Filmpolice | 208 points | Nov 16 2016 18:18:41

REPLY TO AMANDA KLEINMAN - empirically verifiable evidence, footage, and photos included

Here is a response to a person named Amanda Kleinman (which in German means "small one" or "small man."), vocalist for the "rock band" Heavy Breathing. Links to footage and photos are provided in what follows.

Kleinman's words are in bold.

"Ever get lumped into a right wing conspiracy theory that you knew nothing about? I sure did, along with my band, Heavy Breathing."

Kleinman is referring to a pending investigation into allegations that certain political figures, both democrats and republicans, as well as their associates, are aiding or participating in a child trafficking network. Note well that Kleinman calls it a "right wing conspiracy theory," deceiving readers rather than addressing the pertinent details.

"Last week, when Hillary Clinton’s emails were released, a notoriously scandalous internet message board quickly invented a wild story that suggested Clinton, her campaign chairman John Podesta, and beloved local restaurant Comet Pizza & Ping Pong were part of a secret pedophile ring."

Kleinman is ostensibly referring to Reddit, Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, and 4chan, where thousands of citizens are freely and openly asking questions about leaked emails from John Podesta's account, particularly concerning whether terms such as 'pizza-related map' are code for illicit sexual activity involving minors. Such questions were seen as justified in light of the fact that 'pizza' and 'cheese pizza' function as coded locutions for pedophilia and child pornography in criminal networks. Questions became particularly heated when it was revealed in one email that multiple young children were being transported and placed inside of a warm pool as "entertainment" for adults. Here is the original email: https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/46736

Needless to say, the content of such emails, and many more, has caused varying degrees of concern among thinking people of all backgrounds and political persuasions that pedophilia may be occurring among political figures.

"No such pedophile ring exists," Kleinman adds, "to my knowledge."

He continues:

In junior detective, connect-the-dot, conspiracy fashion, some members of the aforementioned message board chose to use Heavy Breathing’s images, music, and videos to tie us in with the imagined Podesta conspiracy in the hopes of fanning the flames and getting people on board for a witch hunt."

Questions about Kleinman first surfaced when it was discovered that he performs at Comet Ping Pong, which advertises itself as a "kid-friendly" establishment, and whose owner is a close associate of Podesta.

In what follows, I will provide the actual images and content from "Heavy Breathing" and let readers decide for themselves whether questions concerning Kleinman's intentions are warranted.

More precisely: I ask readers to adjudicate whether this is all a "right wing juvenile conspiracy," or whether Kleinman is, indeed, intentionally alluding to pedophilia.

[Amanda Kleinman goes on to compare himself to legendary rock bands like ACDC, and portrays himself as a victim of a "witch hunt," which we shall ignore.]


First, readers can view screen captures from Kleinman's pitch for his album called "Air tight."

You can see the screen captures here along with key questions (warning: discretion advised): http://imgur.com/a/uD0Uy

You can watch the full video here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N_gGhrIO6ps&t=1m49s - listen carefully for ambiguity in meaning, themes involving payment and transportation, locations in Washington DC, NLP-like vocal emphasis and intonations pertaining to sexual themes like "filling holes," "virgin," and so forth.


Second, you can watch footage of Kleinman speaking at Comet Ping Pong. During his talk he alludes to enjoying "special" pizza, as well as children or infants and the use of cords. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9itWsqzFMVo


Third, another video directly from Klienman again makes references to pedophilia in which Klienman (or someone dressed like him) is evidently unmasked. Screen captures: http://imgur.com/a/mfekr

Full video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zo_euND7Acs.


Fourth, Kleinman did another speaking session at what he described as an underground facility beneath a restaurant, and again, "little boys" are referenced, to which Kleinman responds: "we all have preferences." Full video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vlhBn_zSIro


Fifth, on Kleinman's website readers can observe a photo of multiple children, one of whom is bringing a phallic shaped object to his lips with a heart nearby. The illustration is titled "All the children." As follows: https://scontent.xx.fbcdn.net/t31.0-8/fr/cp0/e15/q65/15002445_198406947281870_1888807782361453495_o.jpg. Taken in isolation this is ambiguous and strange, but taken cumulatively with all of Kleinman's other allusions to pedophilia, one could understand why thousands of people are concerned.


In summary, the pedophilia themes, both implicitly and explicitly, seem to be recurring and abundant.

I have only presented Klienman's own material. I leave it to readers to decide if this is all a "conspiracy theory" and Kleinman is an innocent victim targeted by a "witch hunt."

Kleinman also says: "Lots of good old-fashioned threats, racism, and hate going on here" in response to this investigation.

That Kleinman is engaging in diversion in his response, rather than owning up to his use of pedophilia themes -- it indicates that he is avoiding the key details, which makes the investigation more justified and urgent.

(Background: I've played lead guitar in a punk band and a death metal band. We used pentagrams and various other symbols for shock value. It's pretty typical in our scene. However, we've NEVER seen or heard of a band that uses pedophilia themes as abundantly and positively as "Heavy Breathing." And if there were such a band, they certainly would not be invited to play in the venues we did, much less an establishment frequented by children.)

I invite readers to collaborate below and provide any additional evidence that I may have missed. Here is Kleinman's full statement: https://www.reddit.com/r/pizzagate/comments/5d8o85/heavy_breathing_responds_to_allegations/

ETA: Note that whenever Kleinman and co respond, they either (a) deflect with charges of "racism" and "right wing," or (b) maintain deniability with excuses according to which "it's just art" or "it's just a joke" or "we're trying to be creepy on purpose" or "other bands are morbid" or some variation thereof.

Readers can decide for themselves if that kind of response is satisfactory.

permalink

Aconitome | 64 points | Nov 16 2016 18:26:43

Agreed, even bands that are famous and use gruesome imagery in music videos usually never touch on the subject of pedophilia especially in a positive light because of how disgusted their audience would be. You have to be a in crowd of pedos in order to be appreciated pushing a message like that

permalink

thispizzaiswhack | 28 points | Nov 16 2016 18:58:37

i listen and watch acdc/metallica/iron maiden, they have morbid imagery but not pedophilia

permalink

tardbuster | -13 points | Nov 16 2016 20:37:26

Wow, what are the odds that at all these shows, publicly advertised and taking place at popular venues, some with well-known indie bands who bring their own audiences, somehow only pedos show up? I mean since only pedos would not call the police when they hear a joke about Jared from Subway.

permalink

newfoundland_urth | 17 points | Nov 16 2016 20:49:51

Both posts of yours are illogical. No one (sane) posting here assumes everyone attending is a pedo. You must really like Comet Ping Pong to be so active all the sudden.

permalink

BubblingMonkey | 1 points | Nov 20 2016 01:27:54

For someone who publicly advertises, I haven't seen a single song recording on YouTube to get their names out there. I mean Justin Bieber got famous off YouTube. Not a single mention when I looked up heavy breathing band.

permalink

tardbuster | -12 points | Nov 16 2016 21:16:09

Aconitome said bands would not touch on the subject of pedophilia because of how disgusted the audience would be, and it would only fly in a crowd of pedos. Since these audiences are not disgusted, one must therefore assume they are all pedos. If you find that illogical, take it up with Aconitome -- it's his logic, not mine.

permalink

newfoundland_urth | 13 points | Nov 16 2016 21:21:20

He said people in the crowd appreciated it. He did not say everyone did. You know it, I know it. Quit rationalizing your fucking terrible, talking points. You are not even good at what you are doing. Not even a skeptic can latch on to your argument. If your criticism was well thought out, and did not circumvent logic with strawmen or false equivocation, your intent to dissuade people's distaste for this band might work.

permalink

tardbuster | -10 points | Nov 16 2016 21:32:19

Again, try to follow along: He said bands would never do that because the audience would be disgusted. These audiences are clearly not disgusted. Some laugh, all stay for the show. If anyone is disgusted, there is zero evidence of it. So where is the backlash for saying such things that Aconitome said keeps even the most gruesome bands from saying them?

permalink

newfoundland_urth | 13 points | Nov 16 2016 21:36:11

Holy shit man I cannot even pretend to follow your argument. I wish I knew your other reddit usernames so I could see just how fucking dense you are.

permalink

Filmpolice | 12 points | Nov 16 2016 21:51:35

"Holy shit man I cannot even pretend to follow your argument."

He has no argument.

permalink

newfoundland_urth | 9 points | Nov 16 2016 22:02:17

I believe this what the doctors call "cognitive dissonance"

permalink

tardbuster | -2 points | Nov 16 2016 21:38:19

Holy shit man I cannot even pretend to follow your argument.

Well, at least you're honest about your inabilities to comprehend simple statements and the most basic arguments.

permalink

rickyrobby91 | 7 points | Nov 16 2016 23:30:55

Go run into traffic shill

HA. Of course ur account is 3 hours old. The powers that be really sending their best on this one.

permalink

Filmpolice | 8 points | Nov 16 2016 21:49:35

" Since these audiences are not disgusted, one must therefore assume they are all pedos"

You are committing the fallacy of denying the antecedent, inferring the inverse from the original assertion -- it doesn't follow and it's patently illogical.

If you are going to make excuses for these people, you should at least be courteous enough to think rationally and critically.

permalink

tardbuster | 0 points | Nov 17 2016 13:37:53

Nice try.

Here's the original quote: "You have to be a in crowd of pedos in order to be appreciated pushing a message like that"

In these video clips, these jokes are appreciated. Therefore, she had to be in a crowd of pedos, because "you have to be in a crowd of pedos in order to be appreciated pushing a message like that".

So, as I said, what are the odds that at different, popular venues on different nights, publicly advertised performances, a random line-up of local and touring bands, the crowd that happens to show up are pedos?

permalink

justgimmieaname | 20 points | Nov 16 2016 18:49:37

Rock star post! Thank you!!

The War on Pedophilia, now that's one crusade I can get behind.

permalink

newfoundland_urth | 19 points | Nov 16 2016 18:28:09

Excellent, well-reasoned response. If there is any way to post this on her FB or wherever she made a statement we would post it there...

permalink

Killbot240 | 11 points | Nov 16 2016 23:51:00

Agreed but Kleinman is a (very creepy) woman, not a guy. She's a photographer by day and with her split personalities was probably a victim at one point

permalink

[deleted] | 8 points | Nov 16 2016 19:13:32

[deleted]

permalink

AnonIDIOTA | 1 points | Nov 16 2016 20:14:51

This is one of the most damning emails in the entire collection. This one should be broken down and explained bit by bit so new people get the idea.

permalink

birthdaysuit11 | 1 points | Nov 16 2016 20:41:26

Care to explain. I've read that Tamera has a blog that seems fishy in the way she talks about her grandchildren. Is this email alluding to the fact that she is using her grandchildren as sex slaves and entertainment for people like podesta?

permalink

AnonIDIOTA | 1 points | Nov 16 2016 20:45:33

Remember its all circumstantial right now, but yes.

permalink

tardbuster | 1 points | Nov 16 2016 21:02:11

Well, I'll take a shot at it. It appears to be an email from a woman inviting her friends and their families to hang out at her farm with her family and kids. Her own kids will get there via a ride from a friend or family member named "Bonnie". The pool will be heated since it's kind of chilly out. Kids will be entertaining, as parents often find their and their friends' kids to be.

Oh wait, no, it's code for pedophilia, like pretty much everything is these days. At this point I think it's harder to write a sentence that is NOT code for pedophila activity than otherwise.

permalink

newfoundland_urth | 9 points | Nov 16 2016 21:31:38

Who the fuck advertises the age of their kids explicitly and offers them as entertainment? Do you have kids?! I would feel creepy typing an email anywhere close to this about my kids. I am all for poking holes in this investigation -- in the long run it forces people to provide stronger evidence. All you are doing is pouring gasoline on the fire by rationalizing weird, distasteful innuendo about children.

permalink

HappyAfroMan | 7 points | Nov 16 2016 20:37:05

Am I missing something? Amanda Kleinman is female. She uses a voice distorter on stage. Does she identify as male? Is that why you keep referring to her as a he?

permalink

newfoundland_urth | 3 points | Nov 16 2016 20:47:04

Yeah that was my only criticism, but I didn't look in to his/her "preferred pronoun" so I didn't say anything.

permalink

justgimmieaname | 6 points | Nov 16 2016 18:54:19

Is this a stage name that declares pedophilia? What might "da" stand for?

permalink

Officer_Coldhonkey | 8 points | Nov 16 2016 19:26:06

It's her name, dude.

She uses the same name on her LinkedIn.

permalink

jackthyme | 3 points | Nov 17 2016 00:07:11

She's a Man, Duh.

permalink

StopBeingBatshit | 2 points | Nov 17 2016 02:48:51

You don't feel like that's a bit of a stretch? This is why people think that we are all right wing conspiracy tinfoil hatters.

permalink

shogun_starship | 5 points | Nov 17 2016 03:19:52

This is why people think that we

Who's "we"? You have a new account and have posted in this thread only.

BTW, people who throw around terms like "tinfoil hatters" tend to be (a) shills or (b) naive morons who have a child-like faith in the ruling class and government officials.

permalink

StopBeingBatshit | 1 points | Nov 17 2016 03:30:00

Lol. I installed Tor Browser, and created this account today because I started to worry about some of the links people were posting. Sorry for trying to reign in some of the unbridled nuttery that is invading this sub.

Edit: While we're at it, the current obvious lack of deductive reasoning is in this thread:

https://www.reddit.com/r/pizzagate/comments/5danwt/it_security_company_created_by_bill_havre/

Just take a look at the about page on the site they're talking about, it's obviously a red herring (the site is fake).

https://www.z-sec.io/about.html

permalink

WormBloat | 1 points | Nov 17 2016 06:57:35

"da" means big or older in chinese but i think that would be a stretch

permalink

justgimmieaname | 4 points | Nov 17 2016 07:03:59

There's an old joke from the Simpsons where Bart calls Moe's bar asking for "Amanda Huggenkiss" (a man to hug and kiss). In that context "da" means "to." So, here it would be "a man to little man"

permalink

elesdee | 1 points | Nov 22 2016 16:42:15

Is amanda a tranny?

permalink

justgimmieaname | 1 points | Nov 22 2016 17:29:04

Check out the videos. Wears a mask but it is 110% clear that he's a dude. Talks like a gay hairdresser. Very, very sick puppy.

permalink

stevesteve19 | 4 points | Nov 17 2016 00:05:24

Your fourth video... listen again they reference that a "Jared" likes to hang out "down here" under a "subway sandwich shop" and that he likes kids.... I'm taking a wild guess on Jared "the pedo" Fogle

Also do a simple search of the meaning of the name "Amanda" another of the name "kleinman". Put a plus sign in between and tell me what u have?

Another coincidence like Comet's owners name?

permalink

StopBeingBatshit | 3 points | Nov 17 2016 02:18:14

TL;DR: I think you have a lot of good points, but in a few places you give into conspiracy fueled hyperbole.

Questions became particularly heated when it was revealed in one email that multiple young children were being transported and placed inside of a warm pool as "entertainment" for adults. Here is the original email: https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/46736

Really? That email was weird as fuck. But stating that it was clearly, 100% about putting kids in a pool for adult entertainment is very subjective.

Amanda Kleinman goes on to compare himself to legendary rock bands like ACDC, and portrays himself as a victim of a "witch hunt," which we shall ignore.

These were...no would have been legitimate points. Rock bands in the past did have crazy religious nutjobs calling them out as satanists. However, I agree, in this case Heavy Breathing has (had) some pretty fucked up content on their site, and their music sucks. So comparing themselves to AC/DC isn't exactly the same thing.

Second, you can watch footage of Kleinman speaking at Comet Ping Pong. During his talk he alludes to enjoying "special" pizza, as well as children or infants and the use of cords.

I don't think that video can be used as 'evidence' against Kleinman. It was weird as shit, stupid as shit, and definitely morbid. But I'm somewhat willing to just put that down to off color wannabe ladyboy shock-humor.

Third, another video directly from Klienman again makes references to pedophilia in which Klienman (or someone dressed like him) is evidently unmasked. Screen captures:

Those screen caps add a bit of manufactured context to the video. It's one line, and could possibly mean they dislike house music, and are implying that only pedophiles like it because it's so bad. However, such an obvious and out of place reference to pedophilia is at least a bit strange.

Fourth, Kleinman did another speaking session at what he described as an underground facility beneath a restaurant, and again, "little boys" are referenced, to which Kleinman responds: "we all have preferences." Full video:

She needs to explain this shit, those were some fucked up comments. Especially the creepy "everyone has their preferences". I don't think the "underground facility" really matters. How many comedy/music venues aren't underground? That part seems fairly normal to me. Often you'll have a restaurant/bar on the ground floor, and then a comedy/music venue downstairs (underground), or upstairs.

In summary, the pedophilia themes, both implicitly and explicitly, seem to be recurring and abundant.

Totally agree. It's just too much for there not to be something there. No matter if you're a Trump/Hillary supporter, left/right, liberal/conservative, how many people do you know that make references like those we've seen in public to fucking little kids?

That Kleinman is engaging in diversion in his response, rather than owning up to his use of pedophilia themes -- it indicates that he is avoiding the key details...

Yes

which makes the investigation more justified and urgent.

That's some slight hyperbole right there. Somewhat justified, and possibly urgent would sound more reasonable.

permalink

z3r0117x | 3 points | Nov 17 2016 04:07:44

The wierd music videos alone are on another level of weird. What kind of band even would consider this shit. Not even the biggest bands would say pedophile in the video. Even though that is small and simple it is odd and weird. Because before pizzagate the term would never cross my mind in a millions years. But then again I'm not a sick fuck like these assholes

permalink

archnihilist | 2 points | Nov 16 2016 22:07:37

I think a lot of people know what "Airtight" is a euphemism for.

permalink

[deleted] | 2 points | Nov 17 2016 00:29:21

i don't. what does it mean?

permalink

archnihilist | 3 points | Nov 17 2016 00:34:27

Let me see if there is a subreddit for that...

/r/AirTight/ (NSFW)

Oh look at the title... "all holes filled."

permalink

[deleted] | 3 points | Nov 17 2016 01:35:36

gross

permalink

[deleted] | 2 points | Nov 17 2016 01:32:48

This fucking sicko preforms for children?

permalink

StopBeingBatshit | 3 points | Nov 17 2016 02:52:53

Well, she performs at a restaurant that has all ages shows. However, this basically means anyone < 21 years old. So if you can't drink, but want to see a show you can go to this place.

Does that means she possibly performs in front of 5 year olds? Yes

Does it mean she definitely performs in front of 5 year olds? No

permalink

WormBloat | 1 points | Nov 17 2016 06:56:28

Holy bitches - if that creepass weirdo isn't a fuckin pederast...

permalink

[deleted] | 0 points | Nov 17 2016 00:14:37

"Questions became particularly heated when it was revealed in one email that multiple young children were being transported and placed inside of a warm pool as "entertainment" for adults. Here is the original email: https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/46736"

Compare the last name of the author of the email that mentions the "warm pool" and "entertainment" email to the last name of the children. It's the same. Do you mean to imply that this woman from Pew is offering one of her own children for sex? Or could she just be saying that the guests will be entertained by the children on hand because, well, kids can be pretty entertaining. It appears that she is referring to the fact that her own children will be on hand.

permalink

Filmpolice | 6 points | Nov 17 2016 01:44:46

I don't want to speculate or think about the possibilities. But the fact that the ages were specifically mentioned, alongside a guarantee that they will be "in that pool for sure" as entertainment, is profoundly alarming. The passage in question is:

"Bonnie will be Uber Service to transport Ruby, Emerson, and Maeve Luzzatto (11, 9, and almost 7) so you’ll have some further entertainment, and they will be in that pool for sure."

We are left guessing why a parent or relative would transport children in this manner and highlight their ages in an email addressed to several adult males. Nobody can say for sure, and it is certainly not my place to hurl accusations without 100% proof.

Do note, however, that it is not uncommon for relatives including parents and grandparents to exchange their children for money. Here is an example of a grandmother transporting her child to people who wanted to sexually abuse her: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ws2GDT0Xr78

permalink

[deleted] | 1 points | Nov 17 2016 01:53:39

honestly this seems like a mom or another family member just pointing out that her kids will be at the event and they will be excited about using a pool and joking that they are the entertainment. also, to be fair, it's not just men on that email thread. there's women too. The Uber reference could just be updated vernacular like saying "she's taxi'ing the kids around". bonnie is obviously the person who is driving the kids or rather "ubering" them in this case.

permalink

Filmpolice | 3 points | Nov 17 2016 02:39:13

I hope you are right, though that doesn't really explain why she would mention the ages specifically, nor does it explain the guarantee that they will be there.

Maybe she is just a bit odd when it comes to speaking about the children? I don't know. I'm only looking at what is actually there and hoping for the best.

BTW I think she is the nanny and may not be blood related, will see if anyone can confirm.

permalink

[deleted] | 3 points | Nov 17 2016 14:11:55

I don't define mentioning the presence of the kids as "a guarantee that they will be there" as you put it. That implication is a stretch. It's reaching. To me, this is just a mom or family member saying her kids will be there, and letting people know their ages. Your initial post implies this woman is having kids delivered to this party by Uber for people to have sex with. This speculation on what that email implies, rather than what it clearly states, is conjecture. It doesn't help the overall case, because an objective examination of the information reveals the suppositions your original post. People will use that against the entire community of an example of why their investigation is amateurish not to be taken seriously. Like the thing with Kleinman and Alefantis's actual names spelling out pedo code things in other languages. That does more harm to the sub than good. Reasonable people see that and write off this whole thing. People working on this need to stay objective. You HAVE to ask yourself "Would this hold up in a court of law?" "Is this a subjective or an objective interpretation of information?" Meaning, do you think you already have the answer to your question BEFORE you ask it. The investigative standards need to be elevated or mainstream folks will laugh it all off as the work of amateur wannabes. It doesn't help.

permalink

StopBeingBatshit | 1 points | Nov 17 2016 02:54:54

Dude, it's not "profoundly alarming", it's weird. I'm not sure how weird. The first time I read the email I thought it was weird as fuck, but definitely not profoundly alarming. Now I'm wondering if this is just how old rich people talk about their kids, since their lives must be boring as shit since they have nothing to worry about or strive for.

permalink

Filmpolice | 5 points | Nov 17 2016 08:56:02

Yes it is.

permalink

tardbuster | -1 points | Nov 16 2016 20:12:26

You seem to be trolling, but for the sake of those who won't realize it:

"Kleinman is ostensibly referring to Reddit, Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, and 4chan, where thousands of citizens are freely and openly asking questions about leaked emails from John Podesta's account"

-- The theory and 99% of the "evidence" came from 4chan. Everyone else is just mindlessly copy-pasting it.

"Third, another video directly from Klienman again makes references to pedophilia"

-- You say "again makes references to pedophilia", yet you have not yet cited ANY references to pedophilia. And THIS reference to pedophilia in this video is to call it "gross" and use it as an insult.

"Fourth, Kleinman did another speaking session at what he described as an underground facility beneath a restaurant, and again"

-- It's a bar called Tropicalia, which is located beneath a Subway restaurant, hence the jokes about Jared.

"In summary, the pedophilia themes, both implicitly and explicitly, seem to be reoccurring and abundant."

You have literally cited just two references to pedophilia: One where it was used as an insult and called "gross", and one being a joke about Subway's Jared.

As for your questions about the video:

1) The pizza parlor image comes at a point in the video where the band says the top perk is getting them to play anywhere of the donor's choice. The joke is that the places are all shitty. Most bands would not be too psyched to play at "Pizza World" or "Bowlorama" or a kid's birthday party or the dining room of some dorks.

The images of children are NOT used in conjunction with sexual innuendos. The picture of Amanda with the beggar kids is illustrating her joke that she has been busy in a Broadway play called "Orphans and Assholes", i.e. an Oliver-like production about lovable scamps and douchebags.

2) The cribs picture, along with the accompanying giant anthropomorphic ear in the crib, illustrates her simultaneous voiceover where she says "let Heavy Breathing ADOPT your malnourished ears". She is talking about "filling holes" because the album is called "Airtight", which are indeed sexual innuendos, yet entirely unrelated to children.

3) All images of kids were to explicitly illustrate specific things she was saying in the video, things entirely unrelated to pedophilia, as has been explained. As for why they are interspersed with more tasteless jokes, why not? Do you demand explanations from Louis CK when he goes from talking about his masturbatory habits to talking about his daughter's vagina? What is the permissable time between making a joke about a kid and making an entirely unrelated joke involving sexual innuendo?

permalink

newfoundland_urth | 21 points | Nov 16 2016 20:34:13

Jokes about euthanizing a child upon birth don't generally fly in my circle of friends. Maybe yours though?

permalink

[deleted] | 1 points | Nov 19 2016 23:43:54

[deleted]

permalink

newfoundland_urth | 1 points | Nov 19 2016 23:51:15

The problem is that she works directly with children. While people are free to say what they want, I personally (take note that this is an opinion) do not believe that they should talk about killing kids as a joke in their "art". With everything else we know it is, at the very least, suspect. Thanks for trying to come up with an explanation though, I would like to believe your rosier version -- I really would -- there is just too much dark stuff surrounding all of these people to not believe it is more sinister.

permalink

[deleted] | 1 points | Nov 20 2016 00:01:03

[deleted]

permalink

newfoundland_urth | 1 points | Nov 20 2016 00:07:31

I am not even going to read your post because the answer to "Does she?" is yes, it was confirmed by a friend of her's posting here.

permalink

[deleted] | 1 points | Nov 20 2016 00:22:06

[deleted]

permalink

newfoundland_urth | 1 points | Nov 20 2016 00:22:52

look through my post history. I have gone back and forth with her friend for the last two days.

permalink

newfoundland_urth | 1 points | Nov 20 2016 00:30:10

I see your point, and you may be right about simply being entertainment for the real sickos. When the dust settles, hopefully it will be clear who is responsible for the real crimes. No one should harass the members of the band, and if they do we have laws in this country to combat it.

permalink

tardbuster | -5 points | Nov 16 2016 20:48:06

So I guess you were horrified and rushed to reddit to vent your outrage when Seth Rogan recorded a message for his baby saying he was going to drown it in the river in the Christmas comedy "The Night Before"?

It's almost like different people find different jokes funny, perhaps you should head over to Amazon and write angry messages on the pages of the numerous "dead baby" joke books they sell.

permalink

newfoundland_urth | 17 points | Nov 16 2016 20:52:13

Never saw it, and never heard any jokes like that. You are awfully familiar though, huh?

permalink

tardbuster | -6 points | Nov 16 2016 21:14:06

Yes, it's a mainstream movie with mainstream actors, I did in fact see it. $52 million box office, 66% Rotten Tomatoes score, I guess all those people are all pedos or satanists, otherwise they would have contacted the FBI to have Seth Rogen investigated if not charged for his joke.

If you'd like I could give you a list of hundreds of popular movies, books, shows, comedians, musicians, artists, etc that make light of dead children in one way or another, and then you can just stockpile some Cheetos and get to work on reddit expressing your outrage. Cool?

permalink

xx45xx | 12 points | Nov 16 2016 21:20:50

ah yeah so some pothead ''actor'' made a killing baby joke? great job you just debunked the whole thing..

permalink

newfoundland_urth | 7 points | Nov 16 2016 21:26:09

How can you type something like that, and have it make sense in your own head? This folks is what we call a slippery slope argument (a logical fallacy the 3rd you've made this post alone). You'd think these people would have a higher class people Correcting The Record.

permalink

tardbuster | 0 points | Nov 16 2016 21:36:50

Again, you do not seem to understand basic logical concepts. You have horribly misused the terms "slippery slope" and "strawman".

You said you have never heard jokes like these, and they would not fly in your circle of friends, and implied that to even make jokes like these indicates something worthy of investigation. Yet I am telling you that, contrary to your belief, such jokes are all over the place, in the most mainstream entertainment, and there is NO BACKLASH. People aren't storming out of the movie theater in horror. There are no boycotts over Amazon's (and every other book chain on earth) decision to carry "1001 Dead Baby Jokes" books. Seth Rogen is not being blacklisted and has not become box office poison.

So there is no "slippery slope" of any kind (a fallacy that does not in fact at all apply to anything said here). Just a simple refutation of your belief that your "circle of friends" is representative of society as a whole and that dead baby jokes are such extreme outliers that those who make them deserve investigation or at least surveillance.

permalink

newfoundland_urth | 6 points | Nov 16 2016 21:56:24

That is the definition of a slippery slope. Claiming that one joke in particular was distasteful, so all jokes should be distasteful even if they are, I'll admit subjectively, different levels of fucked (false equivalence), is a slippery slope. You came here to defend your talentless buddies by attacking people that, by comparison (and Seth Rogan annoys the shit out of me), have comedic talent is just fighting a losing battle. And thus, by creating these sham arguments, you are creating straw men. You are either making up an argument, or picking out a low hanging position and focusing on it. So, please, head over to GW or whatever uni is close to you, and take a logic class.

I suppose attacking me is ad hominem. You are 4/4, but you can talk about it with your friends over at Comet Ping Pong and Pizza and come up with ways you are smarter and more progressive than everyone else in the world over a nice Cheese Pizza, while you listen to an "all ages" show about euthanizing a crying baby.

Again, we are all for rational thinking here, but coming here and blindly posting propaganda is something the people that are investigating this shit, can see right through.

edit: added bit about the joke to remind readers what joke he is comparing other comedy to

permalink

MiniLurkette | -2 points | Nov 17 2016 01:47:49

Ugh. "Your talentless buddies." Like no human in the world could possibly read the same things as you and come to a different conclusion, no--this person must be IN ON IT! ^/s

permalink

tardbuster | -2 points | Nov 17 2016 03:00:01

I'm afraid you are still incorrect.

Slippery slope is a fallacy where you attempt to argue against something by saying it will lead to something worse. The problem is that whether or not it will lead to that worse thing is an entirely different argument of its own.

Strawman is when instead of refuting your opponent's argument, you refute a weaker argument that you attribute to him but that he never actually made.

Ad hominem is when you say an argument has no merit not because it's premises are weak or unsupported, but because the person who made it is [insert something bad].

permalink

newfoundland_urth | 3 points | Nov 17 2016 03:01:49

A hasty generalization then. Let's be done communicating forever, please. Frankly, you sort of scare me.

permalink

rickyrobby91 | 5 points | Nov 16 2016 23:36:04

Give us the list then. Enlighten us since u seem to be so interested in disproving everything.

Better yet, since you seem so keen on denial, how about you refute every piece of evidence here? There's nothing particularly damning uncovered (yet), so it should be an easy task no? Get to work.

permalink

chayesdigital | 3 points | Nov 17 2016 00:44:58

Stop wasting time, report that piece of shit and move along to something more productive.

permalink

tardbuster | 1 points | Nov 17 2016 03:00:50

My first post here was a rebuttal to all the "evidence" in OP. Scroll up and read it.

permalink

stopcensoringpizzag8 | 19 points | Nov 16 2016 22:10:32

Lol. This person is obviously a member of Heavy Breathing or someone close to these people. S/he just joined 2 hours ago for the sake of replying to this post...

Anyways, the points you make here are bullshit excuses. When I have time, I will go through and refute some of these deceptive excuses you make with evidence. Stay tuned, Amanda!

permalink

imayellowbelly | 1 points | Nov 19 2016 05:30:46

I do actually demand explanations from Louis CK. I think he's involved with this shit too. Fuck him too.

permalink

[deleted] | 0 points | Nov 19 2016 23:45:17

[deleted]

permalink

imayellowbelly | 2 points | Nov 20 2016 00:04:32

Just saying if you spend your snl monologue saying child rape probably feels really awesome or else why would people do it, I just gotta wonder what kind of artist you really are and if maybe you might just need to shut the fuck up forever because you're now officially out of interesting things to say. Sorry but kid rape isn't funny to anyone but pedophiles. If that's your idea of art, good. Stick your neck out for it so we can take note of your retardation.

permalink

[deleted] | 1 points | Nov 20 2016 00:06:38

[deleted]

permalink

imayellowbelly | 2 points | Nov 20 2016 01:36:46

Culture is not your friend. You've been put in a very compromising position by the people you admire and you're being tricked into defending things that are deplorable. My initial comment was in response to Amanda saying that what he/she did was ok because people think what Louis ck did was okay. Just wanted to clarify I think both are gross. I don't hear real comedians talk about kid fucking. That's what retards with nothing to say talk about. You probably better get off here though. I hear the season premiere of "ow my balls" is on tonight. You wouldn't want to miss your retard entertainment.

permalink

[deleted] | 1 points | Nov 20 2016 01:48:21

[deleted]

permalink

imayellowbelly | 2 points | Nov 20 2016 02:08:16

I'll call that a big woosh on all accounts

permalink

[deleted] | 1 points | Nov 20 2016 02:12:42

[deleted]

permalink

imayellowbelly | 2 points | Nov 20 2016 02:18:12

Did I say that

permalink

imayellowbelly | 2 points | Nov 20 2016 05:10:25

In answer to my own question, no I didn't. Hilarious and Chewed Up are comedy classics and Louis CK deserved the fame he got from those specials. It's what he's chosen to do with that fame that disgusts me. You know how comedians are always like "I just want to make something that people can enjoy in these tough times. Something to make them forget about their lives for a bit.... yada yada look at me I'm such a noble hero for entertaining people..." And then to turn around and tell jokes that could only possibly offend good people who are sensitive to the wrongs and the pains of this world.... fuck that, man. You ever had a kid die? You ever have your kid kidnapped and raped? Doesn't sound like it. Neither have I but I feel for those people and anyone who makes light of their pain and the pain felt by their children is an immoral cunt who ought to just shut the fuck up

permalink

MiniLurkette | -3 points | Nov 16 2016 21:33:39

Very nice (actual) research and points. I'm still baffled by how people are calling these things "undeniable evidence." At most, they don't get it or the jokes, but that is not concrete evidence for anything .

permalink

newfoundland_urth | 10 points | Nov 16 2016 22:39:04

I am not sure where "undeniable evidence" is coming from. People will make connections and come to their own conclusions -- it is how we reason our way through life. What is undeniable, at least from where I sit, is that repeated jokes, allusions, and innuendo about child abuse makes me sick.

permalink

MiniLurkette | -1 points | Nov 17 2016 01:45:50

If this were just a thread about Amanda Kleinman making very poor jokes, I'd totally agree with you. But it's being used as concrete "evidence" that Comet is the HQ of a child sex trafficking ring.

permalink

newfoundland_urth | 7 points | Nov 17 2016 02:18:38

No one is claiming it is supposed concrete evidence except for you. You are parroting that line. Why?

Also, I knew immediately upon reviewing your comment history that sooner, or later, I would get a response from you as well. What is the hourly payrate to Correct the Record? Would it not be easier to just drive an uber?

Maybe you could drive and uber full of kids to your friends house for entertainment. Make sure you call out their ages explicitly ahead of time, because as your friend Amanda has pointed out, "everyone has their preferences."

permalink

MiniLurkette | 2 points | Nov 17 2016 02:22:47

Ah yes, the "your friend" tactic. Love that one.

Hahaha I wish I were being paid to refute your delusions! But since you guys are so bad at research, I'll do it for ya: my account is three years old buddy, and I spend all my time posting on dog pics. I am a real, unpaid, non-magical human who disagrees with you...I am sorry that is such a shock to your brain.

I have been having many conversations, and this has indeed been held up as "undeniable evidence." Maybe do some more reading in the sub you support.

permalink

newfoundland_urth | 5 points | Nov 17 2016 02:35:48

You are talking to someone who is telling you, YOU ARE RIGHT, THIS IS NOT UNDENIABLE EVIDENCE.

Sorry for assuming that you were part of "the gang", it just appeared from your recent posts that you are cut from a similar cloth i.e. you can rationalize the odd inappropriate things these people are saying. Furthermore, who's to say that CTR would not want someone on the pay roll with an actual comment history? Addmitedly, I made that comment more in jest, but I don't understand why you would come to a sub that is -- by all accounts, I am sure you will agree -- hysterically motivated to prove their allegations are true to post an agreement with a piss-poor response to OP who simply accumulated evidence, and asked people, "well this is weird, right?"

This shit is weird, and if you can rationalize it all away that is fine for you and the people in your social circle -- just stay the fuck away from my kids, and for that matter my dogs.

permalink

MiniLurkette | 1 points | Nov 17 2016 02:42:15

Okay, let me be less rude. Except for that part about staying away from your dogs, because for real, fuck you on that. But for the other stuff, sorry for being rude.

My rudeness stems from two areas: one being that there are mundane explanations for pretty much everything here (and by here I mean within the entire investigation). I am not, nor have I ever, said that that means nothing is going on, but I do think people need to explore all options. And why? Reason two: people are plastering photos of toddlers all over the internet with their full names and weird mocked up pictures that say horrible things on them. People have been arguing that these pictures were available on instagram, but that's such a poor argument because there, it was someone's personal instagram, intended for a small audience and with the parents' approval. And now thousands of people are looking and tweeting those out. That's where my frustration and insistence to keep arguing come from.

But also your dogs would love me.

permalink