Philly.com Has TWO Pizzagate Stories on front Page : "Pizzagate Truthers" at Philly's Little Baby's Ice Cream/Pizzabrain ( pizzagate )

submitted by Haldelos

Instead of calling this journalist a moron...I would suggest ppl send her well thought out/measured evidence to show that THERE IS something to this story...PPL need to be eased into this. Her twitter account is at bottom of the story. I just sent her the Ben Swann piece.

Philly.com http://www.philly.com/philly/food/Pizzagate-target-Philly-favorites-Pizza-Brain-and-Little-Babys-.html

archons

Jeez can't believe no one has found the shit I have linked to Little Baby's. Follow the rabbit hole and you find a lot of shit.

VieBleu

so...why don't you put up your links?

archons

Still putting it all together. Haven't even started connecting the businesses to anyone yet.

Birdzeyeview

"a lot of shit"

exactly, bullshit, horsehsit... etc etc etc

archons

oh my my my shilly willy you so silly.

Azzipdoe

Can ya possibly help a fella out and link me?

WakingUpisHardToDo

There was a big thread on this a few weeks ago. I can't search on my phone but it should not be hard to find. Museums and pizza shops. Coincidence?

Haldelos

oh...ive seen...its effed up

archons

have you seen the websites that are probably selling kids?

nomorepepperoni

Oh sure, make sure you always bring up that a nut stormed into and shot up CPP, just to emphasize how scary and dangerous words are.

truthstrangerthanfic

unlike the CRACKED piece from the other day, this one has my favorite strawman:

"...the Washington pizza shop Comet Ping Pong was headquarters for a child-abuse ring run by Hillary Clinton."

no credible person looking into pizzagate has ever claimed that Clinton or Podesta is the ringleader of anything.

AreWeSure

you just made a no true scotsman argument.

DryMartini

It's not 'no true Scotsman.' NTS applies to illogical segmentation: a Scotsman is such by birth and the only certain logical segments are those which would apply to all Scotsmen. For example, 'no true Scotsman is Spanish' is a logical statement whereas 'no true Scotsman likes tapas' is not. But the claim that no credible Pizzagate researcher believes that Hillary is the ringleader is not a no true Scotsman fallacy at all. To the contrary, it is merely stating that such a claim is not credible and therefore anyone making the claim is not credible. To further illustrate, 'no true Yankees fan supports the Red Sox,' 'no true man of peace supports genocide,' or 'no credible researcher believes Bigfoot shot JFK' are also not NTS fallacies.

This is off-topic, but it's a pet peeve when people who don't know what they're talking about toss around logical fallacy claims.

reasonedandinformed

AreWeSure is known CTR shill.

DryMartini

Oh, thanks for the heads-up. I should've known when I saw the lame attempt at logical reasoning!

waxdino

@AreWeSure is frankly way too smart for CTR. I don't quite understand AWS's angle- Contrarian asshole? Keeping us on our toes? I give them the benefit of doubt... AWS, do you hate our cause? Or desperately try to make us perfect so our cause is successful? Do you hunt red herrings, mistakes, logical fallacies, and whatnot, to try to polish the accusations, or because you really are a pedo protector?
...And, what did I do wrong in my comment, I'm dying to know.

stellarcorpse

BBF with JA they joined the exact same time.

stellarcorpse

He is JA's BFF.

AreWeSure

You're quite wrong. You probably heard of James Alefantis before I did.

stellarcorpse

Can someone kindly down voat this for me. I don't have enough votes and he is lying. Will love ya for it!

stellarcorpse

ya, like you would really admit to this. So maybe not Scott but another buddy. Always on here doing damage control. Knowing so many precise details about Comet Ping Pong . So articulate and arty with that vaguely elitist attitude; That haughty arrogance that JA also displays here. (yes, he is here but you know that.) Treating us like we are all uncultured hillbilly sheep. (hint we are not all the same at all. You would be extremely surprised if you met me ) Mind you you are a lot nicer and not such a condescending ass. You both joined this a day apart. But I suppose that you will say that is mere coincidence and us conspiracy theorists are always finding connections in everything.

It's alright. I enjoy your presence here. Enjoy the challenge and at least you, unlike your partner in crime who can't even find it in himself to respond back to us, the unwashed masses, takes time to respond. Don't go cause I outed you. All this is amusing to me. Have a wonderful day!

grlldcheese

Oh sorry. I thought you were calling me a shill.

Shit, nigga, be clearer. We can dv him together.

stellarcorpse

No not you. The AreWesure pretty boy.

AreWeSure

you're delusional. Also that may be the first time someone called me pretty boy.

stellarcorpse

Are you saying you're not pretty? You expect me to believe anyone would spend this much effort on here like you have without it being personal? Do you like beads?

grlldcheese

Clearly. I will also add that I painstakingly read 100+ of his comments a couple days ago, disagreed with all of them, and used my right as a voater to express my disagreement in a civilized manner.

I fully take credit for his ccp going from +25 to -100 in one afternoon.

stellarcorpse

He or someone down voted every single reply i left him last night.

grlldcheese

Well i dvd a few of yours this morning but i corrected that and should have given you +15-20

stellarcorpse

Thank you!

reasonedandinformed

Whether he is technically CTR or not, he behaves as a cautionary troll, always assuming that we are on the wrong track. It is one thing to point out a need for more info, but this troll will constantly talk down facts or arguments that are strong. It is similar to the MSM calling pizzagate "fake news," a conclusive statement, when the best they can do is to say that it is a theory, with some supporting fact patterns, that merits investigation. When they label is as "fake," meaning it is known to be false, without ANY investigation and while using false red herring statements (e.g., "they claim Hillary ran a pedo ring out of CPP"), there is a deliberate effort to dissuade and mislead. The MSM is fighting it because they know it to be true and are controlled or are compromised in some way. Not clear on the motivation of AreWeSure, but he will caution except to make very CONCLUSIVE statements that go against pizzagate.

AreWeSure

You should read up on the No "True" Scotsman fallacy.

As for me, I think there's no foundation to this investigation. I think the key evidence at the heart doesn't mean what people say it means and it only resonates among people who have long standing and deeply held conspiratorial beliefs.

I think it's funny that you wonder if I'm "a pedo protector" because I don't think this board is actually accomplishing anything against real pedophiles. And that it won't do that because people are too wrapped in their prior beliefs to actually focus this energy. They rather believe Marina Abramović is a Witch or Satanist and any one who responds to her work must be a cult member. Or that Louise Bourgeois is connected to Jeffrey Dahmer. I think this is investigation is part and parcel or several other irrational trends going on.

stellarcorpse

Explain these codes to me Sir. (in the Podesta emails) What are they drug dealers? I'm waiting...

http://www.thedailysheeple.com/the-disturbing-disgusting-pedophile-code-hidden-in-the-john-podesta-emails_112016

AreWeSure

The idea that they are codes is giant bit of speculation. Not proven.

waxdino

They rather believe Marina Abramović is a Witch or Satanist and any one who responds to her work must be a cult member. Or that Louise Bourgeois is connected to Jeffrey Dahmer.

I believe neither of those things. Way to "protect a universal generalization from counterexamples by changing the definition in an ad hoc fashion to exclude the counterexample"!
This is a public board full of amateurs. Of course there will be shit theories and dead ends.

AreWeSure

That's not what no true Scotsman is.

No true Scotsman is a kind of informal fallacy in which one attempts to protect a universal generalization from counterexamples by changing the definition in an ad hoc fashion to exclude the counterexample. Rather than denying the counterexample or rejecting the original claim, this fallacy modifies the subject of the assertion to exclude the specific case or others like it by rhetoric, without reference to any specific objective rule ("no true Scotsman would do such a thing"; i.e., those who perform that action are not part of our group and thus criticism of that action is not criticism of the group).

The argument can be sketched out this way.

Pizzagate people believe X.

No they don't .

Example after example of pizzagate people believing X.

No credible person looking into pizzagate believes X.

And for the record, the claim NYPD found something compromising in Weiner's emails started with this guy and he claimed Hillary Clinton was at the center of a trafficking ring. https://img.buzzfeed.com/buzzfeed-static/static/2016-11/4/7/asset/buzzfeed-prod-fastlane01/sub-buzz-5512-1478259424-1.png ?

stellarcorpse

An intellectual. I'm impressed.

stellarcorpse

ok. who down voted me Birdzeyeview?? I was not being fictitious I was being honest. Intellectuals are sexy as fuck.

DryMartini

Do you understand the difference between logic and illogic? If so, No True Scotsman shouldn't be too hard for you to grasp. Let's try again, here's a quick test for you. Which of the following represent a No True Scotsman fallacy? 1: No true Scotsman would ever steal. Answer: yes, because being Scottish is a fact of birth, with no logical relevance to stealing. Scottish citizens have been found guilty of stealing, and they have not lost their birthright as a result, so this statement is illogical. 2: No honest Scotsman would ever steal. Answer: no, this is quite logical, as honesty is a descriptor of behavior, and it makes perfect sense (can even be considered redundant) to point out that someone, no matter where from, may have their honesty questioned if they steal.

3: No true Scotsman would claim that Hillary is the ringleader. Answer: yes, for same reason as mentioned above. One may very well hold a Scottish passport and make this claim without any logical borders being crossed. 4: No credible researcher claims that Hillary is the ringleader. Answer: no, because 'credibility' is an earned, perceptual descriptor. You have perhaps heard the phrase that someone's credibility has been damaged? The OP was making a simple, logical statement which can be rephrased as 'any Pizzagate researcher who claims that Hillary is the ringleader is not credible.' Same exact meaning, and again quite logical.

Regarding the specific instance you cite, this does not relate to No True Scotsman. The OP has every right to challenge the credibility of anyone making this claim, does he not?

Again, this is off-thread, but letting sloppy logic comments get by is a slippery slope! The next thing you know, you might claim pizzagate / pedogate is not real ..

VieBleu

This article appeared last October 17, 2016.

AreWeSure

The article mentions the shooting at Comet. .........In December, a North Carolina

Haldelos

Nope...it says UPDATED (there may have been an original article in October about this place but it was updated today) End of the article says: Published: February 9, 2017 — 6:11 PM EST The Philadelphia Inquirer

Also- Pizzagate didn't even exist In October 2016

Phenomenonanon

Interesting