Countering the naive: 'Epstein wasn't involved in blackmail'
An article posted on Counter-Currents caught my attention. Titled Why Jeffrey Epstein Was Not Running a Blackmail Op (archived copy), author Travis LeBlanc presents a pile of absurdly naive assumptions and scenarios in an attempt to bolster an untenable position.
Travis correctly points out the following:
- underage girls were present on Epstein's island
- many high profile people had visited the island
- sex between adults and underage girls had occurred
- hidden cameras were present
- Epstein's network was infinitely larger than has been reported by the Jewish controlled media
- Epstein had potential connections to Israel's Mossad (in fact he did, if not directly, certainly through Ghislaine Maxwell)
If that doesn't spell blackmail, i don't know what the hell does, so how then does Travis attempt to convince his readers otherwise? Let's dig in...
The theory goes that members of the elite were lured to Epstein Island and then induced to have sex with underage girls in wired-up rooms, after which the Zionist Occupation Government (ZOG) would approach the luckless victim, telling him that he would have to do whatever they ordered or else he would be exposed as a pedophile.
Travis makes many such naive assumptions in his article, such as that evidence which incriminates the victim -- the victim being the person being targeted for blackmail -- would be disclosed to them upon its collection when there may be no immediate intention to use such information before it becomes necessary. There is no logical reason to burn bridges by making the victim aware of them having been compromised, unless and until there is reason to do so. Does one discipline a dog before it bites the mailman?
My issue with the Epstein blackmail conspiracy is not that there is no evidence for it, but rather that it doesn't even make sense is theory. Blackmail requires more than just obtaining compromising information on someone. The perp also has to be willing and able to follow through with his threat if the victim refuses to comply.
No, it doesn't, and no, they don't. Imagine yourself as being in the position of a politician or high-profile businessman caught in an extraordinarily compromising position, such as the threat of being accused of pedophilia. What would you do? You'd be forced to consider not only how such a revelation would affect your family and your friends, but also your personal life and your professional reputation and career. Simply being made aware that such incriminating evidence exists, should it become necessary to reveal it, is all that is needed to control them. When compromising evidence like this is collected, the likely expectation is that it will never need to be disclosed beyond the victim.
The thing that no one promoting the Epstein blackmail theory seems to consider is what following through with the threat would actually look like. So let's think this through.
Congressman Joe Blow goes to Epstein Island and is introduced to a 15-year-old sex worker. They go off and have sex in front of a bunch of hidden cameras. The next week, Rep. Joe Blow is contacted by ZOG, who tells him: "Mwah-ha-ha! We now have evidence that you are a pedophile! You work for us!" Rep. Joe Blow responds: "Fuck you. I'm not going to do it."
Now what? Having been rebuffed by Rep. Joe Blow, ZOG sends the video to the police.
There is almost certainly no intention of turning over such evidence to law enforcement and thus potentially incriminating ones self in the process. Only if it becomes necessary would the victim even be made aware of such evidence and in all but the very rarest of cases, that, in and of itself, is all that would be needed to maintain a permanent leash on them. In the extremely rare case where a victim refuses to cooperate, the information could potentially be sanitized, so as to not reveal its origin, and leaked, perhaps selectively, or perhaps anonymously on the web in which case the victim is then tried in the court of public opinion. Leaking such information to a single person or select few may be all that is required to either render the victim mute, or at least cause them to reconsider their position, and handling the situation in this way could easily avoid any unwanted attention from law enforcement.
Another blatantly obvious fact that Travis fails to consider is how completely corrupt law enforcement and the courts are. Did Epstein not run his operation and traffic under age girls for years before being outed while law enforcement, the courts and the Jewish controlled news media did little or nothing? And of course there are countless other examples.
Video: Amy Robach (ABC News) talks about Epstein in 2009: "I've had the story for 3 years"
Getting caught banging teenage [girls] is not the death sentence people say it is
[...]
It is also public knowledge that just about every rock star in the 1970s from David Bowie to Led Zeppelin was banging underage girls. In the early 1970s there was even a clique of underage groupies in Los Angeles known as "the Baby Groupies."
Implying that the public perception of sexual conquests pursued by rock stars and celebrities also applies to high profile political figures contradicts reality. The male rocker, as Travis himself shall point out, is not held accountable for having sex with young or underage woman because it is practically expected for them to do so, whereas a high caliber businessman or political figure is held to a higher standard and judged by a different audience. Travis and admits this, and contradicts himself in the process, with the following:
You might respond by saying that rock stars are entertainers, and that most people generally expect - if not outright demand - that entertainers be a little degenerate in their private lives, while it's different for politicians. This is true. The bar for destroying a politician's career is a lot lower than it is for ruining an entertainer's career.
Yeah, no kidding. Consider the Clinton-Lewinski scandal for example which was used to take down a sitting president, and she wasn't even a minor.
Travis closes with the following:
But then why film those who do it? Ghislaine Maxwell reportedly told a friend that it was a form of "insurance." This makes sense, since doing so acts as a doomsday device. If Epstein went down, everyone else was going down with him. It was Epstein's personal Samson Option. And this is likely why Epstein had to be killed before he - or more likely an associate - could push the big, red button.
Nonsense! There is no way the entire network of the Jewish-Zionist criminal cartel, through the media which they control, would ever permit such a damaging disclosure and Epstein had to have know this.
"Politics in America has become a Jewish profession, just like arts and the law," [...] "We now are overrepresented in all these areas." -- Ira Forman, executive director of the National Jewish Democratic Council, in the Forward article Dozens of Jewish Super-Delegates May Hold Key to Democratic Race by Jennifer Siegel, Mar. 20, 2008 (source)
Again, there were high profile people having sex with young and underage girls, while being recorded, as well as multiple connections to Israeli intelligence ... but blackmail wasn't part of that???
While i do not personally have concrete proof that people who visited Epstein's 'Rape Island' were being blackmailed, the evidence clearly and overwhelmingly points in that direction. To posit otherwise, without any convincing evidence, is childishly naive in my opinion.