ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags Jeffrey Epstein , Satanism conspiracies

Reply
Old 7th January 2020, 04:48 PM   #801
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Suomi
Posts: 17,931
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
Bearing in mind there has been no trial, the commonly accepted facts are as follows:

  • Epstein started off as a mediocre maths teacher and fired.
  • He has no finance qualifications such as a CPA or MBA.
  • He is not a qualified financial advisor or registered stockbroker or hedge fund manager.
  • His only known 'client' is Les Wexner.
  • Wexner runs Victoria's Secrets lingerie empire using young teenage girls to model the range at 'shows'.
  • Some auditions for these 'lingerie fashion' shows took place at Epstein's NY mansion.
  • This mansion once belonged to Wexner who gave Epstein Powerof Attorney to transfer it to his name, together with the island and other locations.
  • Epstein bought Little St James for a few million bucks with Wexner's money.
  • Epstein's one-time girlfriend Ghislaine Maxwell, the daughter of Robert Maxwell whom many believe was a Mossad agent.
  • The owner of Seagram distillers has a ranch within six miles of Epstein's in New Mexico; no-one else is around for many miles.
  • Seagram's daughter, and multi-billionaire heiress, Sara Bronfman is a leading member of satanic cult LXIVM.
  • LXIVM placed young girls in a school for excellence in Mexico and later procured them to work as sex slaves in NY for Keith Raniere, founder of LXIVM.
  • The inner circle of LXIVM is based on latinised mottos and rituals involving masters and servants, with young women branded with Raniere's initials, or his high priestess' Allison Mack who also branded girls with her initials, as being owned by the cult.
  • Listed in Epstein's 'black book' is not only Prince Andrew but also *Prince Charles*.
  • Prince Charles was a close friend of paedophile procurer Jimmy Savile, who called himself the *eminence grise', who abused over 300 young girls and boys but was never investigated, either.
  • Prince Andrew met Ghislaine Maxwell at Oxford but may also have known Epstein via Prince Charles.
  • Prince Andrew ran a yacht club called Golden Naples Ltd (iirc) which he registered under a false name.
  • Prince Andrew is pictured lying on a yacht surrounded by young women in skimpy swimwear, some topless.
  • Meghan Markle is rumoured to have been a 'yacht girl' and it may have been Prince Andrew who set her up with Prince Harry [it is claimed].
  • Meghan knows secrets about Prince Charles and Prince Andrew which is why she has a hold over the Royal Family [is the grapevine]
  • Epstein was fabulously rich, far richer than his association with Wexner would suggest.
  • The FBI found documents in his safe including a fake Austrian passport with his photo, different name and a Saudi Arabian address.
  • The passport is dated in the 1980's and investigators believe he travelled to various European countries using it, including the UK.
  • The association with Maxwell and his incongruously enormous wealth (net worth at death: $550m), together with Austrian passport indicates he worked as an intelligence agent.
  • The issue of the hundreds of young teenage girls he procured for parties for his middle-aged male high powered 'movers and shakers' friends suggests a blackmailing racket as they were likely filmed in compromising positions with the girls.
  • Epstein aimed to impregnate fifty girls at a time and with leading scientists. Accusers have come forward claiming orgies.
  • Not only did Epstein and Maxwell procure underage girls as well as young adults, they appear to have run a baby making racket (cf Virginia Guiffre).
  • Nobody knows what has happened to all these young girls, many of whom were runaways and from trailer parks.
  • One night in his prison cell, Epstein died from neck injuries compatible with a ligature around his throat.
  • Epstein was in a single cell, when he usually had a companion. The CCTV cameras to his cell door were dead that night, the guards were low-level incompetents who didn't bother with surveillance.

Conclusion: procuring young females for the sexual gratification of married men who are - or were - world leaders, a prime minister, a future POTUS, a former POTUS, a Prince (as alleged by Virginia Guiffre) and top scientists at parties in extremely remote locations in what has been described as underground chambers, with weird themes such as Zorro and Ancient Egypt is what would popularly be described as 'satanic'.

The aim? I would suggest a foreign country interfering in Western values by introducing decadence and depraved behaviour as the norm, thus aiming to bring down civilisation as we know it and introducing an 'anything goes' ethos, based on sex slavery, sex with underage teenagers, sex trafficking, prostitution, eugenics and money laundering. All the things the law enforcement agencies are supposed to be clamping down on.

Epstein may have been taken out by a counter-espionage agent (the CIA...?) terrified that what comes out at his trial could bring down the British Royal Family, the US POTUS, members of Congress and top attorneys, not to mention all kinds of Nobel prize-winning scientists.
Ta-da! What did I tell you? Now on the cards Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are to give up their royal titles and move to Canada (so they claim but I reckon it'll be sunny California, USA) for good.

Chickens come home to roost. She no longer has a hold over Prince Andrew as his secret is out.

Quote:
Harry and Meghan’s official staff will remain at Buckingham Palace.

But the couple are expected to work closely with the controversial US PR company Sunshine Sachs to launch the Sussex Royal Foundation in the coming months.

The friend added: “They took a genuine break over Christmas. But they are back working and planning the launch of the Sussex Royal Foundation and Sunshine Sachs are involved in that.”

The decisions Harry and Meghan make are likely to be highly controversial and unconventional, with some courtiers worrying it could essentially see the couple “exile themselves from the royal family”.
She is a close friend of Ron Burkle (listed in Epstein's 'Black Book') and managed by Marcus Anderson of SoHo house. Epstein helped start the Clinton Foundation/Global Initiative. DING! DING! DING! Some of you will recall that Meghan launched her 'humanitarian' career being invited to talk at one of these conferences. Prince Harry seems to have stopped with his ridiculous 'horned Ba'al' signs with his fingers.
__________________
Blott en dag, ett ogonblick i sander,
vilken trost vad an som kommer pa! ~ L Sandell
Vixen is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th January 2020, 06:49 PM   #802
LondonJohn
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 14,584
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
Ta-da! What did I tell you? Now on the cards Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are to give up their royal titles and move to Canada (so they claim but I reckon it'll be sunny California, USA) for good.

Chickens come home to roost. She no longer has a hold over Prince Andrew as his secret is out.



She is a close friend of Ron Burkle (listed in Epstein's 'Black Book') and managed by Marcus Anderson of SoHo house. Epstein helped start the Clinton Foundation/Global Initiative. DING! DING! DING! Some of you will recall that Meghan launched her 'humanitarian' career being invited to talk at one of these conferences. Prince Harry seems to have stopped with his ridiculous 'horned Ba'al' signs with his fingers.


What do you mean by your "What did I tell you?" triumphalism?

In the midst of all your wild conspiracy-theorising, I don't remember you ever saying that the Sussexes would move to North America - far less that they would move there because of something to do with the Epstein affair.

I know people who have decent connections into both Charles' and William's/Harry's press offices, and it's long been known that Meghan has been pressing Harry hard for a move to North America. As you allude to, Meghan's preference would definitely be for the USA, but the compromise is Canada (over which the monarchy still has dominion with the British monarch as its Head of State, after all). But there's never been any link between this desired move and the Epstein case. Rather, it's driven by Meghan feeling like a fish out of water in the UK (and her quickly growing a strong dislike for the constant media surveillance of their lives), and Harry feeling that he's failed to create a role for himself in the UK.

Now, the matter of Meghan's former *ahem* "employment" is certainly up for interrogation - and I understand that a) she did indeed work as a high-end escort, and b) she did indeed meet Harry first within that capacity, at a large party (though of course Harry's press office have manufactured a palatable alternative "truth" to that meeting....). But there's never been any linkage whatsoever between this and the Epstein affair - and there's no reason whatsoever why there should be one.
LondonJohn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th January 2020, 07:03 PM   #803
LondonJohn
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 14,584
Oh and the other factor driving the Sussexes' desire to move to North America is this: I understand that a few months after Philip dies (he's apparently got a terminal diagnosis and is expected to die either this year or next), The Queen will abdicate the throne to Charles. Charles in turn will make an announcement that he intends to rule for a fixed maximum period of either 5 or 10 years, and then abdicate the throne to William.

Those two things will focus public attention not only onto Charles but also onto William, who is expected to greatly increase his public profile and his public work. This will inevitably leave Harry looking - in a much greater way than at present - sidelined and somewhat irrelevant. Harry's people also think he's on something of a hiding to nothing in the UK: he rarely gets much credit for anything "good" that he does, while attracting quick criticism for everything he gets wrong.

One interesting factor - assuming that the Sussexes do end up moving to Canada - is what (if anything) Harry's official role might be. He cannot and will not hold any monarchy-proxy positions (i.e. Governor General or any of the leutenant governors of the provinces), since these have for decades now been chosen by the Canadian government and not the monarch, and only Canadians are now appointed to these posts. His only likely option, therefore, will be to head up some sort of significant charitable foundation.
LondonJohn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th January 2020, 07:37 PM   #804
BStrong
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 12,713
The crazy world of this thread and the conspiracy theory string model gets bigger every day with no facts in evidence.
__________________
Music is what feelings sound like

"Dulce bellum inexpertīs." - Erasmus
BStrong is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th January 2020, 02:12 AM   #805
Cosmic Yak
Illuminator
 
Cosmic Yak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Where there's never a road broader than the back of your hand.
Posts: 3,119
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
Ta-da! Prince Harry seems to have stopped with his ridiculous 'horned Ba'al' signs with his fingers.
The what now?
__________________
Fortuna Faveat Fatuis
Cosmic Yak is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th January 2020, 05:43 AM   #806
eerok
Quixoticist
 
eerok's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 1,883
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
Prince Harry seems to have stopped with his ridiculous 'horned Ba'al' signs with his fingers.
I don't doubt that he still gives some people the 'unicorn'.
__________________
"Every saint has a past and every sinner has a future." - Oscar Wilde

Last edited by eerok; 8th January 2020 at 05:44 AM.
eerok is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th January 2020, 05:52 AM   #807
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 87,715
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
You don't think sweaty middle-aged men having orgies with young teens in the remotest of bunkers is satanic?
What, exactly, is you definition of "satanic"?

You're not making any sense here.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th January 2020, 08:00 AM   #808
carlitos
"más divertido"
 
carlitos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 21,007
Originally Posted by LondonJohn View Post



Now, the matter of Meghan's former *ahem* "employment" ...
I really do not want to Google this. Are you being serious here? She was an actress on “suits,” right?
carlitos is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th January 2020, 09:23 AM   #809
LondonJohn
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 14,584
Originally Posted by carlitos View Post
I really do not want to Google this. Are you being serious here? She was an actress on “suits,” right?


She was. But it seems that she was also leveraging this (minor) celebrity in the secretive - but very much in-existence - world of Hollywood "companion services". There is a market comprising wealthy men (usually either tech executives, Russian oligarchs, or Middle Eastern/Far Eastern men of money) who will spend large amounts of money for a night or a weekend with a young woman who has achieved some level of fame/success in modelling or film/TV. This practice has become colloquially known as "yachting" - on account of what some believe to be the genesis of the industry: the hiring of these sorts of young women to mingle at parties held on yachts by their wealthy owners, where it was often customary for additional "services" to be sought and delivered.
LondonJohn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th January 2020, 10:10 AM   #810
Jack by the hedge
Safely Ignored
 
Jack by the hedge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 9,921
Getting paid to turn up and mingle with rich people at parties is somewhere on a very, very wide spectrum from celebrity guest appearance to high class call girl. Everyone across that spectrum gets paid, but they don't all provide quite the same services.

Obviously if you're sufficiently well known from TV, you would be risking your career if you were spotted doing anything which might get you blackmailed or the story sold.
Jack by the hedge is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th January 2020, 01:03 PM   #811
BStrong
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 12,713
Originally Posted by LondonJohn View Post
snipped

Now, the matter of Meghan's former *ahem* "employment" is certainly up for interrogation - and I understand that a) she did indeed work as a high-end escort, and b) she did indeed meet Harry first within that capacity, at a large party (though of course Harry's press office have manufactured a palatable alternative "truth" to that meeting....). But there's never been any linkage whatsoever between this and the Epstein affair - and there's no reason whatsoever why there should be one.
Going back at least to the 1940's every beautiful actress that came down the pike has been accused of either sleeping her way into stardom or sleeping her way into hollywood or just plain hooking.

It's true in some cases, but it's far from clear that MM worked as an escort.

The days are long gone where someone famous can have much of a secret life - their is no Fred Otash to keep someone's vids off the 'net, and few folks involved in "the life" today would hesitate to out a famous actor or actress that worked their side of the street.
__________________
Music is what feelings sound like

"Dulce bellum inexpertīs." - Erasmus
BStrong is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th January 2020, 01:24 PM   #812
Cain
Straussian
 
Cain's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 13,285
I wish the conspiracy theory about Epstein's alleged "murder" were its own thread rather than getting folded into this "Satanic Ring." A couple of months ago, 45% of Americans believed he was assassinated, and that's probably even higher today.
__________________
April 13th, 2018:
Ranb: I can't think of anything useful you contributed to a thread in the last few years.
Cain is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th January 2020, 04:38 PM   #813
LondonJohn
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 14,584
Originally Posted by BStrong View Post
Going back at least to the 1940's every beautiful actress that came down the pike has been accused of either sleeping her way into stardom or sleeping her way into hollywood or just plain hooking.

It's true in some cases, but it's far from clear that MM worked as an escort.

The days are long gone where someone famous can have much of a secret life - their is no Fred Otash to keep someone's vids off the 'net, and few folks involved in "the life" today would hesitate to out a famous actor or actress that worked their side of the street.


Oh no, it very much DOES exist. I have second-hand knowledge to that effect. A reasonable minority of B/C-list film & TV actresses, along with others such as Victoria's Secret models, do effectively supplement their "normal" income by selling themselves as escorts to high-net-worth men.

The reason it's not widely known is simply because it's a closed system in which nobody within that system has anything to gain by divulging what's going on ("first rule of fight club" and all that). The high-net-worth men love the fact that they can buy sexual access to these sorts of women - and it feeds their egos and their sense of power to feel that they are the privileged few to be able to enjoy such an experience. The women involved don't want wider public knowledge of what they're doing..... for obvious reasons. And the media - even if they wanted to expose what was going on - really could not do so, since the gateways to entry to these circles are so exclusive, so highly-priced, and so highly-controlled.

Though I'm confident that if you google "yacht girls", you'll get some reasonably sober (i.e. non-hysterical, non-conspiratorial) information on the issue. It's going on.


ETA: You talk about "the days (being) long gone when....". Yet only about 15-20 years ago, the public were, for years and years, wholly unaware of the thriving, well-established businesses of the likes of Heidi Fleiss and her prostitution rings, and their client bases which included many of Hollywood's most high-profile stars. And those rings only ever came to public attention because the authorities were eventually able to infiltrate and expose the operations from the bottom up. Indeed, that's arguably one of the reasons why the "yachting" industry rose up in its place: there IS no "bottom rung" in the yachting system. Now, there's nobody within the system who has any incentive for exposing what's going on, and there's very little prospect of media or law enforcement agencies being able to infiltrate or expose their activities.

Last edited by LondonJohn; 8th January 2020 at 04:51 PM.
LondonJohn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th January 2020, 04:42 PM   #814
LondonJohn
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 14,584
Originally Posted by Jack by the hedge View Post
Getting paid to turn up and mingle with rich people at parties is somewhere on a very, very wide spectrum from celebrity guest appearance to high class call girl. Everyone across that spectrum gets paid, but they don't all provide quite the same services.

Obviously if you're sufficiently well known from TV, you would be risking your career if you were spotted doing anything which might get you blackmailed or the story sold.


Like I said in my previous post, the point is that nobody within the closed system would benefit in any way from anything like blackmailing or selling stories. The women (and their brokers) get extremely well paid for what they provide. And the men who pay for these services also obviously have no reason to tell the wider world what's going on. And it's much more than being paid to mingle at parties. It's almost always sexual activity.
LondonJohn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th January 2020, 04:55 PM   #815
LondonJohn
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 14,584
Originally Posted by Cain View Post
I wish the conspiracy theory about Epstein's alleged "murder" were its own thread rather than getting folded into this "Satanic Ring." A couple of months ago, 45% of Americans believed he was assassinated, and that's probably even higher today.


That's because Americans (and, to be fair, most general populi) are easily-led masses who are easily sold stories of conspiracy and "big-government deception" and so on.

Epstein committed suicide. Just like JFK was shot by Oswald acting alone. Just like RFK was shot by Sirhan Sirhan acting alone. Just like 9/11 was planned and executed by a small number of islamist terrorists who were largely fininced by Saudi interests.
LondonJohn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th January 2020, 10:03 AM   #816
BStrong
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 12,713
Originally Posted by LondonJohn View Post
That's because Americans (and, to be fair, most general populi) are easily-led masses who are easily sold stories of conspiracy and "big-government deception" and so on.

Epstein committed suicide. Just like JFK was shot by Oswald acting alone. Just like RFK was shot by Sirhan Sirhan acting alone. Just like 9/11 was planned and executed by a small number of islamist terrorists who were largely fininced by Saudi interests.
Proving yet again that for some people, conspiracies are just like potato chips - they can't stop at just one.
__________________
Music is what feelings sound like

"Dulce bellum inexpertīs." - Erasmus
BStrong is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th January 2020, 10:06 AM   #817
carlitos
"más divertido"
 
carlitos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 21,007
Originally Posted by LondonJohn View Post
Like I said in my previous post, the point is that nobody within the closed system would benefit in any way from anything like blackmailing or selling stories. The women (and their brokers) get extremely well paid for what they provide. And the men who pay for these services also obviously have no reason to tell the wider world what's going on. And it's much more than being paid to mingle at parties. It's almost always sexual activity.
Other than "google yacht girl" or "I have secondhand info" is there any evidence for your claim that our fair princess was a prostitute?
carlitos is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th January 2020, 10:50 AM   #818
BStrong
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 12,713
Originally Posted by carlitos View Post
Other than "google yacht girl" or "I have secondhand info" is there any evidence for your claim that our fair princess was a prostitute?
Sadly, there is evidence that actresses and female vocalists resorted to prostitution - on the way down from their stardom, not on the way up.

Barbra Payton:

https://www.foxnews.com/entertainmen...use-alcoholism

Natalie Cole:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natali...e_and_recovery

I'd advise interested parties to google Fred Otash for a glimpse into the way the world worked before the 'net, social media and surveillance camera society as it is today.

The likely hood of any actress/model/whatever finding fame and keeping a sex worker life secret is -0- in today's world.
__________________
Music is what feelings sound like

"Dulce bellum inexpertīs." - Erasmus
BStrong is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th January 2020, 02:56 PM   #819
abaddon
Penultimate Amazing
 
abaddon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 19,441
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
Ta-da! What did I tell you? Now on the cards Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are to give up their royal titles and move to Canada (so they claim but I reckon it'll be sunny California, USA) for good.

Chickens come home to roost. She no longer has a hold over Prince Andrew as his secret is out.



She is a close friend of Ron Burkle (listed in Epstein's 'Black Book') and managed by Marcus Anderson of SoHo house. Epstein helped start the Clinton Foundation/Global Initiative. DING! DING! DING! Some of you will recall that Meghan launched her 'humanitarian' career being invited to talk at one of these conferences. Prince Harry seems to have stopped with his ridiculous 'horned Ba'al' signs with his fingers.
Or perhaps she is fed up with prodnoses making her and Harry's lives a misery. I know I would be.

Personally, I am happy for Harry taking a stand to live his own life unconstrained by the trammels of courtly life. When one considers it, being a royal is a life sentence without parole to never being YOURSELF. Never being ones-self. Never being quite human with all of the flaws pertaining to just being a person.

And I really struggle to believe that anyone in the 21st century takes any of this "satanic" superstitious crap seriously. 'horned Ba'al' signs? Grow up.
__________________
Who is General Failure? And why is he reading my hard drive?


...love and buttercakes...
abaddon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th January 2020, 06:30 PM   #820
Axxman300
Illuminator
 
Axxman300's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Central California Coast
Posts: 4,259
This doesn't help things:

https://www.nydailynews.com/new-york...ft5qKGaBAAFHmw

Quote:
Swergold said last month in White Plains Federal Court that the video had not been preserved. He reversed himself less than 24 hours later, saying it had been archived.

Now, the feds say that due to a record-keeping error, MCC staff preserved footage from outside the wrong cell — and the Epstein footage is gone.
Yup, definitely a crackerjack crew working there.
__________________
Disingenuous Piranha
Axxman300 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th January 2020, 09:03 PM   #821
Gord_in_Toronto
Penultimate Amazing
 
Gord_in_Toronto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 18,860
Originally Posted by abaddon View Post
Or perhaps she is fed up with prodnoses making her and Harry's lives a misery. I know I would be.

Personally, I am happy for Harry taking a stand to live his own life unconstrained by the trammels of courtly life. When one considers it, being a royal is a life sentence without parole to never being YOURSELF. Never being ones-self. Never being quite human with all of the flaws pertaining to just being a person.

And I really struggle to believe that anyone in the 21st century takes any of this "satanic" superstitious crap seriously. 'horned Ba'al' signs? Grow up.
My wife and I are just catching up with The Crown on Netflix. Being a participating member of the Royal Family is a full-time job.

I wonder if Harry and Meghan were binge watching it over their Christmas vacation in BC?
__________________
"Reality is what's left when you cease to believe." Philip K. Dick
Gord_in_Toronto is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th January 2020, 01:50 AM   #822
LondonJohn
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 14,584
Originally Posted by BStrong View Post
The likely hood of any actress/model/whatever finding fame and keeping a sex worker life secret is -0- in today's world.


Well firstly, would you have said that the likelihood of famous Hollywood male actors being regular clients of high-end prostitution rackets was -0- througout the 1990s?

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/ne...zemore-1117449


And secondly, and pertaining directly to the matter of reasonably well-known (say, B-list or C-list) actresses (and models etc) working as high-end sex workers "in today's world" (my bolding for emphasis):

Women installed on yachts in Cannes during the film festival are called “yacht girls,” and the line between professional prostitutes and B- or C-list Hollywood actresses and models who accept payment for sex with rich older men is sometimes very blurred, explains one film industry veteran.

https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood...cannes-escorts

(article published in 2013)
LondonJohn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th January 2020, 01:54 AM   #823
LondonJohn
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 14,584
Originally Posted by carlitos View Post
Other than "google yacht girl" or "I have secondhand info" is there any evidence for your claim that our fair princess was a prostitute?


No. But that's the nature of the beast. These sorts of things tend not to get documented unless/until they happen to be exposed for some reason. I'm just telling you what I know from people whom I consider to be very good and very reputable sources. Feel free to judge it on that merit, and feel free to disregard or reject it if you like.
LondonJohn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th January 2020, 07:56 AM   #824
carlitos
"más divertido"
 
carlitos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 21,007
Originally Posted by LondonJohn View Post
No. But that's the nature of the beast. These sorts of things tend not to get documented unless/until they happen to be exposed for some reason. I'm just telling you what I know from people whom I consider to be very good and very reputable sources. Feel free to judge it on that merit, and feel free to disregard or reject it if you like.
This being a skeptics forum, the lack of evidence to support your claim means that I will disregard it.
carlitos is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th January 2020, 09:58 AM   #825
Lithrael
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,656
Is this supposed to be like how the con girls don’t rat out which b and c list con guests are a bit slutty?
Lithrael is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th January 2020, 09:00 PM   #826
BStrong
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 12,713
Originally Posted by LondonJohn View Post
Well firstly, would you have said that the likelihood of famous Hollywood male actors being regular clients of high-end prostitution rackets was -0- througout the 1990s?

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/ne...zemore-1117449


And secondly, and pertaining directly to the matter of reasonably well-known (say, B-list or C-list) actresses (and models etc) working as high-end sex workers "in today's world" (my bolding for emphasis):

Women installed on yachts in Cannes during the film festival are called “yacht girls,” and the line between professional prostitutes and B- or C-list Hollywood actresses and models who accept payment for sex with rich older men is sometimes very blurred, explains one film industry veteran.

https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood...cannes-escorts

(article published in 2013)
The problem here is that evidently your pov on the subject is formed by trusted sources and news reports.

My pov is formed by 15 years as a working cop, and something that I believe I've mentioned before on ISF, in non-specific terms

At one point in my post-military pre-LE career I was waiting on a security clearance that was held up by the fact that a branch of my family were/are involved in crime, and that was an understandable issue, one that was eventually overcome.

There are more parts to that story than my NOLA cousins lowlife criminal activities.

Right here on the S.F. peninsula, family by marriage were deeply involved with prostitution:






There's more on Newspapers.com if you have an account - search for San Mateo Times, 1970 - 1990 Prostitution Easy Street

This is stuff that I'm not proud of. I was away in the army when this part of it went down, but "Uncle Sal" fought off city and county authorities for years before the San Mateo city ran him out and his Redwood City location ran into the 1990's.

I'm not proud of this either. I saw the sights in the Zona Rosa in Salvador and I've been to Amsterdam and elsewhere and paid for sex. The fact that I was single when I did it doesn't mitigate my regret.

This part I'm not ashamed of, but I have regret for the other party involved. I had a long term relationship with a woman who worked as a legal prostitute in Nevada. Her work didn't disturb me, but as the facts of her exploitation by her family members became clear to me - interestingly not by her employer - I couldn't deal with her reality and what she was being used for.

The above all went down before I was otj, and it was there that I saw the full monty truth about how the actors in the life used each other and anyone they could possibly work an angle on - this "Happy Hooker" ******** and "gentleman of means" buying the services of beautiful, articulate courtesans is complete ******** - this is closer to reality:

https://www.thedailybeast.com/call-g...overdose-death

Alix Tichelman served three years for the overdose death of a wealthy Google executive on a yacht in California. Now she’s been indicted on murder charges for the death of an ex.

As far as your yacht girls reference, to me it's just another run-of-the-mill misogynistic pov that all attractive women are for sale, the only difference is in the final price.
__________________
Music is what feelings sound like

"Dulce bellum inexpertīs." - Erasmus
BStrong is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th January 2020, 08:31 AM   #827
carlitos
"más divertido"
 
carlitos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 21,007
Thank you for sharing that, BStrong.
carlitos is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th January 2020, 08:36 AM   #828
Thermal
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: God's own NJ USA
Posts: 9,288
I am soooooooo waiting for Beyesian probability to factor into this.
__________________
Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect -Mark Twain

Truth is not what you want it to be; it is what it is, and you must bend to its power or live a lie -Miyamoto Musashi
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th January 2020, 06:18 AM   #829
Jack by the hedge
Safely Ignored
 
Jack by the hedge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 9,921
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
I am soooooooo waiting for Beyesian probability to factor into this.
Or indeed satan.
Jack by the hedge is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th January 2020, 01:29 PM   #830
Craig4
Penultimate Amazing
 
Craig4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Alexandria, VA Home to the Deep State.
Posts: 19,462
Originally Posted by Jack by the hedge View Post
Or indeed satan.
I was noticing that too. It seems odd that the evidence for satanism lacks references to satanism.
__________________
A MAGA hat = a Swastika arm band. A vote for Trump is a vote for treason.
Craig4 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th January 2020, 03:22 PM   #831
LondonJohn
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 14,584
Originally Posted by BStrong View Post
The problem here is that evidently your pov on the subject is formed by trusted sources and news reports.

My pov is formed by 15 years as a working cop, and something that I believe I've mentioned before on ISF, in non-specific terms

At one point in my post-military pre-LE career I was waiting on a security clearance that was held up by the fact that a branch of my family were/are involved in crime, and that was an understandable issue, one that was eventually overcome.

There are more parts to that story than my NOLA cousins lowlife criminal activities.

Right here on the S.F. peninsula, family by marriage were deeply involved with prostitution:

http://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/640...922/GmzuR2.jpg
http://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/640...923/1a5Ftw.jpg

http://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/640...923/pdzEby.jpg

There's more on Newspapers.com if you have an account - search for San Mateo Times, 1970 - 1990 Prostitution Easy Street

This is stuff that I'm not proud of. I was away in the army when this part of it went down, but "Uncle Sal" fought off city and county authorities for years before the San Mateo city ran him out and his Redwood City location ran into the 1990's.

I'm not proud of this either. I saw the sights in the Zona Rosa in Salvador and I've been to Amsterdam and elsewhere and paid for sex. The fact that I was single when I did it doesn't mitigate my regret.

This part I'm not ashamed of, but I have regret for the other party involved. I had a long term relationship with a woman who worked as a legal prostitute in Nevada. Her work didn't disturb me, but as the facts of her exploitation by her family members became clear to me - interestingly not by her employer - I couldn't deal with her reality and what she was being used for.

The above all went down before I was otj, and it was there that I saw the full monty truth about how the actors in the life used each other and anyone they could possibly work an angle on - this "Happy Hooker" ******** and "gentleman of means" buying the services of beautiful, articulate courtesans is complete ******** - this is closer to reality:

https://www.thedailybeast.com/call-g...overdose-death

Alix Tichelman served three years for the overdose death of a wealthy Google executive on a yacht in California. Now she’s been indicted on murder charges for the death of an ex.

As far as your yacht girls reference, to me it's just another run-of-the-mill misogynistic pov that all attractive women are for sale, the only difference is in the final price.


Hmm. Interesting (I'm pretty confident I don't have any similar personal family connections to the practice)... but somewhat, erm, peripheral to the subject under discussion. Which is whether or not a) it's feasible that there's a "hidden" practice of reasonably well-known (but not superstar) US female actors and models working as very expensive escorts, and b) there's any evidence of any sort to support that notion (which, if it's "hidden", is likely to be slightly harder to find in any case).

I find your last sentence personally offensive by the way. I am doing nothing more than repeating things that I've heard from people whom I trust (and whom I also do not regard as holding "run-of-the-mill misogynistic PoVs") and from the limited amount of media reportage. If you or others choose to conclude that what I've written doesn't meet your standard of proof, I entirely understand that. Indeed I'd expect it. All I was ever saying was that I'd come to understand information about it, and it was information which also tended to be supported to a degree by that Vanity Fair article I linked to above.

But please don't go accusing me of holding misogynistic views, OK?

Last edited by LondonJohn; 12th January 2020 at 03:39 PM.
LondonJohn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th January 2020, 03:32 PM   #832
LondonJohn
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 14,584
Originally Posted by carlitos View Post
This being a skeptics forum, the lack of evidence to support your claim means that I will disregard it.


And that of course is fair enough. I am not requesting that others take it as truth. Indeed, I myself do not take it as truth. But I do consider that my knowledge came from reputable sources (who of course may themselves also have been misled....). And I deemed it appropriate to the debate to raise the matter in respect of what I'd heard about Markle. As I say, I never a) presented evidence to prove ("on a skeptics (sic) forum" lol) that Markle certainly pursued this line of work, and b) never requested/demanded that anyone (including myself) came to that conclusion in any kind of definitive manner.

On a "skeptics (sic) forum" (lol) I suppose I might have expected to receive the following kind of response: "That's interesting, and I guess it may be the case (and if so, it'd certainly be germane to the situation), but I think you'd agree that there isn't sufficient reliable evidence to reach that conclusion with any degree of certainty. Perhaps more will come out in the future, or perhaps not". But, y'know...... skeptics and all (lol)

Not directly related to the quoted post, but it never ceases to amuse me how so many people seem to think that posting on a "sceptics' website" (which literally anyone in the entire world can join and post to) somehow necessarily imbues one with genuine sceptical thinking skills.....


(PS: are we all - BStrong included - disregarding that Vanity Fair article which I quoted and linked..... or is that also part of the "run-of-the-mill misogynistic PoV"....?)

Last edited by LondonJohn; 12th January 2020 at 03:45 PM.
LondonJohn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th January 2020, 01:56 AM   #833
Cosmic Yak
Illuminator
 
Cosmic Yak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Where there's never a road broader than the back of your hand.
Posts: 3,119
Originally Posted by Craig4 View Post
I was noticing that too. It seems odd that the evidence for satanism lacks references to satanism.
Oh, come on. We're overrun with cushions and sundials, not to mention cockatoos.
How much more Satanism do you need?
__________________
Fortuna Faveat Fatuis
Cosmic Yak is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th January 2020, 07:53 AM   #834
carlitos
"más divertido"
 
carlitos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 21,007
Originally Posted by LondonJohn View Post
And that of course is fair enough. I am not requesting that others take it as truth. Indeed, I myself do not take it as truth. But I do consider that my knowledge came from reputable sources (who of course may themselves also have been misled....). And I deemed it appropriate to the debate to raise the matter in respect of what I'd heard about Markle. As I say, I never a) presented evidence to prove ("on a skeptics (sic) forum" lol) that Markle certainly pursued this line of work, and b) never requested/demanded that anyone (including myself) came to that conclusion in any kind of definitive manner.
You heard a rumor. You repeated that rumor here. You have no evidence to support it. If you were a journalist, you'd be rightfully be sued for libel and lose. Hedging your defamatory, libelous BS by saying that you "never requested/demanded that anyone" believe you is just a load of passive-aggressive crap. You should be ashamed of yourself, honestly. "I'm not saying you have to believe me, but I heard this rumor" is just a way to repeat salacious stories here without having to defend your argument.

Since we are on a skeptics forum, I'll note that I have seen this type of argument here before, from believers in God, UFOs, bigfoot and mysticism. They tell me that they have seen evidence, but I don't have to believe it myself.

Originally Posted by LondonJohn View Post
On a "skeptics (sic) forum" (lol) I suppose I might have expected to receive the following kind of response: "That's interesting, and I guess it may be the case (and if so, it'd certainly be germane to the situation), but I think you'd agree that there isn't sufficient reliable evidence to reach that conclusion with any degree of certainty. Perhaps more will come out in the future, or perhaps not". But, y'know...... skeptics and all (lol)
But it's not interesting. You are asserting that a general category of things (yacht girls who prostitute themselves) exists, and have somehow deduced that Megan Markle was one of them. You have provided ZERO evidence for this claim. Not even "ordinary" evidence for your extraordinary claim. Literally you claim to have the quality of evidence along the lines of "guy at the pub told me" a thing about a goddamn British princess being a former call girl and you post it here? Go on, then:

"extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" - got any?


Originally Posted by LondonJohn View Post
Not directly related to the quoted post, but it never ceases to amuse me how so many people seem to think that posting on a "sceptics' website" (which literally anyone in the entire world can join and post to) somehow necessarily imbues one with genuine sceptical thinking skills.....



Originally Posted by LondonJohn View Post
(PS: are we all - BStrong included - disregarding that Vanity Fair article which I quoted and linked..... or is that also part of the "run-of-the-mill misogynistic PoV"....?)
That article did not mention Ms. Markle.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg where is megan.jpg (36.7 KB, 10 views)
carlitos is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th January 2020, 12:35 PM   #835
Mycroft
High Priest of Ed
 
Mycroft's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 19,702
Originally Posted by carlitos View Post
You heard a rumor. You repeated that rumor here. You have no evidence to support it. If you were a journalist, you'd be rightfully be sued for libel and lose. Hedging your defamatory, libelous BS by saying that you "never requested/demanded that anyone" believe you is just a load of passive-aggressive crap. You should be ashamed of yourself, honestly. "I'm not saying you have to believe me, but I heard this rumor" is just a way to repeat salacious stories here without having to defend your argument.
Meh, I don't have any objection to someone giving their personal experience without being able to offer proof. Just because I witnessed something doesn't necessarily mean I can prove I witnessed it, but it's still a part of my story.

Originally Posted by carlitos View Post
That article did not mention Ms. Markle.
Yes. It's important to note that knowing something happens isn't evidence that it happened at a particular place and time with a particular person. I know prostitutes exist, but that's no reason to claim your mom is one. Too often conspiracy kooks don't get that.
Mycroft is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th January 2020, 01:11 PM   #836
Elagabalus
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 5,160
Originally Posted by Craig4 View Post
I was noticing that too. It seems odd that the evidence for satanism lacks references to satanism.


You guys just aren't getting it! Epstein's Island hideaway/underground lair-Submarine Base has Satan literally written all over it!

Epstein never mentioned Satan because Epstein didn't know that he (Epstein) was under Satan's spell. That's how good* Satan is!



*eh ... that's how good Satan is AT BEING BAD!!
Elagabalus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th January 2020, 01:41 PM   #837
BStrong
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 12,713
Originally Posted by LondonJohn View Post
Hmm. Interesting (I'm pretty confident I don't have any similar personal family connections to the practice)... but somewhat, erm, peripheral to the subject under discussion. Which is whether or not a) it's feasible that there's a "hidden" practice of reasonably well-known (but not superstar) US female actors and models working as very expensive escorts, and b) there's any evidence of any sort to support that notion (which, if it's "hidden", is likely to be slightly harder to find in any case).

I find your last sentence personally offensive by the way. I am doing nothing more than repeating things that I've heard from people whom I trust (and whom I also do not regard as holding "run-of-the-mill misogynistic PoVs") and from the limited amount of media reportage. If you or others choose to conclude that what I've written doesn't meet your standard of proof, I entirely understand that. Indeed I'd expect it. All I was ever saying was that I'd come to understand information about it, and it was information which also tended to be supported to a degree by that Vanity Fair article I linked to above.

But please don't go accusing me of holding misogynistic views, OK?
1. The actual subject of this thread is "Did Epstein run a World Satanic Ring?"

The OP themselves broadened the discussion to a range of nutty assertions regarding their perception of what constitutes evidence for that premise.

You are the poster that brought prostitution into the discussion.

2. That's too bad. I'm to the point in my life where hearing or reading material that denigrates women - and your gossip does just that - doesn't get a free pass.

I could go on ad infinitum about prostitution in general and the symbiotic relationship between LE and prostitutes as sources of information or how prostitution works irl at the level you're speculating on but this thread has already gone into the twilight zone and I doubt that real information on the subject would be to your liking.

WRT misogyny, anyone that speculates about a women being a prostitute based on attractiveness, mode of dress or social standing is a misogynist, period. The fact that prostitution exists and females are known to work as prostitutes, even very beautiful women, does not make speculation that a beautiful woman is a prostitute absent actual evidence a valid path of inquiry.

This is definitely OT in this thread, but my general experience with attractive women is that there is always someone, often another woman, that assigns all manner of negative characteristics to the individual in question based solely on their appearance.

Case in point.

I have a woman friend who I met when she went looking for professional instruction in marksmanship. She was working with a woman of my acquaintance through business and she put us in contact..

Our friendship (and I've known her for 10 + years) is pretty much based on her service as an officer in The Air Force. She left the AF and went to work for NASA, got an advanced degree and her life was exactly as she had hoped, right up till the time NASA was dee-funded on her project and that was it.

What could the above have to do with this discussion?

Her great crime, aside from being a woman in a man's world, is that she's drop dead beautiful. Her nickname in the company she worked for with my other lady friend was "princess (whatever?)" a reference to a Disney cartoon character she supposedly resembles greatly. She is very smart and plain spoken. In certain circles those are not considered positive attributes for a beautiful woman, by both men and women.

This woman is 30 + years younger than I am. We have never gone in the direction of any relationship past friendship and although we have a great relationship as friends, I know she is absolutely not looking for a romantic relationship was a busted up old cop.

When she got into training seriously with me, we shot every Friday. afternoon

One of the new hires at our facility upon getting a look at her, before being introduced and before even knowing her name made the observation to another employee that "She must think he (me) has a lot of money."

That's the casual run-of-the-mill misogynist pov that is on display here and elsewhere.
__________________
Music is what feelings sound like

"Dulce bellum inexpertīs." - Erasmus
BStrong is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:50 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.