Re:The time I didn't meet Jeffrey Epstein
by dlubarov on Saturday February 07, 2026 @04:29PM
(#46928285)
Okay, if you like, we can stretch the definition of "evidence of X" to "anything that has any bearing, however slight, on the likelihood of X".
By this absurd definition,
- Sure, Epstein having a Jewish client is evidence of him being a Mossad spy.
- Similarly if you have any Jewish acquaintances, that's evidence of you being a Mossad spy.
- If you've eaten at McDonalds, that means you're not an extreme BDSer, which is evidence of you being a Mossad spy.
- If you know even a couple words of Hebrew, that’s evidence of you being a Mossad spy.
- If you have any encrypted messaging software installed, that’s evidence of you being a Mossad spy.
etc.
Please, please learn the difference between evidence and proof. There's a lot of evidence, from circumstantial to testimonial to an abundance of hearsay.
Not proof, no. Proof is what follows from investigation - which hasn't happened. Are you familiar with the concept of "the dog that didn't bark"?
> how is a business relationship with a wealthy Jewish family evidence of being a Mossad spy?
Never said it was.
You claimed "This is just false" when my source [2] claimed that he worked for the Rothschilds, and now have moved the goalposts because he said so himself and there's thousands of emails backing that up.