Sarah Westall, Trafficking/Blackmail Cycle of Evil |410|

If by ‘a lot’ you mean around 10 % then I guess your statement is true David.

“According to YouGov's polling, 11 percent of Britons believe Trump is a great or good president. But 67 percent, a vast majority, believe he is a poor or terrible president.”
Well we don't do polls here, so I was only guessing. Actually,I thought you recognised at least some of the reasons why Trump was the better choice - such as his choice not to try to pursue the war in Syria.

David
 
Well we don't do polls here, so I was only guessing. Actually,I thought you recognised at least some of the reasons why Trump was the better choice - such as his choice not to try to pursue the war in Syria.

David
What I’ve said is that given the choice between Hillary and Trump, I’d choose Trump, but that choice is similar to the one between Hunt and Johnson. In a future world I would hope that the candidates are of a far higher quality, but I really don’t know what that means. If I were to choose two people (one from the US, one from UK) that I think might improve our world I would choose Tulsi Gabbard and Jeremy Corbyn. Not because they are perfect, but because they are decent people imo. Is that enough? Well, if it’s not, then I’d take my chances finding out because it’s unlikely to be worse than the present crowd.

In some ways, Corbyn’s weakness and inability to stand up to the anti-semitism total bullshit that obviously stems direct from the Israeli government, backed up by the uk media, but is somehow swallowed down by many MPs on the left is an example of how things might go wrong. The Global Warming thing too, but I’d much rather we blew money on that than on illegal wars.
 
How you can say that about one ‘crowd’ and think that it doesn’t apply to Trump & co is nothing less than delusional imo.
Well I suppose the bottom line was when AOC started attacking Pelosi as being a racist!

More importantly, she doesn't begin to recognise the danger of her Green New Deal. If you destroy the industrial base of a Western country, you could easily kill 100 million people!

David
 
What I’ve said is that given the choice between Hillary and Trump, I’d choose Trump
Exactly, and how many Democrats dare say that? Given a hypothetical infinite field of candidates, probably I could choose someone better than Trump.
Likewise, IMHO neither Boris nor Jeremy Hunt would be as good as Nigel Farage, but given the current choice, I'd choose Boris.

I suppose a lot in the insincerity of the Democrats IMHO, is that they did try to get Hillary elected - ignoring the devastation - at least to Syria and a fair number of US servicemen that would result.

Fighting a war as anything other than a last resort is an abomination. Taking over a war that others have started - as Trump did in Afghanistan - is a very tricky problem.

David
 
Milton Friedman (Nobel Prize in economics 1976):
http://www.goodreads.com/quotes/738162-i-do-not-believe-that-the-solution-to-our-problem
"I do not believe that the solution to our problem is simply to elect the right people. The important thing is to establish a political climate of opinion which will make it politically profitable for the wrong people to do the right thing. Unless it is politically profitable for the wrong people to do the right thing, the right people will not do the right thing either, or if they try, they will shortly be out of office."
 
Well I suppose the bottom line was when AOC started attacking Pelosi as being a racist!

More importantly, she doesn't begin to recognise the danger of her Green New Deal. If you destroy the industrial base of a Western country, you could easily kill 100 million people!

David
Pelosi probably is a racist, as she’s a big supporter of Israel.

There are many more that believe in the Green New Deal apart from AOC, why pick on her? My guess is that her intent is good, can you say the same for say John Bolton?
 
Senator Chuck Schumer: "If you take on the intelligence community, they have six ways from Sunday of getting back at you." This statement is tantamount to an admission that the intelligence agencies control the elected government. Elected officials are afraid of them, and cannot restrain them or cross them. Blackmail is probably #1 out of six.]
Chuck Schumer is a serial liar. He will say anything and then will contradict himself the next day. He was threatening Trump in that quote for not going along with Brennan's and Clapper's little scheme re; the the Steele dossier. Schumer is not a reliable source on anything.

At the end of this post below, is a transcript from a video made by a Washington D.C. bureaucrat, Catherine Austin Fitts , who explains that blackmail is used routinely. "We're literally watching a government that is being run by coercion whether it's the blackmail or control file or physical violence. If you don't do what you're told, there's really issues of physical violence now.".
Fitts is in no position to know anything about intelligence operations. She is, at best, repeating rumor.

Just from following the news I came to the conclusion that many people in congress and many judges were being blackmailed long before I heard about Epstein.
Sure. Politicians are craven liars and have no ethics, generally speaking. But you're confusing politicians with intelligence operations. The two are not the same.


Acosta, your friend at the DIA, and Assistant Secretary of Housing - Federal Housing Commissioner at HUD Catherine Fitts (below), are going with the intelligence/blackmail explanation. That is corroboration by people either in a position to know or with experience that qualifies them to have an opinion who think an intelligence/blackmail operation is the best explanation.
My retired DIA friend has been wrong before. He has blind spots. He has an intense dislike of Israel. IMO it is clouding his judgment. Acosta and Fitts would not be informed about the goings on in the IC world. Anyhow, even if there's anything to the alleged quote from Acosta saying the Epstein "belongs" to intelligence, it may not mean what you want it to. It could be interpreted to mean that, having been arrested and put on trial, Epstein agreed to tell what he knows to intelligence so that the IC could use the info for their own purposes. Acosta might have not even said that. If he did, it might have been a lie to justify the lite sentence and save his political skin.

You're not thinking this through. If Epstein worked for US intelligence, then why would Bill Clinton go on Lolita Express airplane trips with the guy? How could the E be blackmailing Clinton? Clinton would definitely know who the guy is. Clinton has people to tell him these things. Same if E worked for Israeli intelligence. Clinton is going to put himself at risk of a felony and damnation in the public eye by going on trips with a known blackmailer? Nope. Sorry. That's a stupid theory.

In order to believe this conspiracy theory, you have set aside another; that the Clintons kill inconvenient people. Why wouldn't the Clintons just have Epstein killed when he threatened to blackmail them?

The best fit given what we know is that Epstein is a socially hyper-active, slick talking, psychopathic/libertine pervert (probably a democrat to the extent that he is party affiliated) who made money in more or less underhanded ways; off shore money laundering for drug dealers, arms dealers, some semi-legit businessmen and some legit billionaire trust fund baby types dodging taxes they would face on-shore, rock stars and other wealthy celebrities. He no doubt obtained all kinds of insider trading tips from his menagerie of wealthy friends. With the tips, he'd make a lot of money for his wealthy "clients" and pocket an agreed upon percent of the profit.

If one of these one of these potential investors was into teenage girls, I'm sure E had no problem hooking them up. In exchange the investor provides insider tips. No blackmail required. I'm sure E provided all kinds of weird and below board goods and services; whatever it takes to grease the wheels and get the deals going. I'm also not opposed to the idea that once in a while some intelligence service would approach him and purchase information on key targeted individuals. No doubt E happily exchanged that info for favors, cash or other goods and services. He probably only guessed at the true identity of the contact. In short, IMO, E worked for himself. I betting that's all there is to it.
 
Last edited:
Fighting a war as anything other than a last resort is an abomination. Taking over a war that others have started - as Trump did in Afghanistan - is a very tricky problem.
Here I agree totally!

I think your views on Islam colour your other views. I feel that Islam has been chosen as a fallguy to justify our actions, the question I would like answering is who is behind this decision.
 
Pelosi probably is a racist, as she’s a big supporter of Israel.

There are many more that believe in the Green New Deal apart from AOC, why pick on her? My guess is that her intent is good, can you say the same for say John Bolton?
Trump has had to contend with war mongers in the Republican party. Bolton is undoubtedly one of those, but I think he finds it easier to control him inside government than outside. I'd guess Bolton was fuming when Trump blocked an attack on Iran recently, but I guess he enjoys the cudos of being National security Advisor, too much to want to argue with the President and get booted out!

By now I am ambivalent on support for Israel, I used to feel the Israeli government was the worst of the worst, but it turns out that extreme Islamics in Britain are willing to kill and maim people indiscriminately - even audiences of kids at pop concerts. Anything that Israel did that let such people into the country would end the same way.

When people point out that Israel fires on unarmed protesters at the border, they should remember that there is a deliberate Hamas policy of mixing terrorist extremists in with more peaceful crowds so that if the border is breached by sheer numbers of people, then the extremists will try to escape into Israel to perform yet more attrocities.

David
 
Pelosi probably is a racist, as she’s a big supporter of Israel.

There are many more that believe in the Green New Deal apart from AOC, why pick on her? My guess is that her intent is good, can you say the same for say John Bolton?
I love how the liberals have all taken a position that Hitler would have approved of.

Yes by all means, let Israel be destroyed via flooding with muslims and simultaneously flood Europe with hateful liberals and muslims so as to ensure that Jews will eventually be subjected to endless pogroms.

As soon as I hear the racist card being played to explain complicated situations, I know I'm dealing with a totalitarian fanatic that is highly invested in seeing himself as morally superior (thus justifying his will to control everyone else).
 
Trump has had to contend with war mongers in the Republican party. Bolton is undoubtedly one of those, but I think he finds it easier to control him inside government than outside. I'd guess Bolton was fuming when Trump blocked an attack on Iran recently, but I guess he enjoys the cudos of being National security Advisor, too much to want to argue with the President and get booted out!

By now I am ambivalent on support for Israel, I used to feel the Israeli government was the worst of the worst, but it turns out that extreme Islamics in Britain are willing to kill and maim people indiscriminately - even audiences of kids at pop concerts. Anything that Israel did that let such people into the country would end the same way.

When people point out that Israel fires on unarmed protesters at the border, they should remember that there is a deliberate Hamas policy of mixing terrorist extremists in with more peaceful crowds so that if the border is breached by sheer numbers of people, then the extremists will try to escape into Israel to perform yet more attrocities.

David
I think your views on Islam colour your other views.
Israel has killed and maimed innocent people for many years, the Nakba was the earliest/biggest such event in recent history. What do you think the ordinary people of Iraq and Afghanistan and many others feel about their ‘kids at pop concerts’ being bombed shitless? Do you think they are indifferent to it? Should they just suck it up? Would you?

There is no possible justification for the murder of of the ‘unarmed protesters at the border’, none.

https://www.middleeasteye.net/opinion/why-nakba-bigger-events-1948

 
People need to understand how blackmail works. The core of the thing is the threat to make public something that the target doesn't want to be made public. The target agrees to pay or otherwise compensate the blackmailer for keeping that "something" private.

It all hinges on the possibility of the blackmailer going public with the "something".

If the blackmailer himself is engaged in the same something as the target and the blackmailer also would not like that something to be made public, then the blackmail cannot happen. As soon as the blackmailer exposes the something against the target, then the blackmailer has exposed himself.

So I have a party on my fantasy island and all my guests and I are having sex with children, I cannot blackmail my guests. I cannot expose, say, the pictures of my guests because the authorities or media or whoever would ask how I got the pictures, what is their provenance? The answer would come out pretty quickly that the pics were from my fantasy island orgy with children. I'm in hot water now too!

The way to entrap someone via a honey pot is more like I have a party on my island. I have attractive girls serving cocktails, etc. I never touch them. My other guests don't touch them (or only extremely discreetly if they do). But I have a target in mind. I tell one of the girls to seduce the target. Target is seduced. My hidden cameras film it. Now I can make a credible threat of blackmail. "Why I would have never imagined that you'd take advantage of teenage girl! What would the Board of Directors say?!!? What would your constituents say?!!? Wow! The media is going to have you for lunch! ....buuuuuut...maybe there's a way we can be better friends and this can stay just between us...."

The latter scenario is not what Epstein was doing. He was the former. Ditto many of these other pedo conspiracy theories. If everyone involved is a pedo, then there will be no blackmail.

Also, using Epstein as an example, it isn't just the blackmailer burning himself if he's also into the pedophilia, he's burning all of the other guests at the party, into it or otherwise, if he goes public. These are all high profile wealthy people that have been playing the game all along per Epstein's rules - he can't fry them all over one guy that is resisting blackmail. His whole op is destroyed, he's destroyed and lots of now really pissed off power brokers are now destroyed. The intel agency behind him is at risk as E talks to save his own slimy skin. So the threat of blackmail goes right down the tubes.

For these reasons, I conclude that there was no blackmail honey pot intel op involving Epstein and that is probably true of most of the other pedo blackmail conspiracy scenarios.
 
Last edited:
If you weren’t so busy jumping to conclusions you might realise that Gilad Atzmon, the guy I ‘read and respect’ is a ‘joo’. (Sigh...palm to forehead).

;)
 
If you weren’t so busy jumping to conclusions you might realise that Gilad Atzmon, the guy I ‘read and respect’ is a ‘joo’. (Sigh...palm to forehead).

;)
I know that. There are many liberal Jews that hate Israel's conservative govt. Kind of like American liberals that hate Americans and want to flood the country with an endless/limitless stream of third world immigrants and give them wealth transfers from existing Americans; especially the evil white ones. Many of these liberals are white. A pervasive sense of guilt and self-hatred is a core feature of liberalism. It comes in part from the brain washing done by lefties -America's enemies -ensconced in the education system and in part from the basic psychological predisposition of liberals; which is cowardice. You don't have to stand up and fight for yourself if you decide that you're to blame and those coming after you and yours are better people.
 
Last edited:
As soon as I hear the racist card being played to explain complicated situations, I know I'm dealing with a totalitarian fanatic that is highly invested in seeing himself as morally superior (thus justifying his will to control everyone else).
I love how the liberals have all taken a position that Hitler would have approved of.
You seem so certain of everything Eric.

I think you are intellectually rich but morally closer to bankrupt.

How would Hitler approve of ‘my position’? (as you interpret it, of course)
 
Last edited:
Top