1) In the 'Candy Girl' you tube of Fiona Barnett, which is the Australian 60 Minutes story that was one of the first that includes a lot of details, Fiona defines pool parties at Anthony Kidman's (Nicole Kidman's Father) as a place he and others molested her.
2) Think about all of the family photos you have ever seen. In this Evie one, there are 3 little girls. Two are very prominent diaper shots. The oldest is an obvious crotch shot. When is the last time you saw 3 girls dressed that way and displayed that way in a photo? And not one of the girls looks happy or like they have a normal childlike expression on their face.
3) If the weather is so iffy, why were these kids purposely brought there and forced in the pool?
Hillarious that elites need to travel to a farm because they want to lay in a pool together somwhere. Like that is a destination and plans for the day of grown adults. And then they need to be assured an assortment of children will be in the pool. Wonder if it was a pool like the podesta art or the Vanderbilt's palace? Empty except for tied up children.
This and the handkerchief email are probably the two most compromising emails ever. I can't believe there are real people who read these emails and think there is nothing suspicious. It blows my mind.
Actually, no, people who get their 'kicks' from other people's kids are pretty fucked. Adults should be there for the children, not the other way around. I've never got my 'kicks' from friends' children.
Snopes? You should know something is wrong when a site claims to have the answer to every question. There is no such thing as a fact check site. Of course snopes is damage control site just like Metabunk, Rational Wiki, Factcheck, Politifact etc etc. FALSE!
I actually think of it as the Rosneft Dossier. Oleg Erovinkin was a general in the KGB was personally picked by Putin to work at Rosneft, the state owned oil giant. He was the chief of staff to the CEO and the treasurer. Much of the dossier talks about a deal involving Rosneft and the lifting of US sanctions. Carter Page has now admitted before Congress that he met with offiicials from Rosneft.
Erovinkin was said to the dossier's source on Rosneft and Page. He was found dead in the trunk of his car shortly after the dossier was published and Russia doesn't seem to want to investigate who killed him.
Vladmir Putin believes the dossier has credibility.
It's because if read the email on its own, you wouldn't think anything about it one way or the other. It wouldn't creep you out at all. You would actually have to buy into the elite pedophiles rule the world conspiracy 100% for the email to be suspicious. It's literally "you have to your mind in the gutter" stuff. Because otherwise, it's an innocent email from a grandmother trying to be funny and people are acting like it's John Wayne Gacy's secret diary. You have to have a prism distorting your view to think it's suspicious.
If you read that email in context of pizzagate as most everyone on here did, you are already primed to be thinking
SECRET
CODE
PEDOPHILES
These bring up strong emotions. And this distorting prism to view this email begins to be formed.
For the folks on 4chan or thedonald who started this, you can add in
ENEMIES
POLITICS
Politics is one of the strongest shapers of our emotions. (Think of the folks on this board who defended Roy Moore. Now swap in a Democratic politician with the same evidence. Do you think differently.)
The email was about a group of families getting together for a backyard party and a grandmother letting everyone know kids were going to be there probably running and around yelling and being kids. People are this board act like having adults and kids swim in a pool is unheard of and scandalous. I mean you've never been to family party at someone's house where there's a pool? You've never swam at public pool or a hotel pool.
Humans are not Dr. Spock. Not only do we tend to be irrational, we (all of us) tend to be far less rational than we understand and this often guides our thinking in ways we are unaware. Many brain studies have shown the parts of the brain involves evaluating evidence are often active at the same time as the parts of the brain involved with fear, anxiety, emotional responses and the perception of threat. There's a simple reason for this. Our brains evolved to quickly evaluate threats and to act quickly.
Is that dark spot in those tall grass a lion? WE SHOULD RUN NOW!
Folks who believe in overarching global conspiracies tend to be highly fearful. In this case, if you activate their emotions and anxieties--who wouldn't be emotional about their kids being preyed on by some creep-- you can easily overwhelm rational thinking.
Hatred of pedophiles will spike brain activity much, much stronger than the question of evaluating is this email actually coded language or not.
For example, if I gave you an email and asked you to read it and told you it might contain coded language about people in Adelaide, Australia discussing a surprise birthday party that will not make you emotional. I mean would you care one way or the other? Most likely not.
But if I tell you it's top political elites discussing sexual assault of children, your emotions will spike. If you already hate these people, it makes it that much easier to envision them as monsters and not parents and grandparents. They become the OTHER. It becomes much easier to project your fears on the OTHER, they are not human.
It's because if read the email on its own, you wouldn't think anything about it one way or the other. It wouldn't creep you out at all.
This is the key to all of YOUR supposed debunking attempts, AreWeSure. You want to only look at one email, or one aspect of someone's investigative findings and then claim EVERYTHING is just a right wing fever dream. The fact is, the preponderance of what turned up when people investigated Luzatto after finding that email was seriously fucked up. She had a blog people had to become members of to watch livestreams of the kids. And used inappropriate language regarding them. Someone of your alleged erudition would have to be willfully blind not to have found it disturbing.
This. And oh surprise, when it comes to the pee-pee gate fake dossier or the Hit-Job on Moore or the bogus sex accusations on Trump, suddenly mr. AreWeThatDense wants to have an open mind and think these things are all super credible. Go figure.
How do you explain the "raw and uncut" comment in reference to a baby on Evie's Blog, which accompanies photos of Luzatto with her step-grandchildren?https://dcpizzagate.files.wordpress.com/2016/11/sketch.png
Thanks for the well thought out response. Sometimes I wonder if I am too deep into the conspiracies, if I'm being blinded from reality by that lens, that prism you speak of. But that's how coded language works...it looks innocuous unless seen with the correct preceding knowledge.
and they will be in that pool for sure
I've been to plenty of pool parties and hotel pools and huge outdoor pools.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but "temperature in the 60s" and at night? Children don't want to swim in that regardless of it being heated or not.
Sometimes I wonder if I am too deep into the conspiracies, if I'm being blinded from reality by that lens, that prism you speak of.
Critical thinking involves checking yourself. Is my first instinct wrong? Am I viewing this in the most negative light and not giving any benefit of any doubt? If this was my email people were picking over, would I think I was being judged fairly? Don't I use this words myself with no nefarious intentions?
But that's how coded language works...it looks innocuous unless seen with the correct preceding knowledge.
That's actually how confirmation bias works. When I put on my prism glasses it filters it to match my world view. Coded language is not to useful if other people are aware of the code. Code that is widely understood becomes slang.
I've been to plenty of pool parties and hotel pools and huge outdoor pools.
Did they have adults and kids in the pool? Was anything sketchy going down?
Correct me if I'm wrong, but "temperature in the 60s" and at night? Children don't want to swim in that regardless of it being heated or not.
Who says? Isn't that the benefit of a heated pool? Heated pools feel nice. Personally I learned to swim in a lake in a mountain town fairly early in the morning where 60 would have been a blessing. I would have loved a heated pool.
they will be in that pool for sure.........Seems to be promising a deliverance of goods.
It really doesn't. Like in no way. This is a heavily distorted view. And it's also completely unnecessary for the distorted, mind in the gutter view of these emails. Isn't it enough to say the kids will be there? Are we now claiming that pool is some sort of code?
I genuinely don't know anyone who would read the email that way outside the context/priming of pizzagate.
(By the pyschologists note how difficult it is for people to dislodge a belief once it has sunk in. Facts alone can't do it. They've even done experiments where the told people they did excellent on some skill test getting 24 out of 25 right (when in fact they had scored with the average). Then they told very soon afterwards the truth, they were not very good at this new skill. People didn't believe them. They still felt the false 24/25 right applied to them.
Planes crashed into the twin towers and brought the buildings down correct? Just go on record about it. And Oswald shot Kennedy. Please go on record again here, so all can see.
No seriously, don't give any attention to are_we_sure, he is a known shill. Ignore him. No honest and sane person would ever read this email and think it is ok and all natural. are_we_sure wants you to believe there is nothing to see here. Don't listen to him, trust your instinct and your common sense.
Why aren't you people cheering that pedophile Roy Moore didn't get into the Senate, even though he was endorsed by the president (a fellow pedophile who barged into teen dressing rooms)?
It's almost as if Pizzagate isn't about the children, and is a bunch of impotent losers trying to smear people who oppose Trump.
MathEasySolutions on Twitter: "Why don't fake news NYT/Snopes/BBC/Wikipedia/MSM mention the Luzzatto Pool Entertainment email while "debunking" #PizzaGate?? Maybe because… t.co/h9z7fucbwj"
What are you talking about? Where are you getting this idea that people were paying moeny to see Evie?
It's a blogspot blog. Parents set it up to chronicle their kids. So instead of emailing grandparents and friends and relatives new picture. Your loved ones can just check the website. It's like a pretty popular thing over the last ten years.
Raw footage? Have you never heard about this? Nothing sketchy about that at all. It just means unedited. Footage straight from the camera is raw footage. No post production done to it. You take your raw footage and you edit it into your scene or your piece or your spot. It's a standard way of talking about "in camera" images is the film, tv and news worlds.
'Raw footage' has a very different connotation to 'raw and uncut', which clearly applies to porn and violence, and which implies footage which would not normally be accepted or allowed.
to abridge or shorten;
edit
by omitting a part or parts:
Uncut can mean
not cut.....
or
not edited, shortened or condensed; unabridged:
and is synonymous with
All
Whole
Unabbreviated
You are mistaken that uncut only means uncensored. You are mistaken that Raw only means nasty or indecent. It would only be nasty or indecent if you were the original footage contained something nasty or indecent. If it didn't, there's nothing to censor.
So either you don't understand all the nuances of the the English language or your mind is in the gutter or you can't read context clues would you take it to mean something nasty or indecent.
Yeah, you can play semantics as much as you want, and go pouring over every thesaurus you can get your grubby hands on, but anybody with half a brain knows the meaning of 'raw and uncut'. You can holler as much you like and make up poor debating points, but the more you talk the bigger the hole you dig for yourself. I feel sorry for you. I hope you're getting paid a lot of money for the shite you are expected to squeeze out.
In this case, 'raw footage' stands out because it is like stating the obvious in a way that just isn't done. Out of place. Extremely so. There is NOTHING standard about using this term in family videos. And that is one of the first things a good investigator checks out. The things that don't belong. Very confused as to why anyone would attempt to explain this away.
In this case, 'raw footage' stands out because it is like stating the obvious in a way that just isn't done. Out of place. Extremely so. There is NOTHING standard about using this term in family videos. And that is one of the first things a good investigator checks out.
No. That is not what good investigators do. Good investigations look at the totality of evidence. They don't hyperfocus on a few odd things. In fact that is what conspiracists do. It's called anomaly hunting. They look for little odd things and then try to make the case entirely about these odd things. If you look at all the Podesta emails or all of Evie's blog and you are not looking through a distorted filter, nothing sinister at all jumps out. You have to work at it. Which is why the fake list of code words was invented for PODESTA's emails. It never existed before.
Your argument rests on the idea that people are the same and there is a "standard" way of talking or writing a family blog. That's false and something a good investigator should be aware of. You first need to find out that person normally acts before you find out if that person is acting differently from what they usually do. You can't determine someone is speaking in code by latching on to an odd phrase they use.
Wow. This deserves an award for the biggest bullshit answer on Voat, ever. Exactly what kind of investigator are you? It sounds like you make up stories to attempt to erase facts from intelligent minds. Unfortunately, you come off sounding like a 4th grader who got ahold of a book far beyond your years. Yes, I am sure. You are about as intelligent as a rock.
▼ Omerta101
This one is totally impossible to spin.
▼ Z11Mama
1) In the 'Candy Girl' you tube of Fiona Barnett, which is the Australian 60 Minutes story that was one of the first that includes a lot of details, Fiona defines pool parties at Anthony Kidman's (Nicole Kidman's Father) as a place he and others molested her.
2) Think about all of the family photos you have ever seen. In this Evie one, there are 3 little girls. Two are very prominent diaper shots. The oldest is an obvious crotch shot. When is the last time you saw 3 girls dressed that way and displayed that way in a photo? And not one of the girls looks happy or like they have a normal childlike expression on their face.
3) If the weather is so iffy, why were these kids purposely brought there and forced in the pool?
▼ DeathToMasonsASAP
Are_We_sure says "Yeah, so?"
▼ crashing_this_thread
"Just listen to yourself. You are insane. There is no arguing with you."
▼ Shillaxe
Im thinkin he likes em young.
▼ Narcissism
I have yet to hear a single Normaly explain what a 7, 9, 11 year old would be doing in a hot tub for your entertainment at an adult party...
▼ Are_we__sure
It's not a hot tub. Notice how you mixed that up in your head.
They are not talking about a hot tub.
▼ DeathToMasonsASAP
Like that matters in the scheme of things you weirdo. Hahaha. It's a pool!, not a hot tub!...And those kids will be in it.
▼ Piscina
Let's get serious: adults do not care to babysit other people's kids while they are having fun in a pool. So don't pretend that's the case.
▼ Narcissism
Yeh but it makes the story sound better.... :)
▼ thingsudontknow
What's the farm part all about?
▼ elephantdoesntforget
Going down to the farm...
Isolated place to 'swim' with underage kids. Other references to 'the farm' sound like they are about getting rid of people...
▼ DeathToMasonsASAP
Hillarious that elites need to travel to a farm because they want to lay in a pool together somwhere. Like that is a destination and plans for the day of grown adults. And then they need to be assured an assortment of children will be in the pool. Wonder if it was a pool like the podesta art or the Vanderbilt's palace? Empty except for tied up children.
▼ thingsudontknow
It's all strange.
▼ Are_we__sure
The people hosting the party live on an actual farm. The pool is at the farm.
▼ newworldahead
This and the handkerchief email are probably the two most compromising emails ever. I can't believe there are real people who read these emails and think there is nothing suspicious. It blows my mind.
▼ DeathToMasonsASAP
Those kids will be in the pool. Yeah, that is normal to them. We cannot coexist. Exterminate them all.
▼ ApostateAbe
Hard to spin an email that says children are entertaining?
▼ Are_we__sure
Really?
Seriously?
Do you not like children? You've never gotten a kick out of your friend's kids?
My friend's kid told a joke where instead of the punchline he just said FUNNY. Made me laugh.
▼ DeathToMasonsASAP
Thou doth protest too much.
▼ Shillaxe
Defending John Pedophile Podesta....again, hell, you may just be him.
▼ Piscina
Actually, no, people who get their 'kicks' from other people's kids are pretty fucked. Adults should be there for the children, not the other way around. I've never got my 'kicks' from friends' children.
▼ reasonedandinformed
LSM. Has made no serious effort to do punk any of our findings: https://voat.co/v/pizzagate/1699060
▼ 11368908?
Worth reading. Related.
http://voat.co/v/pizzagate/2079627
▼ dontdoxxmefaggots
where is this e-mail? i would like to see it
▼ Vindicator
Just go to the Podesta emails on Wikileaks and type in Luzatto. Or searchvoat.co.
▼ dontdoxxmefaggots
someone else linked it, i've seen it before. i just wasn't sure exactly what was being referred to
and yeah, it's pretty obvious it's about fucking kids
▼ DeathToMasonsASAP
Snopes? You should know something is wrong when a site claims to have the answer to every question. There is no such thing as a fact check site. Of course snopes is damage control site just like Metabunk, Rational Wiki, Factcheck, Politifact etc etc. FALSE!
▼ eucalyptus_spearmint
snopes was reliable once when it was run by the mikkelsons, they have nothing to do with it now ...
▼ dontdoxxmefaggots
wtf are you talking about
▼ matheasysolutions
It's in the Tweeter: https://archive.is/E2dvz
▼ dontdoxxmefaggots
thanks, i never click on twitter links
▼ Are_we_sure
There's actually an incredibly simple answer to this question.
But it won't resonate with you if you believe this is a valid question.
▼ UlyssesEMcGill
I didn't pose the question, but could you tell me the incredibly simple answer?
▼ newworldahead
I think arguing with are_we_sure is worthless. Never forget: This guy actually believes that the 'Pee Gate' Trump Dossier has credibility.
▼ Are_we__sure
I actually think of it as the Rosneft Dossier. Oleg Erovinkin was a general in the KGB was personally picked by Putin to work at Rosneft, the state owned oil giant. He was the chief of staff to the CEO and the treasurer. Much of the dossier talks about a deal involving Rosneft and the lifting of US sanctions. Carter Page has now admitted before Congress that he met with offiicials from Rosneft.
Erovinkin was said to the dossier's source on Rosneft and Page. He was found dead in the trunk of his car shortly after the dossier was published and Russia doesn't seem to want to investigate who killed him.
Vladmir Putin believes the dossier has credibility.
▼ Are_we__sure
It's because if read the email on its own, you wouldn't think anything about it one way or the other. It wouldn't creep you out at all. You would actually have to buy into the elite pedophiles rule the world conspiracy 100% for the email to be suspicious. It's literally "you have to your mind in the gutter" stuff. Because otherwise, it's an innocent email from a grandmother trying to be funny and people are acting like it's John Wayne Gacy's secret diary. You have to have a prism distorting your view to think it's suspicious.
If you read that email in context of pizzagate as most everyone on here did, you are already primed to be thinking
SECRET CODE PEDOPHILES
These bring up strong emotions. And this distorting prism to view this email begins to be formed.
For the folks on 4chan or thedonald who started this, you can add in ENEMIES POLITICS
Politics is one of the strongest shapers of our emotions. (Think of the folks on this board who defended Roy Moore. Now swap in a Democratic politician with the same evidence. Do you think differently.)
The email was about a group of families getting together for a backyard party and a grandmother letting everyone know kids were going to be there probably running and around yelling and being kids. People are this board act like having adults and kids swim in a pool is unheard of and scandalous. I mean you've never been to family party at someone's house where there's a pool? You've never swam at public pool or a hotel pool.
Humans are not Dr. Spock. Not only do we tend to be irrational, we (all of us) tend to be far less rational than we understand and this often guides our thinking in ways we are unaware. Many brain studies have shown the parts of the brain involves evaluating evidence are often active at the same time as the parts of the brain involved with fear, anxiety, emotional responses and the perception of threat. There's a simple reason for this. Our brains evolved to quickly evaluate threats and to act quickly. Is that dark spot in those tall grass a lion? WE SHOULD RUN NOW! Folks who believe in overarching global conspiracies tend to be highly fearful. In this case, if you activate their emotions and anxieties--who wouldn't be emotional about their kids being preyed on by some creep-- you can easily overwhelm rational thinking.
Hatred of pedophiles will spike brain activity much, much stronger than the question of evaluating is this email actually coded language or not.
For example, if I gave you an email and asked you to read it and told you it might contain coded language about people in Adelaide, Australia discussing a surprise birthday party that will not make you emotional. I mean would you care one way or the other? Most likely not.
But if I tell you it's top political elites discussing sexual assault of children, your emotions will spike. If you already hate these people, it makes it that much easier to envision them as monsters and not parents and grandparents. They become the OTHER. It becomes much easier to project your fears on the OTHER, they are not human.
▼ Vindicator
This is the key to all of YOUR supposed debunking attempts, AreWeSure. You want to only look at one email, or one aspect of someone's investigative findings and then claim EVERYTHING is just a right wing fever dream. The fact is, the preponderance of what turned up when people investigated Luzatto after finding that email was seriously fucked up. She had a blog people had to become members of to watch livestreams of the kids. And used inappropriate language regarding them. Someone of your alleged erudition would have to be willfully blind not to have found it disturbing.
▼ newworldahead
This. And oh surprise, when it comes to the pee-pee gate fake dossier or the Hit-Job on Moore or the bogus sex accusations on Trump, suddenly mr. AreWeThatDense wants to have an open mind and think these things are all super credible. Go figure.
▼ eucalyptus_spearmint
so true... so, so true
▼ Mad_As_Hell
How do you explain the "raw and uncut" comment in reference to a baby on Evie's Blog, which accompanies photos of Luzatto with her step-grandchildren?https://dcpizzagate.files.wordpress.com/2016/11/sketch.png
▼ UlyssesEMcGill
Thanks for the well thought out response. Sometimes I wonder if I am too deep into the conspiracies, if I'm being blinded from reality by that lens, that prism you speak of. But that's how coded language works...it looks innocuous unless seen with the correct preceding knowledge.
I've been to plenty of pool parties and hotel pools and huge outdoor pools.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but "temperature in the 60s" and at night? Children don't want to swim in that regardless of it being heated or not.
Seems to be promising a deliverance of goods.
▼ Are_we__sure
Thanks for actually engaging.
Critical thinking involves checking yourself. Is my first instinct wrong? Am I viewing this in the most negative light and not giving any benefit of any doubt? If this was my email people were picking over, would I think I was being judged fairly? Don't I use this words myself with no nefarious intentions?
That's actually how confirmation bias works. When I put on my prism glasses it filters it to match my world view. Coded language is not to useful if other people are aware of the code. Code that is widely understood becomes slang.
Did they have adults and kids in the pool? Was anything sketchy going down?
Who says? Isn't that the benefit of a heated pool? Heated pools feel nice. Personally I learned to swim in a lake in a mountain town fairly early in the morning where 60 would have been a blessing. I would have loved a heated pool.
It really doesn't. Like in no way. This is a heavily distorted view. And it's also completely unnecessary for the distorted, mind in the gutter view of these emails. Isn't it enough to say the kids will be there? Are we now claiming that pool is some sort of code?
I genuinely don't know anyone who would read the email that way outside the context/priming of pizzagate.
(By the pyschologists note how difficult it is for people to dislodge a belief once it has sunk in. Facts alone can't do it. They've even done experiments where the told people they did excellent on some skill test getting 24 out of 25 right (when in fact they had scored with the average). Then they told very soon afterwards the truth, they were not very good at this new skill. People didn't believe them. They still felt the false 24/25 right applied to them.
▼ bopper
Planes crashed into the twin towers and brought the buildings down correct? Just go on record about it. And Oswald shot Kennedy. Please go on record again here, so all can see.
▼ newworldahead
No seriously, don't give any attention to are_we_sure, he is a known shill. Ignore him. No honest and sane person would ever read this email and think it is ok and all natural. are_we_sure wants you to believe there is nothing to see here. Don't listen to him, trust your instinct and your common sense.
▼ UlyssesEMcGill
I'll argue with whomever I choose for whatever reason I want.
Shill or not, the query remains for normies: is it coded language, or just normal wording?
Explaining my thoughts and reflections hopefully reaches some lurkers and changes their minds.
▼ newworldahead
Sure, feel free to waste your time!
▼ HillBoulder
I could go for pizza for an hour.
▼ UlyssesEMcGill
That's probably just setting up lunch and duration.
▼ PaulBSmith
Why aren't you people cheering that pedophile Roy Moore didn't get into the Senate, even though he was endorsed by the president (a fellow pedophile who barged into teen dressing rooms)?
It's almost as if Pizzagate isn't about the children, and is a bunch of impotent losers trying to smear people who oppose Trump.
▼ garouwarrior
Because he's a big-time Christian Evangelical, which has made the community and Southerners in general look very bad...
▼ newworldahead
Because it was a damn obivous political hit-job.
▼ RedditFuckingBlows
Cause it's made up for cash. Why isn't he in cuffs then?
▼ Are_we__sure
Because the statute of limitations expired year and years ago.
▼ RedditFuckingBlows
Sounds convenient. Why the 750,000$ ? Is that "for feels" ?
▼ Are_we__sure
Sounds convenient? wtf? It's obviously the truth. The most disturbing incident is from the 70's.
$750,000 are you even talking about Roy Moore? Or are you mixing stuff up?
▼ tarnished_spoons
Has anyone , of 100s, that this sub has accused been put in cuffs? Isn't Weiner the only one, and wasn't he pre-pizzagate?
▼ UlyssesEMcGill
Check arrests by year for child pornography and sex trafficking 2000-2017
▼ derram
https://tweetsave.com/matheasysolns/status/941819143631781888 :
This has been an automated message.
▼ mooteensy
Oh yeah and people that were willing to $$$ could see Evie raw and uncut. Whatever the fuck that means.
▼ Are_we__sure
What are you talking about? Where are you getting this idea that people were paying moeny to see Evie?
It's a blogspot blog. Parents set it up to chronicle their kids. So instead of emailing grandparents and friends and relatives new picture. Your loved ones can just check the website. It's like a pretty popular thing over the last ten years.
Raw footage? Have you never heard about this? Nothing sketchy about that at all. It just means unedited. Footage straight from the camera is raw footage. No post production done to it. You take your raw footage and you edit it into your scene or your piece or your spot. It's a standard way of talking about "in camera" images is the film, tv and news worlds.
See here.
https://proeditors.com/
or here
https://www.shutterstock.com/video/search/raw
They are using it as a joke. Raw footage is often boring because it goes on and on.
▼ Piscina
'Raw footage' has a very different connotation to 'raw and uncut', which clearly applies to porn and violence, and which implies footage which would not normally be accepted or allowed.
▼ Are_we_sure
raw and uncut applies to porn and violence? ?????? What?
Are you serious?
▼ Piscina
You're obviously not the brightest spark, so I suggest you use a dictionary or a thesaurus. 'Uncut' = uncensored. 'Raw' = rough, nasty, indecent.
▼ Are_we_sure
You're either incredibly dumb or you have a very thin thesaurus as those are not the only definitions of those words.
Raw can also means
uncooked.
and
not having undergone processes of preparing, dressing, finishing, refining, or manufacture:
Raw food is good for you it's not nasty and it's certainly not indecent. Raw talent is unrefined, unpolished.
and among the synonyms of raw are
unprocessed
and
untreated
http://www.thesaurus.com/browse/raw
Cut can mean
to abridge or shorten; edit by omitting a part or parts:
Uncut can mean
not cut.....
or
not edited, shortened or condensed; unabridged:
and is synonymous with
All
Whole
Unabbreviated
You are mistaken that uncut only means uncensored. You are mistaken that Raw only means nasty or indecent. It would only be nasty or indecent if you were the original footage contained something nasty or indecent. If it didn't, there's nothing to censor.
So either you don't understand all the nuances of the the English language or your mind is in the gutter or you can't read context clues would you take it to mean something nasty or indecent.
It's easy to find example of Raw and Uncut things that are not indecent. Raw footage from the crossfit games.
Ted Cruz and his Family
A request on Reddit --Raw uncut footage? https://www.reddit . com/r/HarmonQuest/comments/70evxv/raw_uncut_footage/
A bible Commentary https://www.amazon . com/Gospel-Uncut-Learning-Rest-Grace/dp/144976567X)
Another bible commentary https://www.amazon . com/Gospel-Raw-Uncut-Unheard/dp/0738821802) The Gospel: Raw, Uncut & Unheard!
A Church Podcast Jesus, Raw, & Uncut
▼ Piscina
Yeah, you can play semantics as much as you want, and go pouring over every thesaurus you can get your grubby hands on, but anybody with half a brain knows the meaning of 'raw and uncut'. You can holler as much you like and make up poor debating points, but the more you talk the bigger the hole you dig for yourself. I feel sorry for you. I hope you're getting paid a lot of money for the shite you are expected to squeeze out.
▼ Are_we_sure
This apparently is your problem.
▼ Z11Mama
In this case, 'raw footage' stands out because it is like stating the obvious in a way that just isn't done. Out of place. Extremely so. There is NOTHING standard about using this term in family videos. And that is one of the first things a good investigator checks out. The things that don't belong. Very confused as to why anyone would attempt to explain this away.
▼ Are_we__sure
No. That is not what good investigators do. Good investigations look at the totality of evidence. They don't hyperfocus on a few odd things. In fact that is what conspiracists do. It's called anomaly hunting. They look for little odd things and then try to make the case entirely about these odd things. If you look at all the Podesta emails or all of Evie's blog and you are not looking through a distorted filter, nothing sinister at all jumps out. You have to work at it. Which is why the fake list of code words was invented for PODESTA's emails. It never existed before.
Your argument rests on the idea that people are the same and there is a "standard" way of talking or writing a family blog. That's false and something a good investigator should be aware of. You first need to find out that person normally acts before you find out if that person is acting differently from what they usually do. You can't determine someone is speaking in code by latching on to an odd phrase they use.
▼ Z11Mama
Wow. This deserves an award for the biggest bullshit answer on Voat, ever. Exactly what kind of investigator are you? It sounds like you make up stories to attempt to erase facts from intelligent minds. Unfortunately, you come off sounding like a 4th grader who got ahold of a book far beyond your years. Yes, I am sure. You are about as intelligent as a rock.
▼ Are_we__sure
This is an absolutely amazing sentence.
▼ madhatter67
Are we sure is one of those 'skeptics' who doesn't like their world view changed....and yet seems to think we all suffer from confirmation bias
▼ mooteensy
Way too hard to spin. I've redpilled many on the Evies Crib blog and the connection to Podesta. Awesome work!!
▼ EricKaliberhall
Been meaning to tell you @matheasysolutions ... Keep up the great work, and you truly deliver with your tweets.
Stay strong brother...
▼ matheasysolutions
Thanks Eric! Just doing my part to expose the sick PTB/MSM!
▼ ESOTERICshade
Ditto