When these people get to a certain financial level, they come to understand that they can literally buy anything they want. What illustrates that better than being able to purchase young women for your own pleasure?

And I wonder if they don't really mind being part of The Club. We think they're being blackmailed, but what if they are all doing this stuff, knowing it puts them in an exclusive club, with exclusive people, who all have to trust each other with the worst secrets in the world. What better way to signal that you've "arrived."

When you have riches and power, you still want what you can't have. That's what drives them.

There's something that everybody seems to be ignoring..

( aside from the vile glossing-over of the "journalism", with their "underage women" euphamism for girls, & their euphamisms for rape, etc, as thankfully, women have been pointing-out )

The way he worked was he used friendship to put people in the position of being friends with him, and then they found-out about more of what was going-on, but now the conflict-of-interest put them in a bind, & gang-loyalty/pack-loyalty/"family"-loyalty conflicted loyalty-to-principle.

AND THAT SAME CONFLICT-OF-INTEREST IS USED BY EVERY FAMILY, EVERY IDEOLOGY, EVERYWHERE, ALL THE TIME, so no, it isn't that they all knew & became his friend regardless: that is reversing the order, for at-least many of them.

WHY were the majority of people in East Germany actively snitching on whomever was around them, for sake of ingratiating themselves with the authorities?

Because that is human-nature.

Within-the-pack/"family"/"clan" .. outranks principles.

Children have that driven into them by parents, by culture, by education, by stories, relentlessly.

The class-clan also played into it:

Say a person who was, with friendship with Epstein, now hobnobbing with people of the class above their normal level..

& then they learn more of what's really going-on..

Now their conflict-of-interest is that if they go against their new "family", they'll .. at-least get ostracized, & possibly murdered.

XOR, they can just compromise their principles, & get to have their clan/class/"family" validity remain..

& that is what they did.

Part of what bugs me with the simplistic "oh, but I would never have done that!" position .. is simply that babies/lives born into different cultures FORM into those cultures.

That evidence is global.

it is idiotic to reject it.

People born into a "make yourself a 'man': put down as many others as you can, & prove yourself through your exclusive 'success'" culture SIGNIFICANTLY BECOME that culture: they embody it.

Same as with people born into a more nurturing culture.

Same with people born into a short-term-only culture, vs a long-term-only culture..

The self-delusion of people who hold that "well I wouldn't ever have been that way, were I the one born into that culture" is outright BEGGING universe to get one's soul/continuum caught in exactly such a life, in the future, just to rub one's soul's face in it: karmic sucker-punching.

The phrase "there, but for the grace-of-G-D, go I" has real wisdom in it.

Freud apparently discovered that child-rape was normal, in the culture he inhabited, & tried speaking-up about it, but .. well, backlash threatened to wipe his importance off the map, so he .. got quiet about it, again.

Feudalism & slavery have pretty-much DEFINED our race's last few millenia of history: we DID embody such corruption, such narcissism, such prejudice, consistently, for thousands of years.

What percentage of humankind rejected that kind of narcissism & perpetuating-established-corruption for sake of principles??

Seriously? it isn't 1/2, it isn't 1/20!!

This isn't a they are corrupt problem, this is they had opportunity & exercised it, but we who haven't been in their culture pretend that our nature is somehow inherently-different, therefore we pretend we wouldn't ever have exercised that opportunity .. kind of thing.

Yes, there are individuals who hold to principle in spite of it violating the culture they live in, like Charles Darwin being anti-slavery.

But .. the whole "WE would NEVER do any such thing, were we born into that culture, ourselves!" .. it's dishonest.

& yes, it's dishonest+vile when the "journalism" of today softpedals what they did.

I read an excerpt from 1 of those documents: a girl was raped & got pregnant, forced to have an abortion she didn't want, & they therefore murdered her daughter.

NONE of the "journalism" of MSM has the spine to state that honestly.

& given that speaking required-truth is their JOB, .. that's .. a betrayal of civilization.

Epstein seems to have been VERY skilful at manipulating people into undermined-principles ( kind of a human moral-pathogen? among other things: he was human, too, ttbomk, and I don't want to know more about him, to validate that: vile is vile, but there had to be more than just-that in him. Same as our "heroes" & "saints" are often mixtures, when we get to know the real someone ).

& I think it would be much more objective of us to thank our karma/luck for how we weren't put in the undermining-force that others failed in, because as nice as it may be to pretend that we're "inherently" better than others .. the blunt fact is that if cultures can form lives as much as the evidence shows they can .. then we'd be drastically different had we been born into different-culture, & it isn't any "inherent" superiority: it's nurture, not nature.

I think the primary reason we're not like him/them is cultural-circimstance we were born into.

Only.

I think humankind is malleable by context to that degree.

& loyalty-to-principle isn't what most humankind are: loyalty-to-gang/family/identity outranks loyalty-to-principle massively among humankind, & people nowadays are just pretending that their current-gang is inherently-good, & masquerading as loyal-to-principle.

This will become biting, when the "masks come off" & humankind HARD-chooses ideology over principles, in the coming months/weeks.

Then the truth will be more "in our faces".

_ /\ _

Amerifat here. We could use some light restructuring. Some newer democracies have features I think are improvements that could benefit us if deployed here. But the fundamental structure isn't that bad, and I'm worried we'll just get something worse if we try a full rebuild.

Are mass executions already off the table?

We all know about Trump raping minors, so what do you think is so vile that he's fighting tooth and claw to avoid releasing the files?

The US abducted a sitting president, broke NATO, is murdering their own citizens in the streets, and IDK what's going to happen with Iran, but I'm sure glad not to be involved. Would Trump really do that to avoid having a pedo paper trail? I'm beginning to doubt it...

It's certainly not out of the realm of possibility, though there's no direct evidence. One possible reason there's no direct evidence is that, as deputy AG Todd Blanche recently said, they're withholding any images that contain violence, physical harm, or death.

I was actually just exaggerating for dramatic effect when I made this but apparently the codeword was jerky and Epstein may have maintained a strict diet of only human meat for a period of time. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ghUNyJzLkfE

The torture and eat parts made this last weekend difficult. My heart still speeds up when I think about those poor children. :(

For real I’m hoping that’s just made up.

Apparently the code word was jerky. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ghUNyJzLkfE

Do you think that’s where they’d draw the line?

Take their assets and put $10M towards keeping the bounty program going. Take another $15M and put it towards a second (even bigger) bounty. Every day a billionaire’s name gets lottery’ed and killing them wins the big pot plus the original $10M bounty. So every single billionaire has a constant bounty on them, plus the chance of getting lotto’ed… At first that lotto may only be $25M. But as more and more die, that bigger pot continues to grow.

Their private security teams may not be willing to turn against their masters for only $10M… But for $25M? $40M? $55M? $70M? Everyone has a price, especially the billionaires’ mercenaries. Of course, the billionaires would probably start requiring bomb collars for their private security at that point, to ensure they remain loyal. But that means the teams would inevitably weigh the price of a bomb collar vs an easy $10M payout in the first place. And that $10M alone would be enough to have them gunning down the billionaires before they put the collars on.

The rest of their assets go towards a fund for reducing homelessness, bolstering food stamp programs, unemployment insurance funds, getting people back on their feet, forgiving debt, funding Social Security, expanding Medicare and Medicaid, maybe even UBI if the fund is large enough to be self-sustaining, etc…