You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

0
0

[–] Vi1techno [S] ago 

A Crash Course Guide to Informing The Uninformed (#PIZZAGATE) PT3 The approach I tend to take is to sound like I am not even convinced myself whether or not PizzaGate is real. I take an investigative approach where I coax my target to investigate the subject along with me; instead of me simply presenting them the subject. I would use phrases like "hey figure this out for me" or "Hey maybe you could make sense of this". Challenge your target directly by asking for their help. People do not like being presented with a mountain of things to dig through, they usually want it in bite sized chunks or to participate in the inquiry themselves. Presuming you have garnered enough empathy and curiosity from your correspondent, they will quickly join your search for the truth too.
Now what I have found is that the order you present the key pieces of evidence you find are extremely important in making the jump from the emotional realm of conversation to the logical realm of the mind. If you do not present the information that has been garnered from PizzaGate effectively, your targets interest in the subject will QUICKLY dissipate. Any attempt to restart the conversation will be very hard from this point if you fail. First impressions really do matter and will forever stay in the mind of your correspondent.
The first piece of information one presents is the most important. It is supposed to hook the attention of your target while providing an instantly verifiable basis. My favorite to start with is what I call the google translate strategy ; ]
You ask your target if they can figure this out for you. Tell them to look up any article from a well known source (does not mean well credited source) like the New York Times that a lot of these leftist liberals tend to follow like the bible. You bring up any article by them regarding PizzaGate, by this point we know all the articles written by NYT are absolute one sided trash, but that is not the point here. The point is to find a FAULT in the main narrative. A direct CRACK you can point to that is published by the MSM themselves that will kick off the interest of your correspondent. In this case I chose to use this article http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/21/technology/fact-check-this-pizzeria-is-not-a-child-trafficking-site.html
The article gives a poorly written explanation (though not evident to your misinformed correspondent) on the shallowest talking points regarding PizzaGate. The article even goes out of it's way to give one sided arguments as to why PizzaGate is a Hoax and why it should be regarded as fake news. it is your job to disprove them later once you have brought them to the logical realm. The first paragraph of the article reads "WASHINGTON — Days before the presidential election, James Alefantis, owner of a local pizza restaurant called Comet Ping Pong, noticed an unusual spike in the number of his Instagram followers." The name of the Store owner is mentioned here, this is cold hard fact that is verifiable through years of public records. This is the man who owns Comet Ping Pong Pizza Shop and this is an undeniable FACT, this HAS to be set in stone before you continue.
Once you've brought the attention of your correspondent onto the name of the store owner, James Alefantis, this is where the google translate strategy comes into play. You tell your target to open google translate on their browser or phone, and set the input language to English, output language to French. Tell them to type in "I love Children" in input and watch their Jaw drop as they see what comes out the other end. "J'aime des enfants" This is what comes up in French when you type in "i love children" into google translate. The similarities in the names are striking and should be damning all by itself. At this point you would have gained considerable curiosity from your target (assuming they aren't being willfully ignorant). They have now used logical strategies to come up with definite conclusions to what they see. One cannot argue with you that the man's name means I Love Children in French. And can only ask the question why someone would possibly have an alias such as that. When coupled with the whole treasure trove of other information out there, there should be more than sufficient evidence to prosecute this sick fuck.
The next thing you need to bring your correspondents' attention to quickly is the Instagram posts by the store owner under Jimmy rocket. All significant posts have been archived and can be found in the Voat forums above. This provides solid visual imagery that millennials can recognize as Instagram posts. It is a highly relatable (not saying reliable) source of information.