Madeleine McCan't Eye ( pizzagate )

submitted by justanotherone

This video which is somehow connected to this shows images slash at the start, 2 eyes are shown (in the flashes of creepy images at the start) both seem to have anomalies similar to Madeleine McCann's, but it's not her. But they might have an interest in it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oicUO0sz08c

But Podesta sent a photo of him playing cards with madeleine McCann, the eye has Madeleines exact flaw, the face matches the age projection and it matches her mother.

https://i.sli.mg/EIRRIV.jpg <Scroll down to near the bottom

IntheLordweTrust

One of my hesitancies with assigning this girl to the identity of Madeleine McCann is that these sorts of situations seem odd to me. That is I have trouble understanding them in the context of social gatherings. Who do the other people in the room think this girl is? I play cards with people and have family gatherings, and each guest has an understandable identity. So and so is X's daughter, or niece, etc. Naturally in these sorts of situations (it would seem to me) that at least some other persons (perhaps most) in the room aren't in on the Podesta brothers alleged pedophilia, and as such would have to have a satisfactory explanation for who this seemingly random girl is.

Has anyone attempted to ID the Man directly to the girl in question's left? This could be her father or something.

varialus

I like the eye analysis. She really should be DNA tested.

28leinad82

Why did you add all that shit to the infographic that's meant to be factual? "James Alefantis means i love babies" etc.. Bullshit, he was born with that name. Please dont spoil a decent factual infographic with crazy theories - start your own non factual graphics. This is going to make us look stupid.

sentryseven

Yeah, this was the original: https://i.sli.mg/eoWIeB.jpg I smell something off with this eyeball thing.

militant

Thanks, much better version! Basically a version without the bs.

Now I know what you are, OP.

UglyTruth

the eye has Madeleines exact flaw

It's close, but Madeleine has a solid bar at around 6 oclock while the girl in the Podesta photo has a thin line which appears more to the left. Also the girl's right eye has a similar line, so these could just be artifacts... Images at link

http://forum.clonehost.net/post/422

justanotherone

I completely disagree, the flaw is at about 6:45 in both, the problem is the image with Podesta is from above and somewhat side on, so this gives an angle that must be corrected for.

I tried again to make sure the eyes were rotated to the same angle and it again matches. https://i.sli.mg/8UEZf4.png

I disagree that it is an image artifact, except for the other eye which has too little visible to know what we are looking at.

Consider too that this is not a case in isolation, this is not the only evidence. They are clearly Pedo's. He deleted his emails over that tie to the day, that is extremely pointed! What are the odds of this being by chance? Almost none! He vacations in Portugal, lots of people haven't, but wait there are reports he was there at the time (there are 3 sources that say that), at a home near the McCann's, in a house of a Pedo (who wasn't there at the time) who bothered to ingratiate himself with the McCann's, very suspicious!

And then the girl looks like Madeleine, is the right age range and a template drawn on the mother fits Madeleine.

So with the eye having the flaw at what IMO is the right angle (also grant some imperfections in the camera and aging) and IMO this is exceedingly probably that she is Madeleine, if not he still obviously took her (better than 99.9% chance).

So anything is possible but this is not debunked, like everything it's less that absolutely perfect, people can always find crap to argue about.

Oh, and the FBI guy reportedly mentioned "Cards" as something to look out for, this is the only thing that fits so it seems he thinks it's her, not proof but that also suggests it's not easily debunked.

UglyTruth

Yes, possibly the difference between the images is due to the camera angle relative to the eye direction, but saying that one eye matches and the other is an artifact is special pleading, a symptom of confirmation bias.

I agree that there's a lot of evidence that Podesta is involved in a paedophile ring, but you're reaching to say that he deleted his emails, they could have been pre-filtered by whoever gave them to WikiLeaks to make it look like he had deleted them. The efits are a very good match, but the witnesses said they didn't get a good look at the guy so they are from an unknown source. The reports that he was in Portugal at the time can't be verified.

I agree that it's highly suspicious and I agree that Podesta could have been involved in the abduction of Madeleine, but due to the circumstantial nature of the evidence and the possibility of a fit-up I believe that we should keep our options open.

Yes, people can always find crap to argue about. The main point I'd like to make is that the facts should drive the theory, and that we should ammend the theory rather than try to force-fit the facts to a particular theory that we've become attached to.

justanotherone

Face remains that this girl certainly has some flaw in her eye at about the same angle, which having eye colour about the same, being about the same age and having looks that match very well.

I grant you I had early considered that the efits were too good to not be fit to the Podestas, but I was talking to someone on FB and he had kept track of the case, read the books or at least knew of details in banned books on the subject and he said it was known John Podesta and his brother were in the country at the time but they didn't know if he was in that part of the country.

Then later 2 sources, one FBI and one Police apparently con firmed that Podesta was in the country and in the area, staying at Clement's house.

Sure, I also considered that the emails might have been held back by another party, but IMO that sounds like it is stretching credulity more than a little.

We know for a fact Podesta visits Portugal. We know for a fact (given all the evidence) he is a Pedo and all round sicko.

People have been sent to jail on a lot less. If it's not Madeleine then a DNA test should be easily secured.

Circumstantial evidence is valid and this is beyond being waved away entierly, it's not all false and a big setup to make this pedo loo like a bigger pedo than he is.

UglyTruth

How does it compare to her left eye? I can zoom in but it can't duplicate the image in the inset, mine is much more pixellated.

justanotherone

I made that some time ago, but at most I might have in some cases some cases done a bilinear resize, then a "nearest neighbour" which is a pixelating resize. I used some adjustments of brightness/contrast or maybe gamma (I tried both/all and went with what made it clearest) and saturation. But there is no retouching. The Bilinear type resize will be what makes it look a bit better. But I did it many times over different ways and you can see the flaw is consistently visible in all, but it helps if your eyesight is good and you need the LCD screen I assume you are viewing this with to be on the right angle.

UglyTruth

My resize was a cubic interpolation, I didn't make any other adjustments because after the resize I could see the same feature that appears in your inset.

UglyTruth

I just searched WikiLeaks for IMG20141128_223509_244.jpg (from your sli.img jpeg) and found no results.

justanotherone

Did you search for attachments? Or just regular email search because that won't work.

At any rate LegionWill gave the link: https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/35941

Click he attachments tab

UglyTruth

Thanks, I've downloaded in the jpeg.