Page 13 | New Epstein allegation horrifying

BillyBand · 19/02/2026 19:30

I wonder just how far reaching this all is.
I can well believe accusations of cannibalism and all the other abuse, people have been talking about this stuff for years - talked about it and often died, or been so ridiculed that they’ve been written off as crazy conspiracy theorists.

There’s a MO amongst these “elite” people. Victims are chosen who are easy to ignore, see also grooming gangs, Jimmy Savile (who also procured children for politicians and celebrities), a Belgian paedophile ring that was written about several years ago but seems to have sunk into obscurity. Pick women and children who are largely seen as subhuman and likely to be lying, then you can get away with murder.

You see this subhumanising (not sure if that’s a word?) all the time, but people have different lines in the sand and justify it to themselves constantly. Threads about autistic/disabled children often show that many people don’t see them as fully human. A friend had a life changing accident, so many people have told her - online and to her face - that it would have been better for her to die. So many people don’t see girls in the care system as worthy of protection, many people see prostitution as fully consenting adults - even those tortured in the name of satisfying wealthy men - they’ve apparently chosen this life so it’s fair game.

If nothing else the EFs have opened my eyes to just how many people would be happiest to cover it all back up and tuck it away, to the many people happy to dismiss it all because it’s a load of made up bollocks, to people who think the collapse of governments/hollywood/elites would be too much for the world to bear, so shut it all down.

Let them all rot. Let the systems that have upheld these disgusting people for so long collapse. But I don’t think that will happen. I think a few minor people will be publicly slaughtered (metaphorically) whilst the big players get off Scott free yet again. I’m honestly so sick of what people put up with.

AnotherHormonalWoman · 19/02/2026 19:47

AlecTrevelyan006 · 19/02/2026 13:22

the more that comes out the more I think Epstein was bumped off

When it first happened I was sure he had been bumped off or at least that he had been deliberately not protected from harm.

The more I read the more convinced I am with the theory that he's actually been removed and protected and is living in relative freedom well protected somewhere. They look after their own, do the old boys club...

Carla786 · 19/02/2026 19:47

Nimbus3000 · 19/02/2026 18:33

There's a real imbalance of power in demanding victims provide incontrovertible proof of their perpetrator's crimes. Don't get me wrong, I think it's good to be skeptical and question but what I'm noticing about your posts is that the skepticism is directed at the people who have been abused rather than their abusers.

This is one of the ways we as a society preserve the status quo. I've never been given to conspiracy theories but something about this is different. And requiring such a high price for belief is epistemic injustice in action.

Show quote history

I see what you mean & I agree that being sceptical of victims can be dangerous

Otoh I'm convinced Epstein, Mountbatten & at least some MPs have all been ringleaders of separate paedophile rings. I just get a bit sceptical of YouTube videos alone...the above people have had multiple people come forward & significant corroborating evidence. YouTube may well be true but it's hard to tell without anything else.

Original poster

Daygloboo · 19/02/2026 20:09

BillyBand · 19/02/2026 19:30

I wonder just how far reaching this all is.
I can well believe accusations of cannibalism and all the other abuse, people have been talking about this stuff for years - talked about it and often died, or been so ridiculed that they’ve been written off as crazy conspiracy theorists.

There’s a MO amongst these “elite” people. Victims are chosen who are easy to ignore, see also grooming gangs, Jimmy Savile (who also procured children for politicians and celebrities), a Belgian paedophile ring that was written about several years ago but seems to have sunk into obscurity. Pick women and children who are largely seen as subhuman and likely to be lying, then you can get away with murder.

You see this subhumanising (not sure if that’s a word?) all the time, but people have different lines in the sand and justify it to themselves constantly. Threads about autistic/disabled children often show that many people don’t see them as fully human. A friend had a life changing accident, so many people have told her - online and to her face - that it would have been better for her to die. So many people don’t see girls in the care system as worthy of protection, many people see prostitution as fully consenting adults - even those tortured in the name of satisfying wealthy men - they’ve apparently chosen this life so it’s fair game.

If nothing else the EFs have opened my eyes to just how many people would be happiest to cover it all back up and tuck it away, to the many people happy to dismiss it all because it’s a load of made up bollocks, to people who think the collapse of governments/hollywood/elites would be too much for the world to bear, so shut it all down.

Let them all rot. Let the systems that have upheld these disgusting people for so long collapse. But I don’t think that will happen. I think a few minor people will be publicly slaughtered (metaphorically) whilst the big players get off Scott free yet again. I’m honestly so sick of what people put up with.

Very good post !!

OP posts:

Original poster

Daygloboo · 19/02/2026 20:27

AnotherHormonalWoman · 19/02/2026 19:47

When it first happened I was sure he had been bumped off or at least that he had been deliberately not protected from harm.

The more I read the more convinced I am with the theory that he's actually been removed and protected and is living in relative freedom well protected somewhere. They look after their own, do the old boys club...

Edited

Show quote history

But why would anyone want to protect him. He's no use to them now.

OP posts:

IloveOwlsandPenguins · 19/02/2026 21:49

NewspaperTaxis · 19/02/2026 17:56

That both Sarah F and Andrew were making coded remarks to tip off they were in the know would be characteristic of state operatives.

Has @IloveOwlsandPenguins seen the YouTube clip of Jimmy Savile being interviewed by Parkinson in the 70s? Alan Alda is a fellow guest, watching on slightly bemused. Savile tells a mad story in his scattergun style, about a treat for a young teenager - getting her in to see Prince Philip. He smuggled her in the boot of his car and on his arrival, got her out to introduce her. 'She'll remember that for the rest of her life,' observed Parky.

Now, it really sounds like he was talking about procuring women for Prince Philip and smuggling them in to the Palace - putting them in the boot of the car was the way, I understand, that was said about Princess Diana's paramours, too.

It seems to be the way Savile might send a message out - remember I've got dirt on you, you better play nice. Incidentally, I once picked up a copy of Savile's memoirs published in the early 80s, at a massive second hand book sale in Epsom Methodist Church, of all places. I flicked through it, thinking, well, he's hardly going to mention his sexual abuse of teenagers is he. In fact, he does just that. Talks about shagging a teenage girl 'my seductress' he called her, making out she was doing all the running, in a mobile caravan he had. And it implied she was one of many. He didn't go into details of the sex, but he made it sound all rock n roll. You'd be a spoilsport to object, that kind of thing.

In Miles Goslett's (sp?) acclaimed book A Convenient Death, well reviewed by the mainstream media, about the death of weapons inspector David Kelly, a similar thing is referenced on a govt website - a strange, incongruous mention of paedophilia, as if to tip someone off not to make a fuss about it, or we will go after you with paedophile allegations we've got against you. You can figure it out for yourself, it is one hell of a book because you have to puzzle things out for yourself - but the author does leave clues. But yes, leaving coded messages as if to say, hey, remember yourself, we're in the same club, seems to be common enough.

Show quote history

Yes , I have seen it .
Also the footage of Phillip Schofield who handed David Cameron a folded piece of paper on live TV containing the names of the prominent people alleged by the social worker Mary Moss to have visited the terrible Elm Guest House is an interesting watch .

Many brave people have tried to shed light on aspects of this terrible subject from different angles over the years . Particularly notable perhaps :
Stuart Syvret ( once a v prominent Minister in Jersey Island Senate ) now living in a safe house in America . The brilliant journalist Eileen Fairweather and Islington Social Worker Dr Liz Davies (who has an excellent website ).

AnotherHormonalWoman · 19/02/2026 21:57

Daygloboo · 19/02/2026 20:27

But why would anyone want to protect him. He's no use to them now.

Show quote history

Isn't he? He was useful to many people. I don't suppose the demand for what he supplied has gone 😔

As I say though, the old boys network look after each other.

And while I'm down the conspiracy rabbit hole, I would imagine he made plans for any kind of peril he found himself in. Perhaps there are people who are more scared of him being dead than alive.

walllaw · 19/02/2026 23:23

EasternStandard · 19/02/2026 17:41

Ok if someone as below said terrible stuff is going on over a decade ago was it good it was squashed in your view?

Show quote history

Don't be ridiculous. Show me where I ever said anything even remotely like that?

walllaw · 19/02/2026 23:26

Basquervill · 19/02/2026 18:29

It’s black magic, ritualistic, crossing the taboo, to gain power, like fire walking and lying on a bed of nails. Like self flagellation. Like sackcloth and ashes. Like st Simeon stylites. Strange extreme practices. The Jakob Frank cult gone underground. That is their ethos. They are living out their belief system.

This is an anti-semitic conspiracy theory and I'm reporting your post.

Ramblethroughthebrambles · 19/02/2026 23:51

smallglassbottle · 19/02/2026 16:46

Epstein plotted to create ‘superior gene pool’ with victims, documents suggest | The Independent https://share.google/baY0vtV5sSiM0erB7

Show quote history

Thank you. This helps us to be clearer about what is actually known. She states clearly that she thinks the rapes she suffered had some kind of eugenics aim & mentions the ranch. It sounds alarming but I wouldn't see the idea of a eugenics plot as fact yet - it's still subject to a court case where it sounds as if her credibility has been debated and her lawyers have dropped her for some reason. I will look out for the court's decision before drawing further conclusions. It seems speculative at this stage to link this to a research gynaecologist being paid by Epstein's finance group?

Original poster

Daygloboo · 20/02/2026 00:28

AnotherHormonalWoman · 19/02/2026 21:57

Isn't he? He was useful to many people. I don't suppose the demand for what he supplied has gone 😔

As I say though, the old boys network look after each other.

And while I'm down the conspiracy rabbit hole, I would imagine he made plans for any kind of peril he found himself in. Perhaps there are people who are more scared of him being dead than alive.

Show quote history

None of that makes any sense. He cant do in hiding what he did in public. He was a networker with a very public profile. How can you do that if you are supposed to be dead.

OP posts:

Original poster

Daygloboo · 20/02/2026 01:46

Daygloboo · 18/02/2026 23:20

Just that. Just when you thought it couldn't get any worse. Now horrific allegations about a property on New Mexico.

I'm surprised one of his brothersq hasnt got Andrew up in a corner grabbing him by the lapels or something and threatening him. For all the diagrace he has brought. I seriously think if i were one of andrew's brothers i would have got him in a corner and let him know in no uncertain terms that he was destroying the RF.

OP posts:

mathanxiety · 20/02/2026 02:29

Pizzagate was a QAnon conspiracy theory accusing the Clintons of running a pedophilia ring from a pizza restaurant in Washington DC. It's an old conspiracy from before the 2016 election. I recall watching a documentary about a riled up MAGA enthusiast from the deep south who packed his truck with supplies and a weapon to go to DC and deliver rough justice. He ended up disillusioned, iirc.

It has nothing to do with Epstein or the Pizza Express in Woking.

The new allegations wrt the New Mexico ranch are separate.

MyTrivia · 20/02/2026 02:52

NewspaperTaxis · 19/02/2026 17:56

That both Sarah F and Andrew were making coded remarks to tip off they were in the know would be characteristic of state operatives.

Has @IloveOwlsandPenguins seen the YouTube clip of Jimmy Savile being interviewed by Parkinson in the 70s? Alan Alda is a fellow guest, watching on slightly bemused. Savile tells a mad story in his scattergun style, about a treat for a young teenager - getting her in to see Prince Philip. He smuggled her in the boot of his car and on his arrival, got her out to introduce her. 'She'll remember that for the rest of her life,' observed Parky.

Now, it really sounds like he was talking about procuring women for Prince Philip and smuggling them in to the Palace - putting them in the boot of the car was the way, I understand, that was said about Princess Diana's paramours, too.

It seems to be the way Savile might send a message out - remember I've got dirt on you, you better play nice. Incidentally, I once picked up a copy of Savile's memoirs published in the early 80s, at a massive second hand book sale in Epsom Methodist Church, of all places. I flicked through it, thinking, well, he's hardly going to mention his sexual abuse of teenagers is he. In fact, he does just that. Talks about shagging a teenage girl 'my seductress' he called her, making out she was doing all the running, in a mobile caravan he had. And it implied she was one of many. He didn't go into details of the sex, but he made it sound all rock n roll. You'd be a spoilsport to object, that kind of thing.

In Miles Goslett's (sp?) acclaimed book A Convenient Death, well reviewed by the mainstream media, about the death of weapons inspector David Kelly, a similar thing is referenced on a govt website - a strange, incongruous mention of paedophilia, as if to tip someone off not to make a fuss about it, or we will go after you with paedophile allegations we've got against you. You can figure it out for yourself, it is one hell of a book because you have to puzzle things out for yourself - but the author does leave clues. But yes, leaving coded messages as if to say, hey, remember yourself, we're in the same club, seems to be common enough.

Show quote history

Great post. I wonder how long Sarah will stay in hiding?

NeelyOHara · 20/02/2026 06:27

Ramblethroughthebrambles · 19/02/2026 23:51

Thank you. This helps us to be clearer about what is actually known. She states clearly that she thinks the rapes she suffered had some kind of eugenics aim & mentions the ranch. It sounds alarming but I wouldn't see the idea of a eugenics plot as fact yet - it's still subject to a court case where it sounds as if her credibility has been debated and her lawyers have dropped her for some reason. I will look out for the court's decision before drawing further conclusions. It seems speculative at this stage to link this to a research gynaecologist being paid by Epstein's finance group?

Show quote history

Are you trying to discredit her?
Also, why can’t posters do their own research, - if they are so sceptical that everything is untrue? The links to the official DOJ website have been posted, so it’s not hard to find out, rather than demanding someone else goes off to provide them with ‘proof’, that they deem credible enough.
If you’ve got time to post on here trying to undermine other posters and indeed victims, then surely you have time to type in a few keywords to google and find a new site deemed trustworthy enough for you, or indeed the actual DOJ website….

Carla786 · 20/02/2026 06:29

Re eugenics, it seems odd that a eugenic plan would use SEN women and girls, given that SEN has generally been reviled eugenicists.

NeelyOHara · 20/02/2026 06:50

Carla786 · 20/02/2026 06:29

Re eugenics, it seems odd that a eugenic plan would use SEN women and girls, given that SEN has generally been reviled eugenicists.

Not if they were researching and comparing?

Nimbus3000 · 20/02/2026 08:28

Carla786 · 19/02/2026 19:47

I see what you mean & I agree that being sceptical of victims can be dangerous

Otoh I'm convinced Epstein, Mountbatten & at least some MPs have all been ringleaders of separate paedophile rings. I just get a bit sceptical of YouTube videos alone...the above people have had multiple people come forward & significant corroborating evidence. YouTube may well be true but it's hard to tell without anything else.

Show quote history

I agree that this is less likely to be one giant cabal than multiple networks all sanctioned by the same systems. The issue with relying on the press is that there are so many reasons, both legal and fraternal, that they do not report on all systemic abuses of power.

Wrt the Epstein files though there is a searchable library. Anything mentioned on YT, IG etc is possible for you to search yourself using either keywords or the file name (if shared). I have done this, Eg searching 'gynaecologist' brings up emails that corroborate Epstein had ties to multiple practitioners across the US.

LondonPapa · 20/02/2026 11:31

Carla786 · 20/02/2026 06:29

Re eugenics, it seems odd that a eugenic plan would use SEN women and girls, given that SEN has generally been reviled eugenicists.

My understanding was that the SEN babies were for abuse and worse.

There were other non-SEN women birthing babies not scheduled for the same abuse but still taken away regardless and caused harm to the child mothers.

But tbh, I’ve read so much horrendous stuff in the files I may be trying to cope and they were all schedule for repeated abuses and worse.

smallglassbottle · 20/02/2026 11:50

NeelyOHara · 20/02/2026 06:27

Are you trying to discredit her?
Also, why can’t posters do their own research, - if they are so sceptical that everything is untrue? The links to the official DOJ website have been posted, so it’s not hard to find out, rather than demanding someone else goes off to provide them with ‘proof’, that they deem credible enough.
If you’ve got time to post on here trying to undermine other posters and indeed victims, then surely you have time to type in a few keywords to google and find a new site deemed trustworthy enough for you, or indeed the actual DOJ website….

Show quote history

I agree. Most of us have been following this for years and regularly look things up and read around the subject, evidence, what witnesses have come forward etc.

Ramblethroughthebrambles · 20/02/2026 12:17

NeelyOHara · 20/02/2026 06:27

Are you trying to discredit her?
Also, why can’t posters do their own research, - if they are so sceptical that everything is untrue? The links to the official DOJ website have been posted, so it’s not hard to find out, rather than demanding someone else goes off to provide them with ‘proof’, that they deem credible enough.
If you’ve got time to post on here trying to undermine other posters and indeed victims, then surely you have time to type in a few keywords to google and find a new site deemed trustworthy enough for you, or indeed the actual DOJ website….

Show quote history

You've completely missed the point of my posts. I was one of those who provided the link for the DOJ files. This thread is well meant but my concern is that women and girls are trying to have their voices heard about horrific experiences at the hands of powerful men and it gets harder for them if online communities muddy the waters. This thread is awash with statements of 'fact' that are actually still contested, and over-interpretations of scant information that are focused on proving prior theories rather than building understanding. References on here to things being 'in' the Epstein files don't always differentiate between witness testimony, police evidence, anonymous 'tips' sent to police by conspiracy theorists and websites which report the files inaccurately.

I wasn't discrediting the testimony. It was the newspaper article being cited as support that was questioning its credibility. The problem is, if you cite something as supporting your argument but then it turns out not to support it, your argument is then undermined. Therefore you provide fuel to those who want to dismiss women's accounts as conspiracy theory nonsense.

Your argument that there is no need for people to provide sources because everyone should do their own research doesn't wash. If we care about the truth coming out then it's better for posters to provide clear information about how they know what they claim to know and the evidence to support it.

The testimony being referred to in the independent article is indeed powerful, troubling and distressing to read. Thanks to those who provided the newspaper sources that enabled me to find it - EFTA02731361 on the DOJ website. I would not want my frustration with some of the previous posts to be taken as discrediting this witness. If you might find this triggering I would avoid reading it though.

walllaw · 20/02/2026 14:32

Ramblethroughthebrambles · 20/02/2026 12:17

You've completely missed the point of my posts. I was one of those who provided the link for the DOJ files. This thread is well meant but my concern is that women and girls are trying to have their voices heard about horrific experiences at the hands of powerful men and it gets harder for them if online communities muddy the waters. This thread is awash with statements of 'fact' that are actually still contested, and over-interpretations of scant information that are focused on proving prior theories rather than building understanding. References on here to things being 'in' the Epstein files don't always differentiate between witness testimony, police evidence, anonymous 'tips' sent to police by conspiracy theorists and websites which report the files inaccurately.

I wasn't discrediting the testimony. It was the newspaper article being cited as support that was questioning its credibility. The problem is, if you cite something as supporting your argument but then it turns out not to support it, your argument is then undermined. Therefore you provide fuel to those who want to dismiss women's accounts as conspiracy theory nonsense.

Your argument that there is no need for people to provide sources because everyone should do their own research doesn't wash. If we care about the truth coming out then it's better for posters to provide clear information about how they know what they claim to know and the evidence to support it.

The testimony being referred to in the independent article is indeed powerful, troubling and distressing to read. Thanks to those who provided the newspaper sources that enabled me to find it - EFTA02731361 on the DOJ website. I would not want my frustration with some of the previous posts to be taken as discrediting this witness. If you might find this triggering I would avoid reading it though.

Show quote history

This thread is well meant but my concern is that women and girls are trying to have their voices heard about horrific experiences at the hands of powerful men and it gets harder for them if online communities muddy the waters. This thread is awash with statements of 'fact' that are actually still contested, and over-interpretations of scant information that are focused on proving prior theories rather than building understanding.

Yes, this. It doesn't help the victims or increase the odds of accountability for the perpetrators if people start muddying the water with crazy and/or disproven conspiracy stuff. The reality is awful enough.

To the pp who said they saw the images on James Alefantis's instagram. No, you didn't, you really didn't. You were not randomly on the IG of the owner of a pizza restaurant in DC. You saw images that were taken out of context for the express purposes of advancing a right wing conspiracy theory about csa taking place in the basement of a pizza restaurant with no basement.

MyTrivia · 20/02/2026 14:41

walllaw · 20/02/2026 14:32

This thread is well meant but my concern is that women and girls are trying to have their voices heard about horrific experiences at the hands of powerful men and it gets harder for them if online communities muddy the waters. This thread is awash with statements of 'fact' that are actually still contested, and over-interpretations of scant information that are focused on proving prior theories rather than building understanding.

Yes, this. It doesn't help the victims or increase the odds of accountability for the perpetrators if people start muddying the water with crazy and/or disproven conspiracy stuff. The reality is awful enough.

To the pp who said they saw the images on James Alefantis's instagram. No, you didn't, you really didn't. You were not randomly on the IG of the owner of a pizza restaurant in DC. You saw images that were taken out of context for the express purposes of advancing a right wing conspiracy theory about csa taking place in the basement of a pizza restaurant with no basement.

Show quote history

You are wrong. I saw all the posts on this guy’s instagram because it used to be public and they were very strange and inappropriate . Context indeed. Before all this blew up in the mainstream news, people were mentioning this guy and I looked at his Instagram out of interest.

This has nothing to do with right wing vs left wing. There are people on all sides of the political spectrum involved in this stuff. For example, most of the nasty rumours I’ve ever heard were about George Bush Senior.

walllaw · 20/02/2026 15:38

MyTrivia · 20/02/2026 14:41

You are wrong. I saw all the posts on this guy’s instagram because it used to be public and they were very strange and inappropriate . Context indeed. Before all this blew up in the mainstream news, people were mentioning this guy and I looked at his Instagram out of interest.

This has nothing to do with right wing vs left wing. There are people on all sides of the political spectrum involved in this stuff. For example, most of the nasty rumours I’ve ever heard were about George Bush Senior.

Edited

Show quote history

People were mentioning him because they were promoting a conspiracy theory.

MyTrivia · 20/02/2026 16:01

walllaw · 20/02/2026 15:38

People were mentioning him because they were promoting a conspiracy theory.

Show quote history

That doesn’t mean I didn’t see his Instagram - I did because it was public.