3 ms·

> shadowy cabal of pedophiles elites Its a shame that this used to just be a conspiracy theory one could mostly ignore, but we simply can't pretend that there

by girvo 7mo ago

> shadowy cabal of pedophiles elites Its a shame that this used to just be a conspiracy theory one could mostly ignore, but we simply can't pretend that there isn't rampant CSA by those in power, because we've had proof of it despite their best efforts. Without wanting to get into politics, the leader of the United States right now was friends with the supposed ring-leader... > but what about everyone else pushing for the law but who didn't go? Useful idiots, perhaps? Wanting to protect their own power and gain more? It's certainly not actually about protecting children. Never has been.

pipes 7mo ago
I might be misreading you, but are you saying that the whole Qanon thing isn't a baseless conspiracy theory?
- girvo 7mo ago
  Qanon is absolutely a baseless conspiracy theory. The overall idea that far too many of those in power politically and economically are involved in CSA isn't though, it seems.
  - Dylan16807 7mo ago
    The threshold for "far too many" is like, a single digit number. It's an extremely weak claim. Even if those in power were half as likely to be involved as the average adult, that would still be far too many.
Tarq0n 7mo ago
I don't like the "those in power" framing because it implies that they all participated and that such a homogenous group even exists.
- smallmancontrov 7mo ago
  Yes, and many people have an extreme incentive to retreat to that framing because * In 2024, they had a choice between pedophiles and not pedophiles and chose the pedophiles. * In 2020, they had a choice between pedophiles and not pedophiles and chose the pedophiles. * In 2016, they had a choice between pedophiles and not pedophiles and chose the pedophiles. There was plenty of evidence of this association in 2016 (bragging about creeping into Ms Teen USA dressing rooms, bragging about being Epstein's best friend in the same sentence as acknowledging he's a pedo, victim testimony under oath that he diddled kids, etc etc), so "I didn't know" isn't an excuse if they cared one iota about the children at any step of the way. It should be good news that the powerful pedophiles are largely (but not exclusively) concentrated in one party, but those who put them in power will do anything to avoid admitting culpability.
  - anonym29 7mo ago
    [flagged]
    - smallmancontrov 7mo ago
      Couple small corrections: Hillary has not been implicated by the Epstein files. Not today and not by evidence available in 2016. Biden has not been implicated by the Epstein files. Not today and not by evidence available in 2020. Bonus: not only was Trump implicated in the Epstein files both today and by evidence available in 2016, he was also in charge of every federal prison and every US spook agency in 2019 when Epstein died under mysterious circumstances.
      - anonym29 7mo ago
        I never accused Hillary or Biden of being implicated in the Epstein files. Those aren't corrections, those are non-sequitirs. Bonus: at no point did I refute Trump being a pedophile or being in the Epstein files.
      - gruez 7mo ago
        >Bonus: not only was Trump implicated in the Epstein files both today and by evidence available in 2016, he was also in charge of every federal prison and every US spook agency in 2019 when Epstein died under mysterious circumstances. Who was in charge when Epstein got the sweetheart deal on his first conviction?
- foltik 7mo ago
  In the USA it literally is two homogenous groups though? One of which is majorly complicit in covering up the files, against their constituents’ wishes.
  - scotty79 7mo ago
    I wouldn't even call them two groups. It's just one group ostensibly and publicly split in half, but it's still one group that intermingles behind the courtains.
  - DaSHacka 7mo ago
    I would say both parties are complicit at this point. Keep in mind Epstein died in 2017. We had two GOP terms and one Democrat term from then to now. With what we know from the files that have been released thus far (and how obviously the worst if it has either been shredded or will never see the light of day), the fact they refused to release/prosecute those implicated tells you all you need to know.
gruez 7mo ago
>we simply can't pretend that there isn't rampant CSA by those in power, because we've had proof of it despite their best efforts What's "rampant"? The news coverage provides no shortage of people, but ringing off 100 (or whatever) people that are in the files doesn't say much, even if we make the questionable assumption that inclusion in files implies guilt. I'm sure that everyone would prefer the amount of pedophiles that are in power to 0, but if it's the same rate as the general population that can hardly be considered "rampant", or a "conspiracy". Given some neutral inclusion criteria (eg. members of legislative bodies), is there any evidence they have disproportionate amount of pedophiles? >the leader of the United States right now was friends with the supposed ring-leader... You conveniently omit the fact that they broke up 5 years before he was first convicted. From wikipedia: "Trump had a falling out with Epstein around 2004 and ceased contact. After Epstein was said to have sexually harassed a teenage daughter of another Mar-a-Lago member in 2007, Trump banned him from the club. " >Useful idiots, perhaps? So basically https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_consciousness https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_consciousness? > Wanting to protect their own power and gain more? How does adding age verification help in that? Are they blackmailed by the shadowy cabal? Are they just doing what the voters/lobbyists want? If so, what makes invocation of this reasoning more suitable than for any other political issue? Is everything from tax policy to noise ordinances just something pushed by pedophile elites, helped by useful idiots and people who want to "protect their own power and gain more"?
- theshackleford 7mo ago
  > You conveniently omit the fact that they broke up 5 years before he was first convicted. And? It doesn’t change the reality of the original statement. The president of the United States was friends with the alleged ring leader of a large pedophile network.
  - gruez 7mo ago
    >The president of the United States was friends with the alleged ring leader of a large pedophile network. You're making some leaps logic here here. If someone's outed as a pedophile, everyone who's friends with him should be assumed to be a pedophile? Surely not, given that pedophilia is considered taboo, we'd expect them to hide it, and therefore at least some friends might not be in the know. That's not to say there's no conspirators, but "he was friends with a pedophile therefore he's a pedophile too" is just guilt by association. What you need to prove is that he knew, or ought to have known that his friend was a pedophile. A conviction works decently for this, because it's presumably public knowledge, although even that's questionable because most people don't do a background check on people they met. In the case of Epstien he also hired reputation management firms to suppress his conviction from showing up in the results, which weakens the case even more.

by girvo 7mo ago

pipes 7mo ago

I might be misreading you, but are you saying that the whole Qanon thing isn't a baseless conspiracy theory?

girvo 7mo ago
Qanon is absolutely a baseless conspiracy theory. The overall idea that far too many of those in power politically and economically are involved in CSA isn't though, it seems.
- Dylan16807 7mo ago
  The threshold for "far too many" is like, a single digit number. It's an extremely weak claim. Even if those in power were half as likely to be involved as the average adult, that would still be far too many.

Tarq0n 7mo ago

I don't like the "those in power" framing because it implies that they all participated and that such a homogenous group even exists.

smallmancontrov 7mo ago
Yes, and many people have an extreme incentive to retreat to that framing because * In 2024, they had a choice between pedophiles and not pedophiles and chose the pedophiles. * In 2020, they had a choice between pedophiles and not pedophiles and chose the pedophiles. * In 2016, they had a choice between pedophiles and not pedophiles and chose the pedophiles. There was plenty of evidence of this association in 2016 (bragging about creeping into Ms Teen USA dressing rooms, bragging about being Epstein's best friend in the same sentence as acknowledging he's a pedo, victim testimony under oath that he diddled kids, etc etc), so "I didn't know" isn't an excuse if they cared one iota about the children at any step of the way. It should be good news that the powerful pedophiles are largely (but not exclusively) concentrated in one party, but those who put them in power will do anything to avoid admitting culpability.
- anonym29 7mo ago
  [flagged]
  - smallmancontrov 7mo ago
    Couple small corrections: Hillary has not been implicated by the Epstein files. Not today and not by evidence available in 2016. Biden has not been implicated by the Epstein files. Not today and not by evidence available in 2020. Bonus: not only was Trump implicated in the Epstein files both today and by evidence available in 2016, he was also in charge of every federal prison and every US spook agency in 2019 when Epstein died under mysterious circumstances.
    - anonym29 7mo ago
      I never accused Hillary or Biden of being implicated in the Epstein files. Those aren't corrections, those are non-sequitirs. Bonus: at no point did I refute Trump being a pedophile or being in the Epstein files.
    - gruez 7mo ago
      >Bonus: not only was Trump implicated in the Epstein files both today and by evidence available in 2016, he was also in charge of every federal prison and every US spook agency in 2019 when Epstein died under mysterious circumstances. Who was in charge when Epstein got the sweetheart deal on his first conviction?
foltik 7mo ago
In the USA it literally is two homogenous groups though? One of which is majorly complicit in covering up the files, against their constituents’ wishes.
- scotty79 7mo ago
  I wouldn't even call them two groups. It's just one group ostensibly and publicly split in half, but it's still one group that intermingles behind the courtains.
- DaSHacka 7mo ago
  I would say both parties are complicit at this point. Keep in mind Epstein died in 2017. We had two GOP terms and one Democrat term from then to now. With what we know from the files that have been released thus far (and how obviously the worst if it has either been shredded or will never see the light of day), the fact they refused to release/prosecute those implicated tells you all you need to know.

gruez 7mo ago

>we simply can't pretend that there isn't rampant CSA by those in power, because we've had proof of it despite their best efforts What's "rampant"? The news coverage provides no shortage of people, but ringing off 100 (or whatever) people that are in the files doesn't say much, even if we make the questionable assumption that inclusion in files implies guilt. I'm sure that everyone would prefer the amount of pedophiles that are in power to 0, but if it's the same rate as the general population that can hardly be considered "rampant", or a "conspiracy". Given some neutral inclusion criteria (eg. members of legislative bodies), is there any evidence they have disproportionate amount of pedophiles? >the leader of the United States right now was friends with the supposed ring-leader... You conveniently omit the fact that they broke up 5 years before he was first convicted. From wikipedia: "Trump had a falling out with Epstein around 2004 and ceased contact. After Epstein was said to have sexually harassed a teenage daughter of another Mar-a-Lago member in 2007, Trump banned him from the club. " >Useful idiots, perhaps? So basically https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_consciousness https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_consciousness? > Wanting to protect their own power and gain more? How does adding age verification help in that? Are they blackmailed by the shadowy cabal? Are they just doing what the voters/lobbyists want? If so, what makes invocation of this reasoning more suitable than for any other political issue? Is everything from tax policy to noise ordinances just something pushed by pedophile elites, helped by useful idiots and people who want to "protect their own power and gain more"?

theshackleford 7mo ago
> You conveniently omit the fact that they broke up 5 years before he was first convicted. And? It doesn’t change the reality of the original statement. The president of the United States was friends with the alleged ring leader of a large pedophile network.
- gruez 7mo ago
  >The president of the United States was friends with the alleged ring leader of a large pedophile network. You're making some leaps logic here here. If someone's outed as a pedophile, everyone who's friends with him should be assumed to be a pedophile? Surely not, given that pedophilia is considered taboo, we'd expect them to hide it, and therefore at least some friends might not be in the know. That's not to say there's no conspirators, but "he was friends with a pedophile therefore he's a pedophile too" is just guilt by association. What you need to prove is that he knew, or ought to have known that his friend was a pedophile. A conviction works decently for this, because it's presumably public knowledge, although even that's questionable because most people don't do a background check on people they met. In the case of Epstien he also hired reputation management firms to suppress his conviction from showing up in the results, which weakens the case even more.