Aardvark DailyNew Zealand's longest-running online daily news and commentary publication, now in its 25th year. The opinion pieces presented here are not purported to be fact but reasonable effort is made to ensure accuracy.
Content copyright © 1995 - 2019 to Bruce Simpson (aka Aardvark), the logo was kindly created for Aardvark Daily by the folks at aardvark.co.uk
Please visit the sponsor!
Something a little different in today's subject matter.
The story of Jeffrey Epstein has filled the media headlines for many weeks now, with the ultra-rich and very well connected alleged paedophile now being found dead in his prison cell.
According to reports, Mr Epstein had a circle of friends and acquaintances that read like a "who's who" of the world's most influential and powerful people. Many have speculated that it was this list of friends that kept Epstein from being prosecuted for his crimes over many years.
If the media are to be believed, he was a man "with no moral compass" who created is wealthy by duping others and engaging in unscrupulous acts of fraud and deception.
Yet he had so many friends in high places...
One can only wonder why that was
Or perhaps the answer is a little more basic and worrying.
"Birds of a feather"?
Whilst I'm sure the conspiracy theorists will have a field-day over Epstein's relationships with politicians, British Royals and other heads of state, I don't think the obvious can be overlooked.
Many very rich and powerful people have been implicated in the recent accusations made by women alleging that they were exploited by Epstein and his associates. I'm pretty sure that none of these people wanted the glare of the public spotlight falling on them so they would have been extremely concerned over his arrest.
Given that Mr Epstein clearly considered his own interests to be paramount at all times, there can be little doubt that he would have more than happily squealed on others to obtain some kind of reduced sentence for himself when at the court's mercy. I think it's pretty clear what this would have meant to those others who would effectively face being thrown under a bus.
Is it really too much of a stretch therefore, to suggest that Epstein's death was not the suicide it has been claimed to be?
One can, of course, only speculate.
However, Occam's Razor would appear to be appropriate.
I guess that this is the risk anyone who positions themselves with "dirt" on people of power and influence must take. Whilst it is possible to extract significant benefit from the leverage such dirt provides, eventually it becomes far more practical for those "under the thumb" to simply wipe away the source of the dirt.
Epstein played a dangerous game and ultimately, he lost.
The really worrying thing now is that those who are perhaps truly responsible for his death will never be identified or brought to justice.
The rich and powerful people involved have more than enough money and influence to effectively wipe away all trace of their involvement... leaving the rest of us in the dark.
One can only wonder at how much corruption goes on at high levels. How many decisions are made, not by those who claim to stand for democracy and freedom -- but by those (perhaps like Epstein) who hold the real power by virtue of the dirt they hold on the figureheads at the top.
Maybe this helps explain why the rich keep getting richer and the poor keep getting poorer.
Sad, very sad.
What do readers think?
Is this all just conspiracy stuff thrown up by a media desperate for a few extra clicks and ad-impressions? Or should we be worried that, through the Epstein case, we've been given a rare glimpse of what really goes on behind closed doors and the type of people who really hold the reigns of power?
Please visit the sponsor!
Have your say in the Aardvark Forums.