On Thu, Dec 05, 2019 at 08:41:24PM -0300, Punk-Stasi 2.0 wrote: > On Fri, 6 Dec 2019 09:56:24 +1100 > Zenaan Harkness <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > You may be right, that blackmail plays no significant part in modern > > politics. > > > > I don't believe it's correct that "blackmail plays no significant part in > > Western politics today". > > 'modern politics' is 'western politics'. Last time I checked western > scumbags were busy conquering and destroying the world. > > Now, the main mechanism in politics is extortion. Subjects are free to > obey govcorp or die. That is Western Freedom. > > If a guy like epstein, a wall-street jew-thief also ran a > blackmail boutique to honestly earn some extra pocket money from > donations from his friends, that wouldn't change the nature and > modus operandi of govcorp AT ALL.
That's a bold assertion. Is it possible that some politicians might actually vote -against- auditing or ditching the Fed, to protect their reputations (from media exposure that they dallianced with under age "children", or actual children)?? > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lavender_scare > > > > The "Lavender Scare" was a moral panic about homosexual people in > > the United States government and their mass dismissal from > > government service. > > > yes, and? What has that got to do with the fact that any government > agent is a criminal, whether he is gay or straight. See above. His sexual proclivity is not the issue - his propensity to protect his (or her) reputation, in the face of blackmail about his sexual proclivity, is the question.
