Frank wrote on Feb 10^th, 2026 at 5:12pm:


Only if the aim is to derail the thread and protect the people you're uncomfortable scrutinising.

This is Studying Epstein, not a grab-bag of crimes you'd rather talk about. Dragging in "Muslim rape gangs" here isn't about relevance or protecting children, it's a distraction from Trump's ties to Epstein and the abusers still hidden behind redactions.

If you actually cared about accountability, you'd back holding all abusers to account, including the ones on your side. Right now, all you're doing is running cover for them.

Quote:


I've already been explicit that anyone involved should be held to account. That isn't in dispute.

What is in dispute is your attempt to hijack the discussion by forcing it onto a very specific case that is plainly off topic. This is a thread literally titled Studying Epstein. The tangent you're obsessively pushing belongs in a separate discussion, one that should absolutely happen, just not here.

I genuinely don't know what more you think you're owed at this point.

Unless, of course, your actual position is that in a thread about Epstein, we should stop talking about Trump and Epstein altogether and instead redirect the conversation to other abusers entirely. If that's your argument, state it clearly, because right now this reads less like principled moderation and more like reflexive defence of abusers on your own side, yet again.

And let's not memory-hole the key point you keep dodging. You still refuse to commit to holding Trump accountable, even if the unredacted Epstein files were to incriminate him. Faced with the hypothetical of clear evidence of Trump abusing children, you still can't bring yourself to agree that he should be held to account.

So no, don't dress this up as some good-faith concern for children or process. What you're doing is protecting abusers by running interference for one in particular. The topic-shifting isn't about safeguarding victims, it's about shielding perpetrators.

ProudKangaroo wrote on Feb 11^th, 2026 at 6:48am:



Because Epstein with the blessing of his intelligence agency handlers was supplying girls for the child sex trade.

He  wasn't getting young women in America to traffic them back to America.

If you check out the world's richest man in times past  adnan kashogi,  he was running all the weapons for the Americans,  initially to the Iranians,  then to the Iraqis.
He had billions.
He had no interest in cash.
He did like girls.
The CIA were happy to oblige.
They needed " connectors"
Epstein types.


Epstein had 70 counts of child rape brought against him.
The FBI thought he would rot in jail.

The federal government Washington  stepped in .
Kenneth star and Alan acosta were the prosecutors.
And they secretly scrapped all the charges.
Why.
Because he worked for the intelligence agencirsvdoing very seedy things.


We are being served up useful idiots
Gates, Andrew, Musk, branson, pinker attia, lutnick.

Maxwell said there were 30 big players in the network.
I would bet not one has been named.


When I get time I am going to do a post on how the CIA ordered the murder of 2 children on a Forrest who accidentally came across the cia and pilot Barry seal unloading cocaine in Arkansas.
Bill Clinton  as governor and Ronald Regan as president were later informed of this cover up when the parents demanded an autopsy.

The intelligence agency are fine with child murder.
They are fine with Epstein victims being told to piss off
And they are fine with child trafficking to regimes that like young girls and boys.

And like it or not, it is mainly rich middle eastern states that value young girls and boys.


Try and make it all about Trump if you want.
Be a useful idiot for the intelligence agencies.
I'm sure they love your work and simplistic thinking 

Do you really think the intelligence agencies didn't know about Epstein
He was flying presidents around.
That alone would trigger interest

Nothing yet to link Trump with the young girls of Epstein or even his island or love express?

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/the-facts-and-timeline-of-trump-and-epstei...

Oh dear.

When Starr and acosta let Jeff go it was years before DL went to Washington.
Try harder

Melanias purse wrote on Feb 10^th, 2026 at 10:27pm:



So you don't wanna be the hangman?    

MeisterEckhart wrote on Feb 11^th, 2026 at 10:25am:


Silly bollocks.

So all genocide and holocaust studies academics are really Hitlerites. ANyone studying WWII wants to have WWIII. Or doctors studying cancer realy want to give you cancer.

Frank wrote on Feb 11^th, 2026 at 10:42am:

So that's what you're pretending Aquascoot is referring to when calling for studying, eh! Academic research!

And, yes, many, if not most, of those 'studying' Hitler are obsessed with him... and not in an academic way.

Hence, the endless documentaries on him, making him more documented than the years he was alive...

When does 'studying' betray a dark obsession?

MeisterEckhart wrote on Feb 11^th, 2026 at 11:13am:




"I'm a scholar, you are a Doctor of Divinity, he has a dark obsession."

Well, you studied Jabotinsky and Ben Gurion et also you are a, obsessive Zionist jew.  Or are your 'learned pronouncements' apply only to others, never to yourself?