The LIST

For months we’ve all been seeing a lot of social media posts and news reports about Jeffrey Epstein; including claims around the release of a list of his clients and/or co-conspirators. However, the reality is there is NO SUCH LIST. It is accurate that there's a release of previously sealed court records, and names to those records, but the majority of the names mentioned aren't accused of any wrongdoing or they've already been named publicly. The people on the list are to be questioned, sure, but this isn’t a list of guilty perpetrators. That is what ‘some’ news sources, social media and tinfoil hat people want to believe, but them wanting it real doesn’t make it real, because they want it to be real so bad. That isn’t how manifestation works. The documents are part of a lawsuit filed against Epstein's former girlfriend Elaine Maxwell by one of Epstein's victims Virginia Giuffre. She is one of the dozens of women who sued Epstein saying he had abused them after her lawsuit was settled in 2017. The Miami Herald requested court papers that were initially filed under seal. Some of those documents were released over the following years, but this next batch remained sealed because of privacy concerns regarding Epstein's victims and others who weren't complicit in his crimes. The judge also said a handful of names should remain blacked out because they would identify people who were sexually abused and that information isn’t exactly for public consumption… People still have the right to keep their names safe from the public. Just because this is a huge news story does not mean these people still do not have privacy rights. They do…

Jeffrey Epstein committed suicide while in prison awaiting trial. There are lots of conspiracy theories related to his death, as in, he was killed, did not commit suicide. The video of his last moments was mysteriously turned off or the footage is missing as he was on suicide watch. There is a list of VIP people, politicians, celebrity types and other billionaires and millionaires, where Jeffrey Epstein would fly these people to a remote vacation island where children were being sex trafficked for portions of these groups of people.

The Above Information Was All Background Information.

What I want to do is write a logical explanation as to why the media and the general public are looking at the names on this list as if they willing participated in these sex acts against children, other crimes and/or at the very least, knew this was going on, but did not report it. My argument is just because a name shows up on this list does not necessarily mean a person or a group committed any crimes at all. It is just as possible these people were isolated from any of these illegal crimes just as much as they could have been a part of all this. As of right now there is no real evidence to suggest that if a person's name was on this list that they are guilty of crimes by default, even with no direct evidence of any crime being committed. The only pro-evidence is just Jeffrey Epstein and his assistant and a person or persons’ name being on this list and them knowing and having some loose business dealings with Jeffrey Epstein. Both sides of the media and YouTube conspiracy theorists are labeling ALL people on this list as villainous, guilty of sex crimes against children and all around, bad people. The inclusion of names on a list doesn't automatically imply guilt, and it's crucial to distinguish between allegations, suspicions, and proven criminal behavior. Some may be skeptical of the legal system or other institutions, leading them to question the credibility of investigations in general. This lack of trust can contribute to the belief that everyone associated with Epstein must be involved in some related wrongdoing associated with Epstein’s criminal activity. It's crucial to differentiate between suspicions, allegations, and proven facts. Simply being associated with Epstein does not make someone, or even anyone, guilty of criminal activities. It is essential to rely on thorough investigations, legal proceedings, and concrete evidence before making judgments about an individual's involvement in illegal activities. People should be cautious about spreading unverified data as fact, and the legal system should be allowed to determine guilt or innocence based on proper procedures and evidence. Not what FOX News or Social Media says is real, true, fact. Where most of the information being presented on the news and on social media, alike, is false, wrong or a straight-up lie. Being on the ‘Epstein-List,’ to me is almost like being shamed by high school administrators when you get into trouble for smoking in the bathroom or some other petty issues at High School and they blame you just because you hang out with a “specific” bad person, that you are associated with. I'd always roll my eyes when this was said to me and even now I think it is a stupid way to think. That sure, some of the time guilty by association is true, but not all the time or even most of the time. If I was on the list, that just makes me a child rapist because I flew on a plane with a guy that was into that. I know nothing about it, but am on the plane ride and when I get to the island I am chillin' at the beach or a bar the whole time I am there, witnessing no sexual acts with children, but still feel like people are weird in general. I fly back with the group not knowing much of anything. I know some people did some FK-shit, but one or many can say that about any group of people that have money and go to an island. Rich people are always doing things they shouldn’t be doing or if they were not rich and average like most of us wouldn’t even have the time to think about all the nonsense they can cause because they are too tired working sixty hours a week, working two jobs, taking care of multiple kids that are not even theirs.

The concept of "guilty by association" is a logical fallacy, and making assumptions about individuals based solely on their loose connections with criminals is not a sound or fair way to judge anyone. Regardless of who they hang out with, who they may work with and even go on private jets to remote islands with. However, there are psychological and societal reasons why this tendency exists. Humans often rely on mental cheat coded (shortcuts,) known as ‘heuristics,’ to quickly make judgments. In the case of guilt by association, people may use this cheat code that if someone is connected to a known criminal, they must share some level of responsibility or guilt. Our current society tends to fear and distrust those associated with individuals involved in criminal activities. Well, most of the time… This fear can lead to a broad assumption that anyone connected to a known criminal is likely to be involved in illicit behavior as well. People may simplify complex situations by categorizing individuals as either "good" or "bad" based on their associations. This oversimplification helps individuals make sense of a complex world, but can lead to unfair judgments. Now apply this to Child Sex Trafficking and watch a person’s career go down the tubes. Isn’t that what defamation is? The media does more than play its part in all this. The media plays a significant role in shaping public perceptions. If media coverage highlights the connections between an individual and a criminal, it can influence public opinion and contribute to the belief in guilt by association. This is even more toxic when the social media perspective is added to it; where most of the judgements on social media are often rash and have little truth to them at the beginning. People tend to seek information that confirms their pre-existing beliefs. If someone already believes that individuals associated with a criminal are guilty, they may selectively focus on information that supports this belief while ignoring contradictory evidence. This is just a fancy way of saying: “Go on Google and everything you see there is true by default. Do not bother to even ask of the validity of the content. Just believe it is all based on facts because Google said so.” The lack of critical thinking in some cases, people may not engage in critical thinking or question the validity of assumptions. This lack of critical analysis can contribute to the acceptance of guilt by association without considering the individual circumstances.

While it's natural to be concerned about connections to criminals that use children in such a disgusting way; fairness and justice demand a more nuanced and evidence-based approach. Legal systems are designed to establish guilt or innocence through due process, relying on evidence and the presumption of innocence until proven otherwise. However, let's not be dense about that, but because my name is on a list I am now looked at by the media and the public for, whatever this list is supposed to imply, my guilt on.

If I know I am innocent and the media starts saying shit. I am suing them and I am going to win too. I just think the YouTube conspiracy people have nothing better to do than latch onto something, anything really that could make sense to them. Remember, the Earth is NOT FLAT and you’re idiot if you actually believe that. They do it every few months. I have a friend who is big into this stuff and I keep telling him he sounds like a quack and he gets pissed at me. I then tell him it isn’t the idea that makes him look whacky, but how he does it. His posts/rants look exactly like that of an Alex Jones or other wild conspiracy theorists. That if he wants people to take him seriously then he has to treat the content seriously. Not this fly by night, really bad memes, screenshots, doctored other postings. Shady articles from websites that have little validity to them to begin with. It is just like the rhetoric/semantics line I keep saying. Rhetoric doesn’t have to be based on real facts. It just needs to appear that way and the same goes for taking conspiracies and making them appear real. One has to make it understandable. Not just some rantings of a delusional mind. One or many cannot expect people to believe up is actually down if you cannot clearly show, speak about and articulate why up is actually down and we all have it wrong. If one or many cannot do that, that it simply will not be taken seriously, regardless if it is real or not.

So, yeah, every time I hear about this “LIST” or the names on the list. I just laugh and am like, you have nothing unless you have something other than a name showing up on a list of passengers. If a plane has 100 people on it, are we to assume all 100 people are bad, evil, rich, kid touchers? That is crazy… I am sure some of them ARE, sure… But ALL? And guilty by Default? Again, crazy… Yet the RIGHT-sided people hold onto this like Churchill would hold up signed documents by Hitler, that he wasn’t going to attack these places and within a few days/weeks Hitler would just continue his massive attacks. Breaking all the promises he signed previously. That hoping, is just the same type of hoping. It’s baseless… Based on very little and almost all on assumptions without any real evidence other than a few names showing up on a list and/or other, possibly, doctored up materials. It just doesn’t work for me at all for those very reasons. They are chasing ghosts. The RIGHT keeps chasing fantasies like if they can just get some of these things to stick, they will win. No… The RIGHT will never win. They just won’t lose. That doesn’t mean they won anything. The RIGHT turn on each other faster than Schmigel killing his best friend for the Ring of Power from the “Lord of the Rings.” The LEFT doesn’t lead. The LEFT leads their own interests and those interests do not coincide with us, the people. It used to, here/there but not anymore. This is another example of that ‘binary by default’ mentality. That if I am not LEFT then I must be RIGHT by default. If I am not RIGHT then I am LEFT by default. Both of those statements are inherently NOT TRUE. However, by the rules of binary, that is exactly what that means, but when we apply that to the real world, it doesn’t work, it never did, but we are to play pretend that it did, and that we should all consume, obey, procreate based on those assumptions. We have opinions, but they tend to be ignored due to the rules of the binary mechanisms.

In the labyrinth of cognition, where reason intertwines with folly, human minds dance on the edges of wisdom and ignorance. Veiled in the mist of impulsivity, we weave tales of brilliance and blunders. Our thoughts, like fireflies in the vast night of understanding, flicker erratically. In pursuit of clarity, we stumble through the maze, often lost in the corridors of haste and bias. Within the kaleidoscope of intellect, brilliance and folly coexist, revealing the paradox of our nature. Amidst the symphony of ideas, the melody of brilliance is occasionally drowned by the dissonance of our own limitations, and thus, in transient folly, we are dumb. "'FK this,’ he said to no one in particular. ‘Don't tell me I clawed my way up from VR addiction just to learn that aliens blew up the Earth because of an old Michael Jackson song and Star Trek. I won't believe this shit! I won't believe it!'" ― Charles Pellegrino, George Zebrowski, The Killing Star

Elenchus
(Latin for: The List)
by David-Angelo Mineo
1/5/2024
2,342 Words