless you want to get involved with an organization like Big Brothers Big Sisters, this sounds like a catastrophically bad idea.

This forum needs more Catcher references.

Post: #697

(04-19-2017 04:44 PM)Rigsby Wrote:  Talking of pedophilia, didn't want to start a new thread on this. Probably should, but just throwing this out there...

There's been a lot of fuss lately about vigilante groups ensnaring pedos via facebook and whatnot. Personally, I'd string the cunts up myself, and the parents too that let their children use the net unsupervised. Don't get me wrong, I'd also string up the pedos, but I have a problem with people taking the law in to their own hands, when they won't even write a fucking letter to their MP, for fear of having their bins gone through (it's a UK thing).

And so, I was wondering. How does the law stand for a grown man of 40/50 years of age to befriend a young girl, all in the name of being a father figure? Steady on! Steady on! Hear me out.

So what if I wanted to contact and become friends with 13/14 year olds say? Is that actually against the law? Obviously it would only be in a nurturing capacity and making sure they are ok. Do they have enough food to eat, clothes on their back, are they not being abused by family members, kind of thing? Just checking that they are good. Is that against the law? I really would like to know. Not that I am even thinking about doing this in the real world, but it's more of a thought experiment.

If nothing else, I could show them not to trust older adults or those that claim to be kids like them. I could provide genuine protection for them via advice, and even possibly through personal hands-on support. Is it illegal for a 40/50 year old man to meet with a 13/14 year old child to offer her protection? It doesn't seem to be. Can a 40/50 year old man be friends with a 13/14 year old child? Is it actually against the law? What law would that be?

I remember bouncing my little Italian sister on my knee (she was about 6/7 years old) and she loved me to bits. It wasn't a father/daughter relationship. Many women looked on with suspicion. She also came from a family that had suffered parental abuse. This made her more loving of older brothers that had her best interests at heart - she saw them as protection.

I'm genuinely curious where the law stands with all of this.

I think it's not against the law. And if that is the case, I might actually try to befriend some 13/14 year old girls to warn them of the dangers of dealing with strangers on the net.

I wonder how the pedo hunters would deal with me? Seeing every man as a fucking predatory scum fucker?

As I get older, I only want to see young children be protected. I don't think they should be using the net at all. But they are. Their mothers and fathers are stoned and drunk to the gills, and there they are, poor little darlings, looking for love and protection.

It may even be that we have reached a point in our cancerous society where it is illegal to protect children - only the state has that right.

That is what I am wondering.

Have at me. I'm thinking if I can get a legal clearance for this, I'm going to end up meeting up with some young 13/14 year old girls, or even boys as well - coz they need our protection too, right?

What could go wrong?

Is it against the law to want to protect children and make sure they are safe? Is there a cut off point in age for doing so? Are men not allowed to protect children?

Sorry for going off thread. Maybe this is worth starting a new one if you think so. I really am genuinely curious about this.

Don't you have stuff to worry about yourself?

Post: #698

@Rigsby,

There are plenty of opportunities to properly children and teenagers. The big brother program, or volunteering at your YMCA, etc... There's plenty of volunteer groups that deal with at-risk kids.

These are vetted and reputable organizations, and you would do so in the company of other verified adults who would vet for you.

I did that stuff in college, and it was quite rewarding at times. Good, honest, and clean mentorship, and it was fun to see their self esteem build up doing things like hiking or just running around the park.

That should answer your question in a very conventional, normal, accepted, yet functional and rewarding manner. Outside of that context, and outside of that organizational structure, I would strongly, strongly advise against it. To that end...

I don't do that stuff any more. The reason why is because the climate to be active with children is so dangerous and toxic that it's not worth the risk. Parents and society is so primed and anxious to label and spot out "creeps", or to exaggerate and misinterpret any circumstance as possible abuse or untoward behavior directed at kids, that it's simply a huge gamble where literally your life (in terms of reputation) is at stake.

If I move to a community in the US or abroad where adult/child mentorship is appreciate, I would again be open to leading a sanctioned boyscout/weeblo/afterschool/outdoors program. Until then, I can only watch as society and the youth decline even further.

Post: #699

(04-19-2017 08:37 PM)polar Wrote:  We're skeptical of the Cosby rape allegations from 30 years ago. Why shouldn't we be skeptical of this allegation?

Cause he's gay and it's more likely than Cosbyrape.

Post: #700

(04-20-2017 12:51 AM)spokepoker Wrote:  

(04-19-2017 08:37 PM)polar Wrote:  We're skeptical of the Cosby rape allegations from 30 years ago. Why shouldn't we be skeptical of this allegation?

Cause he's gay and it's more likely than Cosbyrape.

Also look at that guy's face.

Obvious pedo is obvious.