Post reply

Name:
Email:
Subject:
Message icon:
Verification:

shortcuts: hit alt+s to submit/post or alt+p to preview


Topic Summary

Posted by: rp
« on: February 19, 2026, 08:09:28 pm »

Thanks for clarifying that.
Posted by: 90sRetroFan
« on: February 19, 2026, 03:18:47 pm »

I thought that had been obvious ever since this post of mine that specifically referred to the Epstein case:

https://trueleft.createaforum.com/issues/legal-decolonization/msg31806/#msg31806

or even this earlier post discussing **** in general:

https://trueleft.createaforum.com/issues/legal-decolonization/msg31293/#msg31293

This does not imply I believe the FBI is being honest, because I hold the FBI to their standards, not mine. For example:

https://trueleft.createaforum.com/true-left-vs-false-left/false-left-'conspiracy-theories'-and-the-right/msg32137/#msg32137

Quote
the recent FBI revelation that they found no evidence of a "massive child sex trafficking operation"

In Western law, "trafficking" of minors is defined as when their parents/legal guardians do not consent, not when the minors themselves do not consent. Therefore while Epstein's "underage" prostitutes all seem to have been transported to the island and other destinations voluntarily, it is also true that in many cases their parents were unaware of where they were at the time and did not give prior permission for the travel. Thus the FBI which claims to uphold Western law is lying by their own standards.

(By my standards, there was indeed no "trafficking", as I only require consent from the travellers themselves. But the FBI did not arrive at their position by agreeing with my standards.)

Next, while I agree that the prostitutes were not victims merely for becoming prostitutes voluntarily, it is also obvious to me that in various cases they subsequently became involved in things they did not sign up for. The subset fitting this condition were victims of violence initiated by Epstein and his club members. I would like a full investigation into who those members were, and retaliatory violence against those members only.

With that said, even those members who initiated violence are no worse than anyone who supports compulsory schooling.

Finally, I see no indication that the tweeter whom you reposted shares my stance on the definition of trafficking. Instead I see a tweet that appears to encourage uncritical acceptance of the FBI statement.
Posted by: rp
« on: February 19, 2026, 08:21:00 am »

So you agree that the prostitutes were not "victims"?
Posted by: 90sRetroFan
« on: February 18, 2026, 10:37:57 pm »

"Then what is the most important issue according to you?"

That Epstein was using his leverage for Zionist/Duginist ends simultaneously without contradiction. This should further discredit two narrative camps: 1) those hostile to Russia who think Israel can be an ally against Russia (on account of superficial pro-Ukraine statements from Israel); 2) those hostile to Israel who think Russia can be an ally against Israel (on account of superficial pro-Iran statements from Russia).

Secondarily, the Eurocentrism of the club members:

https://trueleft.createaforum.com/human-evolution/face-shapes-and-preferences/msg32105/#msg32105

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_people_named_in_the_Epstein_files

Quote
Epstein suggested a "tall Swedish blonde woman, to make fun to visit" to Anil, who responded: "Arrange that."[10]
...
In one email Ariely asked Epstein for the name and email of a "redhead" he met earlier.[13][14]
...
Band received an invitation from Maxwell for dinner with a "sluty [sic] Spanish girl".
...
Epstein emailed Sergei Belyakov that a "Russian girl" was attempting to blackmail businessmen in New York.[34]
...
Epstein asked whether Blaine's "French girl" was in town;
...
Gelernter described one of his undergraduate students to Epstein: "I have a perfect editoress in mind: Yale sr, worked at Vogue last summer, runs her own campus mag, art major, completely connected, v[ery] small goodlooking blonde."[83]
...
Epstein offered to introduce then-Prince Andrew to a 26-year-old Russian woman, to which he replied he would be "delighted" to meet her.[161]
...
she helped Epstein anonymously wire transfers of $10,000 to a "girl from Romania"
Posted by: rp
« on: February 18, 2026, 09:11:18 pm »

"Whether or not the prostitutes are "underage" (according to Western law) is the least important issue in the entire case FFS"
Then what is the most important issue according to you?
Posted by: 90sRetroFan
« on: February 18, 2026, 06:54:13 pm »

Continuing from:

https://trueleft.createaforum.com/true-left-vs-false-left/false-left-'conspiracy-theories'-and-the-right/msg32145/#msg32145

Quote
But now that it is indisputable that Epstein was definitely doing something, just not yet sure how many people are involved, should we not err on the side of imagining how much at most could potentially have been going on, in order to ensure we leave no stone unturned in the investigation?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_is29pkTsCU

Quote
Um, now they're coming out
0:15
and saying that's it. All right, we
0:16
released everything that we got. That's
0:18
we got nothing else, bro. I don't know
0:19
what you want me to say. Uh, it is the
0:21
definition of what's called a limited
0:23
hangout. Do yourself a favor and look
0:25
that up. Look up limited hangout. And I
0:27
believe there's a Wikipedia page on it
0:28
and you'll see exactly what we're
0:30
talking about here. But it's this
0:31
intelligence tactic where you only give
0:33
a small percentage of the truth and then
0:36
pretend like you gave the whole truth
0:37
and then that gets everybody to go,
0:39
"Okay, I guess we got everything that
0:41
that we have here."

This is what I was warning about.

Unfortunately, False Leftist Kulinski is drawing all the wrong conclusions in the rest of the video:

Quote
4:05
And I've never been more convinced in my
4:07
life that class politics is is a factual
4:10
truth. It's an objective truth. That
4:12
class politics is is the end all beall.
4:16
That extreme wealth rots your soul and
4:19
turns you into a demonic entity based on
4:22
what these people were doing.

I would ask Kulinski a simple question: if he were given billions of $ today, would he become those whom he is condemning in the above video? Clearly not. Therefore what is going on is not extreme wealth rotting your soul, but those with rotten souls (due to their inferior blood if you ask me) who try hardest to become extremely wealthy (of whom a fraction succeeds, and the remainder who do not are no better, but merely lack the financial means to act on their desires and thereby reveal their similarities with those who succeeded).) Race, not class, is the explanation.

Quote
9:27
what is almost certainly an underage
9:29
girl

Quote
10:00
they're underage

Quote
10:27
somebody maybe underage

Quote
this
11:02
is one that I think is for sure
11:04
underage.

Quote
I think that's an underage.

Quote
This one also looks
11:16
potentially underage.

Quote
Oh, this one is
11:28
definitely underage.

Quote
11:43
This one looks underage, too, to me.

Whether or not the prostitutes are "underage" (according to Western law) is the least important issue in the entire case FFS. It is those (Kulinski included) who think this is the most important issue who laid the sociopsychological groundwork for Epstein's blackmail to be as effective as it was. That Kulinski does not understand this elementary logic is the greatest irony of all.

So let's suppose this time round we eventually manage to get to the bottom of the Epstein case, arrest everyone, try everyone, execute everyone involved. But we do not discard the underlying Western idiocy of age of sexual consent laws. Then what? Answer: someone else whom we don't even know about yet will just restart the operation all over again to blackmail a new generation of politicians to serve Israel/Russia! And now the blackmail will be even more effective due to the new generation of politicians having seen what happened to the previous generation. The new generation of politicians are not going to email one another casually conversing about their shared vacation activities. They are going to be far more secretive. And benefit from increased secrecy accrues to the blackmailer. Thus the blackmail problem has not been solved. It has only been made worse.
Posted by: 90sRetroFan
« on: February 13, 2026, 08:01:35 pm »

At this rate it might take another 25 years just for present-day False Leftists to get to where we are now. (And this assumes along the way they are willing to let go of every other deeply-held False Leftist assumption that they currently hold, such as what Hitler represented.) Can a war be won by a side whose reactions to enemy moves are consistently delayed by several decades, while enemy reactions to our moves require only a few years (e.g. 9/11 (2001) in response to Operation Deliberate Force (1995))?
Posted by: rp
« on: February 13, 2026, 05:47:59 pm »

https://x.com/i/status/2022343543705252210
Quote
I no longer believe official 9/11 story. Two paper passports did not burn and were found on the rubble but it was so hot WTC7 burned down across the street. Nonsense. It's time to look for who gained from 9/11. Our government doesn't work for us. They've been lying whole time.
Posted by: 90sRetroFan
« on: February 11, 2026, 12:37:09 am »

So:

1) rightists (we are to assume) are exaggerating the scale of the Epstein club;
2) the tweeter you reposted is arguing that because 1) is happening, everyone else should instead downplay;
3) you agree with 2)?

Back in the QAnon days, when there were similar speculations but the claim was that only leftists are involved in such a club (which was supposedly run by Soros, not Epstein), we did demand evidence (which rightists were unable to provide), absent which we appropriately dismissed and ridiculed their hysteria.

But now that it is indisputable that Epstein was definitely doing something, just not yet sure how many people are involved, should we not err on the side of imagining how much at most could potentially have been going on, in order to ensure we leave no stone unturned in the investigation?

(Furthermore, I see no indication that the tweeter shares our perspective regarding definitions, as even terms such as "pedophilic" are thrown around casually.)
Posted by: rp
« on: February 10, 2026, 11:47:02 pm »

"Unless you mean they want to find out that the Epstein club involves as large a number of members as possible, which makes Trump merely one of very many who are involved, which might somewhat dilute the negative effect of Trump being caught involved in the first place (compared to if the Epstein club was just Trump and a few others)?"
This.
Posted by: 90sRetroFan
« on: February 10, 2026, 11:38:11 pm »

Why would rightists want something which makes Trump look bad?

Unless you mean they want to find out that the Epstein club involves as large a number of members as possible, which makes Trump merely one of very many who are involved, which might somewhat dilute the negative effect of Trump being caught involved in the first place (compared to if the Epstein club was just Trump and a few others)?
Posted by: rp
« on: February 10, 2026, 11:19:59 pm »

The child abuse/sex trafficking allegation.
Posted by: 90sRetroFan
« on: February 10, 2026, 10:30:16 pm »

"Rightoids desperately want this to be true"

Want what to be true?
Posted by: rp
« on: February 10, 2026, 08:39:22 pm »

"You are taking this at face value, despite the FBI's documented pattern of bias?"
Two things can be true:
1. FBI is covering up Epstein's operation
2. FBI correctly found no child abuse or trafficking from Epstein.

This makes sense from the FBI's perspective, as they would have to insert a truth while attempting to cover up the lie, at the same time misdirecting "truthseekers" to believe that the true statement is actually the lie (child abuse/trafficking), directing all their focus towards it instead of the actual cover up! (This is similar to how Jews lie if you recall)
Posted by: rp
« on: February 10, 2026, 08:28:45 pm »

"If you are arguing that the definition of "trafficking" as used in the mainstream is inaccurate, that is a separate point. But I had assumed that it was obvious that the scale of Epstein's operation, whatever terminology we choose to label it with, is being underreported."
No doubt it is being underreported. But it is also a fact that children are not being trafficked/abused (Epstein's "victims" were adulterated prostitutes). Rightoids desperately want this to be true, in line with their paternalistic grandstanding about "protecting children".

This is what the post is getting at, if you read toward the very end.