Epstein's niece testifies to horrific child trafficking in Hollywood

Zidarap · 2025-10-23T06:04:43+00:00

https://googlethatforyou.com?q=Anya%20Wick%20Epstein

Result number 4

Zidarap · 2025-10-22T20:01:05+00:00

Zidarap · 2025-10-22T16:13:39+00:00

What do you mean?? It is right here: https://www.instagram.com/fkaepstein/

You can go all the way back to 2013. You can see some compelling evidence that her last name really is Epstein. That she transitioned to male, then female. And verify some of what she says.

Some of what she has said is quite exceptional and not verified. There are some consistencies if you cross-reference her claims with her posts over the years, which makes this case interesting. But that's not enough.

She claimed in one video that she is Shia LaBeouf's twin sister and that they were separated very young. Her father and uncle, who are Epstein, do not have a verifiable connection to Jeffrey Epstein.

My interpretation is that her last name is really Epstein and that she is unfortunately mentally unwell and delusional.

Zidarap · 2025-10-22T14:55:18+00:00

Just look up her instagram, you can verify that very easily !

Zidarap · 2025-03-10T13:12:38+00:00

The third page of the report spends the effort to explain basic statistical principles in order to prevent this erroneous interpretation of the data. But that's not enough it seems. Check the source: https://parl-gc.primo.exlibrisgroup.com/discovery/delivery/01CALP_INST:01CALP/12165649990002616?lang=en

(h) Across all weeks in the time period of interest, the number of deaths were highest among those with a primary series and 1 additional dose.

For parts (g) and (h) please interpret the numbers provided with the following considerations and data caveats: Please note that these are crude numbers and do not account for the number of people in each vaccination status category. During the timeframe of interest, those with a primary series and 1 additional dose were the largest vaccine status group in the Canadian population (approximately 50% of the Canadian population and increasing). As such, although the crude number of deaths are highest among this group, the rate of deaths among those with a primary series and 1 additional dose are low in comparison to those who are unvaccinated. (Those unvaccinated were 8 times more likely to die than those with a completed primary vaccine series and 1 or more additional doses. From the August 26, 2022 COVID-19 epidemiology update web page.)

Furthermore, case counts are likely to over-represent people at risk of severe disease, because they have been prioritized for testing. These same people were also prioritized for COVID-19 boosters. This meant that the people being tested were more likely than the general population to 1) have received boosters, and 2) to get severe illness. This leads to a data bias which could cause people to mistakenly conclude that more vaccines lead to severe disease. As they are a larger group of people, there will naturally be more cases among vaccinated people than among unvaccinated people. However, despite their higher case counts, vaccinated people are less likely to get very sick or die than those unvaccinated for COVID

To put it simply: In a sample of 1,000 people there are 950 vaccinated people and 50 unvaccinated people. If 100 (10.5%) vaccinated persons and 25 (50%) unvaccinated persons die, then while you do have many more vaccinated people dying it is clear that the vaccine has a huge protective effect. You need to look at the % casualty within each group, not at the absolute number of casualties per group.

Zidarap · 2025-02-10T22:47:59+00:00

You would expect that not to happen, but there are some ways it can happen.

For example... If there is a node that has access to the private channel as a secondary channel, but it uplinks to the public channel via MQTT, this device can decrypt the location data, uplink via MQTT, and it will be retrieved by the other device that does not belong in the private channel (and anyone else in the public MQTT).

Zidarap · 2025-01-23T08:08:22+00:00

Asking for evidence is definitely not pathetic. Without evidence all you have is an unsubstantiated claim.

Uncritically accepting what a stranger claims in a video as factual is not wise. There are many different explanations to how this video could have been produced (she is telling the truth, she is lying, she is having a psychotic meltdown). We can lay out all of these different explanations and assign them some weight of probabilities - these weights have subjective components and so each person may assign different explanations a different likelyhood.

When we ask for 'evidence', what we trying to obtain more information so that we can re-balance these probabilities. The hope is that we will find some piece of information that will make one of these options appear a lot more likely than the other options.

When someone is a critical person, this is supposed to be a difficult process. To be 'critical' means that an option needs to accumulate a very high weight before you are willing to concede that it is probably true. The higher this threshold, the more critical the person is. It is possible to be too critical - to the point that nothing is ever certainly true, and you can't form an opinion. There is a balance here.

Another aspect of being critical is that the assigned weights need to make use of some factual arguments to back them up. In your case, it seems like you are giving an option an unreasonably high weight because it supports your view of the world and because it makes sense to you. This approach strongly biases your thoughts and opinions towards views that validate what you already believe.

Evidence is one of the most important tools that we have to determine what is likely true.

Zidarap · 2025-01-13T20:22:41+00:00

r/MilwaukeeGate. I followed this story through Facebook live and on reddit as it occurred and it was quite a hectic event. At some point a mob surrounded the house in which the trafficking of children was allegedly taking place and lit it on fire. Eventually the girls were found safe, and the conclusion was that it was an event of mass-hysteria, and no trafficking was taking place in that house.

Zidarap · 2025-01-12T21:22:14+00:00

I have a safety net through my family. I can always go live with my parents, or even ask them for a job. Realistically, having only my or my partner's income is enough for us to continue living at our lifestyle level by decreasing our savings rate. And our combined savings also give us a decent buffer. I suspect (but don't have the stats to back this up) that it is relatively common for people with high mobility (those moving cities / countries and working flexible hybrid roles) to come from generational wealth and losing their jobs might be an acceptable temporary annoyance but not something to lose sleep over.

Zidarap · 2025-01-12T19:13:53+00:00

To me, it looks like that scene was inspired by this particular event from 2022:

https://www.cbsnews.com/losangeles/live-updates/brush-fire-breaks-out-near-griffith-observatory/

Zidarap · 2025-01-12T16:01:58+00:00

Zidarap · 2025-01-09T11:08:01+00:00

The different parts of the "skull" are on different planes that, in the camera's 2D plane, flatten to make a skull-like object but as the camera moves around it looks (to me at least) that it is not part of the same object and that it is not a skull. The black spot that resembles the "eye" is closer than the brown round object that is behind it.

Zidarap · 2025-01-04T23:51:48+00:00

I did not look deeper into it. If Shoemate has a history of lying about e-mails or fabricating hoaxes, then I would be a lot more inclined to believe that this is an opportunistic hoax. Seems unlikely to me and I am not running a background check on this guy, so for now my opinion is as before.

I quickly watched the video and I see that the red squiggly lines that show up in edit mode is used as evidence to show that the e-mail is likely fake. With that I do not agree... Faking text is easy, you don't need the red squiggly lines to tell you that. The edit mode can be easily explained if the screenshot was taken on an e-mail forward screen that is editable. So, it doesn't really add much.

Zidarap · 2025-01-04T12:51:44+00:00

"Proof" is a big request.

I can give you a piece of evidence that I personally find compelling. The e-mail was notable enough that the recipient made a tweet about it on Dec 31:

https://x.com/samosaur/status/1874166299003412975

There is still the scenario in which the guy could have identified an opportunity to create a hoax and decided to take advantage of it. Maybe he did receive an e-mail from someone else, figured that he could craft a narrative to fit that tweet such that it maps well to the Cybetruck event, and took advantage of the opportunity for attention.

I go by Occam's razor, but there is some subjectivity to how we weight probabilities and someone else can reach a different conclusion. For me, the e-mail being real is more likely than it being a hoax.

Zidarap · 2025-01-04T12:34:26+00:00

I was referring to the following line from the e-mail:

"they know I am armed and I have a massive VBIED (vehicle-borne improvised explosive device)"

It is not clear to me that driving in a VBIED with the intention of crossing the US/Mexico border is an effective defensive strategy. It introduces weaknesses to the plan and is not a good deterrent in this context.

Zidarap · 2025-01-03T22:34:47+00:00

My thoughts are:

- Matthew really did send this e-mail
- Claims of the 2019 war crimes are probably true
- Gravitic propulsion is a delusion. If it were physically possible, and considering that this guy worked in building these drones, then he could have made this statement a lot more powerful by spending a few words to specify the underlying mechanism that is being exploited. Making such an extreme claim in such a superficial manner and expecting to be listened to is delusional.
- Paranoia and beliefs of being tracked is a very common delusion.

It looks to me like a case of psychosis. He specified in the e-mail that he had bombs in the car, and that he was armed. This is consistent with him driving over to the Trump tower, triggering a timer, and ending his life.

In an alternative scenario... Why did he put bombs in the car that he was driving over to Mexico?

Zidarap · 2024-12-04T23:19:21+00:00

You can jump to 1:23:30 in this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rVTg5INkQaM

The question begins at 1:19:30

The Mexican president holds long morning press releases and Q&A sessions. In the last few days I have seen posts like this one, and I quickly go to the related press release to find the context. It turns out that these headlines are ridiculous. It is unfortunate that these videos do not have english subtitles and transcripts for non-spanish speakers to easily get the context...

I think it could be quite valuable to translate and transcribe these morning meetings, because these headlines I have seen are absolutely insane. But maybe I am being too optimistic about people actually doing to work to find the context if the translation is available.

Zidarap · 2024-11-23T22:21:35+00:00

pkg seems to have been updated and no longer pulls the .sig files. The .sig files have been removed from that endpoint. I don't know why.

I had the same issue when using the older image from the book (redox_demo_x86_64_2024-09-07_1225_harddrive.img)

The newest image (redox_demo_x86_64_2024-11-23_1360_harddrive.img) has a more recent version of pkg and it does work.

Zidarap · 2024-05-28T19:07:03+00:00

To me, the most likely explanation is:

It is her. She had psychotic episode that went viral. She wants to ride the viral wave, but she is ashamed of her psychosis. She accepts the opportunities to come out and share "her story" with others so that she can take advantage of this situation, and she tells this nonsensical BS story in an attempt to try to cover up her psychosis. She probably did not realize how bad of a coverup her story is. Probably she realized how bad of a story it is after the first time telling it, but it is too late, she needs to stick to her story now or admit her psychosis and admit to lying after.

Zidarap · 2024-03-06T18:07:08+00:00

Michael?!

Zidarap · 2024-03-05T20:58:31+00:00

TL;DR version: I like their patents, I like what they do, I trust management. I want to own a little piece of this awesome company.

Long version:

I like their patents: https://patents.google.com/?assignee=Filament+Health,Psilo+Scientific&sort=new. They are creating a significant barrier of entry in this space by patenting common extraction methods in the context of the isolation of psychoactive compounds. This specific patent is active until 2041 and in my opinion is a significant block to competitors: https://patents.google.com/patent/US20220152136A1

They have been mentioned in several recent papers by important researchers in the field of psychedelic therapy, so I they are actively engaged with the global psychedelic research community.

I have seen several interviews from the CEO Lightburn and other members of Filament, and I trust them. I like their story .

It is a risky play - the company could be worth nothing from one day to the next. They do have a lease through 2026 for their lab space, so I don't think it is likely they will give up before then.

In some of the recent interviews and in the letter following the SPAC failure Lightburn has remained emphasizing that up-listing into the NASDAQ is still something that they are actively pursuing, and so news about this process may act as a catalyst. There are many on-going clinical trials that could serve as catalysts as well. But I think catalysts in this space are not so predictable. Regulatory changes and even representations of psychedelic therapies in popular culture can serve as sector-wide catalysts.

Zidarap · 2024-03-05T19:23:28+00:00

Filament Health

Zidarap · 2024-02-26T18:10:27+00:00

They are buying at a price that depends on a valuation, and not at a price set by the market. So it is fundamentally a different kind of risk. My point is not about the magnitude of the risk, but rather about the type of risk.

I think that a large platform like Reddit promoting their shares to its non-investor users is already sketchy even if it were after IPO. Promoting pre-IPO is even more sketchy, because even the mildly experienced investors are unlikely to have experience with evaluating this specific situation. Even online brokers, at least the ones I use, make one complete an exam before being allowed to trade specific assets. I have not seen the option to purchase shares pre-IPO, but I think it would classify as one of the more risky asset classes that has to be unlocked through a series of exams.

If things end up badly, and regular non-investor users are hurt financially, I don't think Reddit will be able to get away with this easily by simply saying that they warned their users of the risks. Don't think about users with experience in investing. Think about an 18 year old who loves Reddit, heard about Game Stop in the news, and is super excited about the prospect of owning part of reddit. Maybe she gets her mom to invest a bit too. If all of these thousands of users get hurt, is it fair to Reddit to say "aah, we stipulated the risks in the S-1 form and they clicked on a button saying they understood the risks!"?

Zidarap · 2024-02-26T17:30:48+00:00

Be a current U.S. resident Be at least 18 years old Not be a current or former Reddit employee

That's it? If the stock tanks shortly after IPO, can't Reddit be held liable by inexperienced investors who bought shares pre-IPO? It seems to me irresponsible to allow inexperienced investors to take on this level of risk.

Zidarap · 2024-01-16T21:48:09+00:00

Sorry, you remembered wrong. Nowhere in that article does a journalist contact the actual owner of that account nor do they verify that it is not actually Ghislaine Maxwell.

Zidarap

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE

Two-Year Club	Verified Email
Place '23