Judges being reluctant to make a distinction, in the light of the sexual liberation movement, doesn't.
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
The Andrew formerly known as Prince (was: Jeffrey Epstein thread)
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by Tactical Genius View PostNot sure if I agree with this, Paedophilia and men procuring underage girls for sex (I'll suspend comment on the overage prostitutes for now) precedes the sexual liberation movement of the 60's by a few thousand years.
In the UK you wound up with things like the Paedophile information exchange, and you wound up with a bunch of early gay rights activists who had to readjust some of their earlier public positions when they saw past the whole "We are all brothers in oppression." fog.
Comment
-
IHE article on Steven Pinker and his reaction to being connected to Epstein.
https://www.insidehighered.com/news/...9C1UPI.twitter
Comment
-
Originally posted by Lurgee View PostJudges being reluctant to make a distinction, in the light of the sexual liberation movement, doesn't.
Homosexuality
Interracial sexual access
And in many cases both at the same time.
I agree Homosexuality was conflated with Peadophillia, but I assumed that came a bit later like the 80's (i am only in my mid 40's so I could be wrong on this). Regardless, Dirty old men sleeping with underage girls until very recently wasn't taken seriously on the odd occasion it reached court anyway. See all the mitigating statements when Rix went to prison for plying the underage girl with alcohol and weed before sleeping with her.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Tactical Genius View PostHowever, the sexual revolution and free love in the 60's was primarily about two things that would have got you killed previously:
Homosexuality
Interracial sexual access
Comment
-
Originally posted by Tactical Genius View Post
Good point. However, the sexual revolution and free love in the 60's was primarily about two things that would have got you killed previously:
Homosexuality
Interracial sexual access
And in many cases both at the same time.
I agree Homosexuality was conflated with Peadophillia, but I assumed that came a bit later like the 80's (i am only in my mid 40's so I could be wrong on this). Regardless, Dirty old men sleeping with underage girls until very recently wasn't taken seriously on the odd occasion it reached court anyway. See all the mitigating statements when Rix went to prison for plying the underage girl with alcohol and weed before sleeping with her.
i still don't understand why John Peel or Bowie are given free passes, let alone obvious irredeemable sweaty junky wrong uns like Jimmy Page.Last edited by Lang Spoon; 17-07-2019, 23:54.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Tactical Genius View PostI agree Homosexuality was conflated with Peadophillia, but I assumed that came a bit later like the 80's
That Pinker Article is interesting. One thing that I took from it is regardless of whether or not what he says is true, it's that you'd have to be terrified of attending any social function with really rich people, because you don't know which of them is Patrick Bateman, and before you know it, you're in a photograph with the American Psycho. . I was reading an article in New York Magazine about Ghislaine Maxwell (which I can't link to because I burned through my free reads,) but in it there's a picture of Captain Bob's Daughter with Elon Musk at the 2014 Vanity Fair oscars after party. Now in the normal course of events he might know who she is, and of her connection to Jeffrey Epstein, but when this photo is taken he's clearly so drunk that he doesn't know where he is.
Comment
-
Pinker is just the optimistic mirror of Jordan Scientist of the Dolorous Countenance Peterson. With worse hair. A Panglossian Reactionary. Oh how I'd laugh like a drain if he's on an Epstein tape along with WJC, AD, DT and the rest.
Evolutionary Psychology from Lorenz down to this egregious bastard is pure reactionary pish. Up there with Kipling's Just So stories as a scientific theory of How Things Are (so let's not bother fighting for change).Last edited by Lang Spoon; 18-07-2019, 00:23.
Comment
-
See what I mean. You go out for a nice evening of drinking yourself to oblivion, and you end up in a compromising picture. I'd say you must have been at a few social or business events over the years Ursus, where there were people that on balance you are glad that you weren't photographed near, based on what you now know
I must admit that today was very late in the day for me to realise that Epstein's missus was Robert Maxwell's daughter. I suspect that if I had read about this story in the Uk press, that fact would have been considerably more front and centre.Last edited by The Awesome Berbaslug!!!; 18-07-2019, 01:15.
Comment
-
https://twitter.com/KlasfeldReports/status/1151878350706810881
I wonder if he will get the same deal to avoid Rikers Island that Manafort did
Comment
-
The Dersh has an unhinged op-ed talking about a smear campaign against him and a hit job being prepared by the New Yorker. He published it at...Newsmax. Clearly no one else is willing to publish him at this point.
https://donotlink.it/1Klp
Comment
-
Originally posted by Incandenza View PostThe Dersh has an unhinged op-ed talking about a smear campaign against him and a hit job being prepared by the New Yorker. He published it at...Newsmax. Clearly no one else is willing to publish him at this point.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Antepli Ejderha View Posthttps://ahtribune.com/us/3296-did-pe...or-mossad.html
Here's another that links Clinton and Epstein. So much of this appears exaggerated or fake but who knows.
Fuck off cunt.
Comment
-
I hope that Posty was directing his ire at the writer of the article not you, AE. I think if so, he does have a point, there is a bit of dodgy dog whistle stuff going on there, which detracts from the piece (which may or may not have some veracity, as you say)
Comment
-
Originally posted by Antepli Ejderha View Post
First of all have you read what I wrote in linking to that article?
Secondly why launch a personal attack using sexist and degrading language?
Comment
-
By my count, he phrase "Jewish state" is used twice in the article, both times following sentences using the name "Israel". The term "Jewish state" -- which is how Israel identifies itself by law -- might have been used as an editorial device, not as a dogwhistle. Maybe thew "cunt" of Posty Webber's outburst is just an anonymous sub-editor.
Having said that, a phrase like "the effectiveness of Jewish power in Washington" is a bit dodgy. How much that detracts from the central premise of the article, I'd not like to be the judge of.
Comment
Comment