• NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!

    Subscribe to The Paracast Newsletter!

February 26, 2017 — Jim Marrs

Forums New posts

Free episodes:

Greers Meeting Planner said:
Gene on after the paracast you say that pizza gate is the "quintessential fake news story".

Ok, so I have heard the arguments to why people think there is something to pizzagate e.g. strange use of paedophilic code words in emails and paedophilic symbols in logos. But I have not heard why it's so certainly fake.

I remember reading on the BBC (the state funded propaganda publishing corporation) that this was outrageous fake news. What I tried to find in the article was how and why this was fake. Indeed it seemed no follow up investigation had been done just lazy labelling of fakeness.

Now I'm open to being convinced either way I'm saying I'm agnostic, I'm curious to why you are so certain its fake.

What is interesting is that if this is fake then senior government officials are communicating rather enthusiasticaly and in some strange ways about their choice and enjoyment of fast food.... why can't we label this "needs further investigation" than simply debunk it without research shermer style?
Click to expand...


Because the allegations involve Democrats. If it were Republicans, or Trump, accused, you would likely see plenty of coverage and discussion in a lot of places. :)
 
Marrs has for me gone the way of so many investigators and writers in the fringe field. Like Howe, Strieber, and so many others.

They seem to start off great. Dealing in facts, asking great questions. Writing great stuff. Having great ideas.

And then they go all reptilian overlords and go straight off the deep end and lose all credibility.

Marrs was great when he stuck to the facts. Crossfire. Or up until the last third of Rule by Secrecy.

Now he's purely in my "entertainment" basket.
 
Gene Steinberg said:
I don't have the energy to research the nonsense, but here's the background:

Pizzagate conspiracy theory - Wikipedia
Click to expand...

Thanks Gene I looked at Wikipedia. There are some problems here.

First of all it says that it is fake because a number of news outlets have said its fake. Reading the list of these news outlets, vast majority are left leaning corporate news.

What it doesn't do is show how the matter has been researched and how they came to the fake conclusion.

They pick on some of the extreme angles of the case which are easy to cast aside e.g. the madeline mcann connection which I would agree sounds total BS. What they don't do however is pick apart the central Tennant to this case which is the podesta emails which he uses language identified by the FBI as known paedophilic code words in emails that are really strange if they are actually about food.

They also don't tackle the closeness of the comet pizza logo's undeniable closeness to the symbol identified by the FBI.

What would be useful is if an analyst could look at the podesta emails, a specialist in say child abuse investigations and give us an opinion on whether what they are reading is of concern or not.

Can't help but see the similarity to UFO debunking here. People will be more likely to beleive what they want to beleive and need less evidence if an argument fits their paradigm.

Just like people who don't want to think anomalies exist in the sky will point to the easy to debunk cases and ignore those with radar traces and multiple witnesses, it's like those who support the dems are debunking this without objective consideration of the evidence
 
Agreed. Corporate media is money leaning. That trait manifests as reporting the news through the political lens they think their customer base likes to hear. E.g. the BBC will take a utopian political correctness angle when reporting because that's what they think their readers want.

The Wikipedia page lost credibility for me when it said the story was reported on "fake news site infowars". Now yes, info wars is full of crap but so is CNN, Fox they have all been caught making stuff up.

When your argument is that it is reported on a fake news site so therefore must be fake it's like Stanton says when he talks about debunking...attack the people don't attack the data
 
CNN has not been caught making stuff up. They are wrong from time to time, but that is not the same as making stuff up.

Fox? They are often caught taking quotes out of context. Take Obama's infamous "you didn't build that!" comment, which had nothing to do with dissing business (which is what Fox and the Republican Party claimed), or Hillary Clinton's "What difference, at this point, does it make?" which was not a statement that showed disrespect to the people who died as the result of the Benghazi attack.
 
One last point... Ted Heath (now deceased) ex British prime minister was accused from the fringes of being a paedophile. There were witnesses who came forward and some independent journalists (such as David Icke) who proposed it was true. What did the media do for years... label it as crazy conspiracy

Last weekend the metropolitan police chief went on record with a Sunday paper in the UK saying that he now thinks the allegations are true and that he believes the evidence now points to Heath being a paedophile.

Keep an open mind and follow up on the data is my point.
 
Greers Meeting Planner said:
Agreed. Corporate media is money leaning. That trait manifests as reporting the news through the political lens they think their customer base likes to hear. E.g. the BBC will take a utopian political correctness angle when reporting because that's what they think their readers want.

The Wikipedia page lost credibility for me when it said the story was reported on "fake news site infowars". Now yes, info wars is full of crap but so is CNN, Fox they have all been caught making stuff up.

When your argument is that it is reported on a fake news site so therefore must be fake it's like Stanton says when he talks about debunking...attack the people don't attack the data
Click to expand...
Who are the owners of Fox & Breitbart, and what are their commonalities?
 
Greers Meeting Planner said:
One last point... Ted Heath (now deceased) ex British prime minister was accused from the fringes of being a paedophile. There were witnesses who came forward and some independent journalists (such as David Icke) who proposed it was true. What did the media do for years... label it as crazy conspiracy

Last weekend the metropolitan police chief went on record with a Sunday paper in the UK saying that he now thinks the allegations are true and that he believes the evidence now points to Heath being a paedophile.

Keep an open mind and follow up on the data is my point.
Click to expand...
This is a question of a serious claim based on police suspicions and something, pizzagate, which had not a whit of credibility attached to it. They aren't in the same league, my friend. The claim that emails use "pizza" as a code word for pedophilia is not just unproven, but absurd. I would also think this is an extremely offensive example of fakery. It's one thing about keeping an open mind, but an extravagant claim of this sort ought to have some evidence attached to it to be taken seriously.
 
Gene Steinberg said:
CNN has not been caught making stuff up. They are wrong from time to time, but that is not the same as making stuff up.

Fox? They are often caught taking quotes out of context. Take Obama's infamous "you didn't build that!" comment, which had nothing to do with dissing business (which is what Fox and the Republican Party claimed), or Hillary Clinton's "What difference, at this point, does it make?" which was not a statement that showed disrespect to the people who died as the result of the Benghazi attack.
Click to expand...

zrup6u5b7vay.jpg
 
Gene Steinberg said:
Before he joined the Trump administration, Stephen Bannon was head of Brietbart, one of Trump's biggest boosters. Fox News is a division of 21st Century Fox.
Click to expand...
Rupert Murdoch owns Trump TV, formerly known as Fox News. The Mercer family are co-owners of Breitbart, and mega-donors of campaign Trump.

BTW, I thought the episode went rather well, although, it sounds as though Vallee may be jumping a shark or two.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I would like to see all of us simply agree that we're not always gonna agree about politics and get back to the 'para' part of our mutual interests. :)
 
Greers Meeting Planner said:
zrup6u5b7vay.jpg
Click to expand...
In all due respect, more than likely, CNN was misinformed. I doubt they deliberately made up a story about using a Frank Sinatra recording somewhere. There are differences between making a mistake, getting wrong information, and making things up. The mainstream media do the first two from time to time, and one hopes they will correct the errors.
 
Walter Bosley said:
I would like to see all of us simply agree that we're not always gonna agree about politics and get back to the 'para' part of our mutual interests. :)
Click to expand...
I'll go with that. But remember, too, that accusing people without evidence of being pedophiles is offensive and nasty. Lets drop pizzagate now and for good.
 
Greers Meeting Planner said:
zrup6u5b7vay.jpg
Click to expand...
And I saw this follow-up to the Nancy Sinatra item from CNN:

Nancy Sinatra on Trump picking 'My Way': Remember the first line - CNNPolitics.com

So please stop the fake complaints about CNN making up stories. Not that I totally approve of what CNN does. For months, they coddled Trump and his surrogates without proper vetting and reasoned criticism. That sort of treatment from the media made Trump a serious candidate until they woke up and realized how they contributed to his rise because he was good for ratings (and thus ad income). But the reality check came too late.
 
Gene Steinberg said:
I'll go with that. But remember, too, that accusing people without evidence of being pedophiles is offensive and nasty. Lets drop pizzagate now and for good.
Click to expand...

See this does have a link to paranormal investigations. It depends what your evidence threshold is.

Take Rendlesham. There is no "evidence" here in the sense of something scientific you can repeat and measure with instrumentation . Seth shostak would say because of that there is no evidence in this case. Others would say anecdotes from credible witnesses is evidence and there may be a third group who say it's not evidence but it's enough to be worthy of further investigation.

Therefore the 'evidence' provided for pizzagate maybe reaching for you Gene but for others it's proof and for me I'm saying it's enough to warrant further investigation.

And let's not be ignorant to our own human condition where we want the truth to fit our existing paradigm as it's less confronting. If you hate the 'system' and want it brought down you may see this as evidence (the same as UFO true believers will see enough evidence in Rendlesham). Likewise if you are a democrat and the thought of the campaign leader being a paedophile confronts you, you will need maybe video evidence of him in the act before you even entertain it (same as shostak being presented with anecdotes of UFO's)
 
Back
Top