by wpietri on 8/27/19, 1:30 PM
That is one hell of a list.
According to friends, Epstein showed up at a TED conference circa 1999 with 6 plus-ones, all listed as "Mrs Jeffery Epstein". (The tickets were something like $5k in 2019 dollars.) They don't recall them as being under-age, but it definitely seemed sleazy. Their recollection is that Epstein used them to meet people; the women would go chat somebody up and bring them back to Epstein.
Abusers are well known for grooming victims, but they also groom allies. So it's not surprising that among this list we find people who are either hopelessly naive or of dubious character themselves. In retrospect it doesn't seem like a coincidence that around the same time Bill Clinton and Kevin Spacey were zooming around on Epstein's plane.
Let that be a lesson to all of us. If we suddenly experience an overwhelming amount of positive attention, it's worth asking ourselves whether it's the love-bombing [1] common to narcissistic manipulators.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Love_bombing
by qazpot on 8/27/19, 1:17 PM
So everyone who ever worked or met Epstein is guilty by association ?
Is this what journalism is ? - Naming and Shaming people where there is no crime or unethical act committed.
by empath75 on 8/27/19, 1:24 PM
No on has ever explained where he got all his money from. It seems like he blackmailed a bunch of extremely wealthy people into giving him money to ‘manage’ and then used that money to ensnare more and wealthier and influential people. He probably contacted and funded far more people than he managed to compromise.
It looks like he started with the current attorney general’s father, who hired him to teach at a school despite him not having any relevant credentials, then managed to get to one of the kids parents who brought him to Wall Street.
by jug on 8/27/19, 1:24 PM
That particular aspect of his persona may be somewhat interesting, but I dislike how they need to list names of scientists and walk them through. It makes it uncomfortably transparent why Buzzfeed is doing this and I disagree with them. If anything, pedophilia can be expected to be a very privately held and guarded part of oneself and none of these persons can be expected to have known. Acting on pedophilia is one of those crimes that really, REALLY need to have a smoking gun for associations not the least because it can be so damaging to others being falsely accused.
by msghacq on 8/27/19, 1:13 PM
by moosey on 8/27/19, 1:24 PM
Money is power, and that power is necessary for continued scientific development. The problem isn't that scientists came to him for that money, it's the fact that the system is built in such a way that bad actors get to retain power.
The problem isn't that scientists went to him for his wealth, but that he had wealth after the first set of convictions. This should be our focus.
by thefounder on 8/27/19, 1:20 PM
It looks that after all he did something good with the money. If more people would donate to science before to go to jail(or commit suicide) the world would be a better place.
by nautilus12 on 8/27/19, 1:16 PM
Wait a second, is the implication that anyone associated with him was also somehow tied to his illegal sexual activities? That seems like a stretch, and this seems like an attempt to smear anyone even remotely attached to him. Its entirely possible and likely he gave money to scientists and they had no further connection to him beyond that. Buzzfeed is such garbage, how is it reaching the front page of hacker news?
by raverbashing on 8/27/19, 1:24 PM
> Morozov declined the offer of an introduction.
Looks like someone was able to read Epstein from afar and keep the distance.
by wickerman on 8/27/19, 1:20 PM
I read this entire thing and don't understand what's the issue - is it that Epstein is trying to fund people who might give a scientific "excuse" for his criminal behaviour or it's just "scientist took money from bad man, bad scientist", because if it's the latter we might as well shut down NASA and the space program since it was funded by Nazis, etc etc.
Edit: I do think that Harvard, et al singing praises to him knowing he was a pedophile is wrong. But the article is really confusing as to what is trying to say (and it wouldn't be the first time science and human rights abuses or crimes are associated).
by petschge on 8/27/19, 1:23 PM
It is now accepted that all politicians are scumbags. So when they meet with Epstein, fly on his jets, visit his house, party with him, it is "only" as bad as expected. That does not rile up reads and doesn't produce clicks. So now the media has to go over associates where the internet expects better - scientists (and to some extend the tech crowd).
by microcolonel on 8/27/19, 1:13 PM
On this side, it seems to be largely related to Epstein's weird narcissistic eugenic breeding program, where he looked (or looks, if he is alive) to notably increase the proportion of the world population descended from himself.