• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Ghislaine Maxwell

RecoveringYuppy said:
His claim that it was caused by a military experience
Click to expand...

Odd how he seems to be the only Falklands vet, let alone vet of any other conflict, who reports this. I worked with several Falklands vets and some Iraq vets and none of them had this weird condition.

Mind, a couple of the Falklands naval vets had a different view of Andrew's service there from The Official Version, which was far less complimentary...
 
Carrot Flower King said:
Mind, a couple of the Falklands naval vets had a different view of Andrew's service there from The Official Version, which was far less complimentary...
Click to expand...

Anecdotes are of no evidentiary value but I know two Falklands vets, one a distant cousin, the other a former colleague, who tell stories of Andrew's service that are similar to each other's but which diverge widely from the official record.
 
Carrot Flower King said:
Yeahbut, if that "reliable" source of information, David Icke, is correct then Andrew is a shape-shifting lizard and so would not need to sweat. Mebbe he just forgot his cover story?
Click to expand...

Well played

RecoveringYuppy said:
Odd how you misrepresented me by cutting my sentence in half.

I went on to say that his claim is not well supported in that very same sentence.
Click to expand...

I think Carrot Flower King was just riffing on the first half, nothing to do with your second point.
 
Maybe this was discussed earlier in the thread, but does anyone feel there is a good chance an actual child rapist will be arrested/punished for child rape?

Where there is trafficking in children, there is usually a rapist. Surely Epstein was not keeping all of the rape victims for himself?

Ranb
 
Last edited:
Prince Andrew ought to get Lord Geidt (Christopher Edward Wollaston MacKenzie Geidt the Baron Geidt, GCB, GCVO, OBE, QSO, PC, FKC)to help him get off.

Geidt was the Queens private secretary until 2017, so he will know Andrew.
He managed to get Johnson off his corrupt activities in the face of overwhelming evidence of his guilt.
Not sure how he will explain Prince Andrew's not sweating defence though.
 
Captain_Swoop said:
Prince Andrew ought to get Lord Geidt (Christopher Edward Wollaston MacKenzie Geidt the Baron Geidt, GCB, GCVO, OBE, QSO, PC, FKC)to help him get off.

Geidt was the Queens private secretary until 2017, so he will know Andrew.
He managed to get Johnson off his corrupt activities in the face of overwhelming evidence of his guilt.
Not sure how he will explain Prince Andrew's not sweating defence though.
Click to expand...

He knows what is right or wrong simply by sniffing it. It's the breeding.
 
malbui said:
Anecdotes are of no evidentiary value but I know two Falklands vets, one a distant cousin, the other a former colleague, who tell stories of Andrew's service that are similar to each other's but which diverge widely from the official record.
Click to expand...
Unless we have acquaintances in common, that's what I've been told.
 
Ranb said:
Maybe this was discussed earlier in the thread, but does anyone feel there is a good chance an actual child rapist will be arrested/punished for child rape?

Where there is trafficking in children, there is usually a rapist. Surely Epstein was not keeping all of the rape victims for himself?
....
Click to expand...

Well, if he involved other people that would have increased his own risks. If any victim had gone to the police about an assault by anyone else that he orchestrated, he would have been implicated. He might well have kept his victims to himself.

I imagine there are also statute of limitations issues for any particular incident.
 
Related news; Prince Andrew's attempt to block the lawsuit of Virginia Giuffre on the grounds that she no longer lives in the USA has been rejected by Federal Judge Lewis Kaplan. This the prince’s lawyers must turn over documents on the schedule that had been set out previously.
 
Bob001 said:
Well, if he involved other people that would have increased his own risks. If any victim had gone to the police about an assault by anyone else that he orchestrated, he would have been implicated. He might well have kept his victims to himself.

I imagine there are also statute of limitations issues for any particular incident.
Click to expand...


Nope. There is no Federal statute of limitations for the kinds of charges Epstein would have faced

https://sgp.fas.org/crs/misc/RL31253.pdf

This is a pdf so here are the relevant statutes for those who don't wish to download it.

Attachment 1. Periods of Limitation for Specific Federal Crimes (Citations)

No Limitation

Child Abduction and Sex Offenses

18 U.S.C. § 1591 (sex trafficking by force, fraud or of a child)
18 U.S.C. § 2241 (aggravated sexual abuse)
18 U.S.C. § 2242 (sexual abuse)
18 U.S.C. § 2243 (sexual abuse of a ward or child)
18 U.S.C. § 2244 (abusive sexual contact)
18 U.S.C. § 2251 (sexual exploitation of children)
18 U.S.C. § 2421 (transportation of illicit sexual purposes)
18 U.S.C. § 2422 (coercing or enticing travel for illicit sexual purposes)
18 U.S.C. § 2423 (travel involving illicit sexual activity with a child)
​
 
Last edited:
I'm trying to keep a balance. You start looking at the Epstein case and a lot of stupid crazy people start seeing that Qanon "The world is run by a secret group of pedophiles" crap everywhere and I don't think that's actually what we are looking at.

I won't be shocked if some big names are attached though.
 
malbui said:
Anecdotes are of no evidentiary value but I know two Falklands vets, one a distant cousin, the other a former colleague, who tell stories of Andrew's service that are similar to each other's but which diverge widely from the official record.
Click to expand...

Military anecdotes occupy an interesting niche in human folklore, where they are both gospel truth and entirely apocryphal. I don't think they're any more reflective of reality than the official version.

Especially since a lot of Brits seem to harbor a knee-jerk antipathy towards the royals. I'm sure the number of military personnel who served with the prince and know what he's really like is probably two or three times greater than the size of the unit Andrew served in.
 
JoeMorgue said:
I'm trying to keep a balance. You start looking at the Epstein case and a lot of stupid crazy people start seeing that Qanon "The world is run by a secret group of pedophiles" crap everywhere and I don't think that's actually what we are looking at.

I won't be shocked if some big names are attached though.
Click to expand...

That's the problem with conspiracy theories, they're red herrings for real injustice.

The idea of cabals or the deep state or whatever hides the less grandiose but more insidious reality, that rich people are not bound by the law like us normal folks and can do nearly whatever the hell they like right out in plain view.

All that said, Epstein's sweetheart deals and rumors of being an intelligence asset deserve a much more public exploration, which almost certainly won't happen because it would implicate a lot of rich elites that would rather see the buck stop here.
 
Dunno whether anyone's posted this gem I received this morning:

maxwell.png
 
malbui said:
Anecdotes are of no evidentiary value but I know two Falklands vets, one a distant cousin, the other a former colleague, who tell stories of Andrew's service that are similar to each other's but which diverge widely from the official record.
Click to expand...

Do share.
 
JoeMorgue said:
I'm trying to keep a balance. You start looking at the Epstein case and a lot of stupid crazy people start seeing that Qanon "The world is run by a secret group of pedophiles" crap everywhere and I don't think that's actually what we are looking at.

I won't be shocked if some big names are attached though.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I have seen some people I know on social media making posts barely distinguishable from Qanon, but they differ either because they think the ones most implicated are the Clintons or Donald Trump depending on their political persuasion. They also look at the trial either assuming that it would bust the whole paedophike ring wide open or that it would be evidence of the cover-up.

Much of the time their narratives betray a lack of understanding about the bare minimum such as when they complained that her trail wasn’t being reported on (before the trial had even begun) or that she either got too light a sentence or too large a sentence because she was a woman when the sentencing hasn’t even been done yet.

People will often insist that their narrative gets confirmed whatever happens.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom