Epstein

[Stirlingsays]

We have all seen the online rumours that Epstein is not dead. And the big conspiracy continues among lofty Elites. The evidence was that his video game moniker was logged on and playing, weeks after he actually 'died'.

So what do you think ? is he really dead ?

I'd say that I'm 8/10 sure he's dead.

That said, written material was found in his cell that suggests he was planning an escape.

 

[Glazier#1]

It's at the suspicion stage......From what I've seen the use of code words definitely warrants that belief. There is an Epstein post where he shows that he's aware that his emails are being read (or will be) and suggests a different method of contact. That to me is an even stronger indication that he used code words for activities he wanted to hide.

If some are more certain than others that's ok.....Not everyone is exactly the same. Personally I think there is weight behind the suspicion.

Proof itself would be very self incriminating in most instances I imagine, but accusations do need looking at (and I want to know why investigations were stopped or limited)......But as the system itself appears broken at the higher level. That nothing happened doesn't surprise me.

Epstein posts that have caused this suspicion have already been posted on the site, I posted a few myself.

Again, I want to make the point that you are only seeing what the department allowed you to see, and of that it's heavily redacted. Half of the Epstein files are still not released and the DoJ are refusing to release them.

I also believe that the very worst of it would have been destroyed.



You post that as if your posts themselves are full of nuance.

The saying itself doesn't relate to all areas related to intelligence and is situational. It refers to the ability to know when to have doubt, rather than intelligence meaning that doubt is justified. For example, a good pilot has to be intelligent to become qualified and a competent pilot isn't in doubt flying a plane.

So, if I'm one of those who needs proof of this (let's face it, horrendous) accusation, it shows, therefore, that I'm defending Epstein and having no respect for his victims?

 

[Glazier#1]

Oh I read it.

If only for the Dunning-Krugerisms.

No response to the points I made though? Telling, for all your nuanced and delicate insight. If my post was full of those 'isms' it would be easy, I'm assuming, to counter?

Nothing.

 

[Stirlingsays]

So, if I'm one of those who needs proof of this (let's face it, horrendous) accusation, it shows, therefore, that I'm defending Epstein and having no respect for his victims?

Your opinion, in my view, isn't really valid insomuch as you haven't read the emails and appear to have little interest in them.

If you are going to engage on this topic then that's the least you could do. But instead you seem more interested in announcing opinions without going through the material yourself.

 

[Stirlingsays]

No response to the points I made though? Telling, for all your nuanced and delicate insight. If my post was full of those 'isms' it would be easy, I'm assuming, to counter?

Nothing.

I use to do this all the time.

But it was very rarely reciprocated, so now I can't be bothered unless I feel the poster is worthy of that kind of debate.

Your arguments are so deviated from what I consider rational that it feels like another language. Having to respond to that kind of thing creates large posts and.....without insulting you, I don't think it would be that productive with yourself.

 

[Glazier#1]

Your opinion, in my view, isn't really valid insomuch as you haven't read the emails and appear to have little interest in them.

If you are going to engage on this topic then that's the least you could do. But instead you seem more interested in picking fights and announcing opinions without going through the material yourself.

I hear what you're saying but, really, there are reams of them and, unlike you or others, I don't want to spend all my day in front of a screen.

I will read a lot about Epstein in news broadcasts and then, if I feel the need, I'll look further into things.

I know that the crimes were despicable. Who doesn't? As a parent, I can't begin to get my head around what these girls must have gone through; it's just monstrous, heart-breaking.

As for picking fights, I made one humorous, satirical side - swipe and look at the response. A pile on with your mates, like the typical Wisbech hunt. Old habits die hard, I suppose.

"The lady doth protest too much, methinks."

 

[Stirlingsays]

I hear what you're saying but, really, there are reams of them and, unlike you or others, I don't want to spend all my day in front of a screen.

I will read a lot about Epstein in news broadcasts and then, if I feel the need, I'll look further into things.

I know that the crimes were despicable. Who doesn't? As a parent, I can't begin to get my head around what these girls must have gone through; it's just monstrous, heart-breaking.

As for picking fights, I made one humorous, satirical side - swipe and look at the response. A pile on with your mates, like the typical Wisbech hunt. Old habits die hard, I suppose.

"The lady doth protest too much, methinks."

If you feel the 'juice isn't worth the squeeze' on reading the Epstein material then fair enough (a lot of people have already presented quite a lot of work that you could go through and links are in the thread).

If you can't be bothered but then provide contrary opinions on it to people who have gone through material then obviously it's going to irritate people.....because crimes don't get much worst than what's suggested.

I don't really have an issue with your taking a contrary position, as that is your right, but obviously it's going to get spicy if pursued with people that think Epstein was up to demonic (either in the religious or non religious sense) activities.....Personally I think what is suspected of him is true.....but that's just an opinion at the moment.

If you say suggesting I hate Jews was a joke, I can accept that, we are all guilty of imperfect phrasing and I shall mention it no more.

 

[Glazier#1]

If you feel the 'juice isn't worth the squeeze' on reading the Epstein material then fair enough (a lot of people have already presented quite a lot of work that you could go through and links are in the thread).

If you can't be bothered but then provide contrary opinions on it to people who have gone through material then obviously it's going to irritate people.....because crimes don't get much worst than what's suggested.

I don't really have an issue with your taking a contrary position, as that is your right, but obviously it's going to get spicy if pursued with people that think Epstein was up to demonic (either in the religious or non religious sense) activities.....Personally I think what is suspected of him is true.....but that's just an opinion at the moment.

If you say suggesting I hate Jews was a joke, I can accept that, we are all guilty of imperfect phrasing and I shall mention it no more.

Appreciate that but I should add, in closing, that I've taken no position at all apart from wanting to see substantiation over a claim. A claim I don't want to believe because it's so awful.

According to one poster here, this means that I am a supporter of Epstein and don't care about his victims which is beyond the pale. A disgusting slur. Now that is virtue signalling of the worst order.

 

[McAhuna]

We have all seen the online rumours that Epstein is not dead. And the big conspiracy continues among lofty Elites. The evidence was that his video game moniker was logged on and playing, weeks after he actually 'died'.

So what do you think ? is he really dead ?

No, I don't think he's dead.

The parasite class protect their own.

 

[eaglesdare]

We have all seen the online rumours that Epstein is not dead. And the big conspiracy continues among lofty Elites. The evidence was that his video game moniker was logged on and playing, weeks after he actually 'died'.

So what do you think ? is he really dead ?

One thing I'm convinced of is that he didn't kill himself.

 

[McAhuna]

I use to do this all the time.

But it was very rarely reciprocated, so now I can't be bothered unless I feel the poster is worthy of that kind of debate.

Your arguments are so deviated from what I consider rational that it feels like another language. Having to respond to that kind of thing creates large posts and.....without insulting you, I don't think it would be that productive with yourself.

I see your considered and thought out replies, but I no longer see the freaks posts that you are responding to. I have to say, why do you bother? Blind alley after blind alley, surely?
You're an intelligent guy, surely you can see that the lights are on but nobody is home? Its kinder to pull the plug. The thread subject matter deserve better.

 

[McAhuna]

Brazil has started making Epstein-related arrests.

https://twitter.com/x/status/2021373935976341556

Who remembers the days when we took the moral lead and cajoled the third world to do likewise?
It's the other way round nowadays.
We'll probably joke about it for a week or two on Have I Got News for You, and then brush the whole thing under the carpet.

 

[Stirlingsays]

I see your considered and thought out replies, but I no longer see the freaks posts that you are responding to. I have to say, why do you bother? Blind alley after blind alley, surely?
You're an intelligent guy, surely you can see that the lights are on but nobody is home? Its kinder to pull the plug. The thread subject matter deserve better.

Tips hat.

I only have two people on ignore, Wisbech and Beak.

I don't mind Glazier.....I've had enough goes at him and he still comes back. I don't mind that.

If I feel someone has no principles at all, then that's when I just ignore them....though I occasionally reply to Corny.

Dan's also an exception because he's so salty about Hol that it's fun to read his latest whines.

 

[McAhuna]

Royal Biographer Andrew Lownie starting to reveal hidden truths...

 

[Glazier#1]

Tips hat.

I only have two people on ignore, Wisbech and Beak.

I don't mind Glazier.....I've had enough goes at him and he still comes back. I don't mind that.

If I feel someone has no principles at all, then that's when I just ignore them....though I occasionally reply to Corny.

Dan's also an exception because he's so salty about Hol that it's fun to read his latest whines.

What I'm wondering is: is there ever a time when you look at one of your fellow-traveller's response to someone and think to write that they are out of order or have things become so tribal that this would out of the question because that would appear disloyal?

 

[ASCPFC]

What I'm wondering is: is there ever a time when you look at one of your fellow-traveller's response to someone and think to write that they are out of order or have things become so tribal that this would out of the question because that would appear disloyal?

There have been plenty of disagreements. It's not a uni-opinion, brain meld or even uni-party.

 

[PalazioVecchio]

Noam Chomsky is being dragged through the mud. Couldn't happen to a nicer guy.

 

[georgenorman]

There have been plenty of disagreements. It's not a uni-opinion, brain meld or even uni-party.

It's more Twist and Shout on the Epstein thread.

 

[Glazier#1]

There have been plenty of disagreements. It's not a uni-opinion, brain meld or even uni-party.

I mean when there is a response to a 'leftie', for example, is just out of order and needs to be picked up on.

Or is that just a no-no?

I do see responses on here between like minds, sure but I'm talking about responses to 'the enemy'

 

[georgenorman]

I mean when there is a response to a 'leftie', for example, is just out of order and needs to be picked up on.

Or is that just a no-no?

I do see responses on here between like minds, sure but I'm talking about responses to 'the enemy'

Not true, Stirling and I have had some sharp exchanges on some topics.