No he didn't, but oddly Hawking did, so even that doesn't seem 100% like a guilty verdict for those who did

Obviously this weaponised series of leaks has been leaped upon by people who fancy yet another boring round of anarchists vs communists, in traditional circular firing squad fashion. It's deeply depressing how quick people are to join the latest lynch mob

Chomsky had a lot of friendships and connections among the rich and powerful, he described it as part of his study of the nature of power, but it was largely because he was a tenured MIT prof. In this case it was an obvious fuck up on his part, but does not de-value the mans work.

If this wasn't the case, why are there endless hit job articles being published about Chomsky but not Hawking? No one fancy laying into Hawking? Isn't he also guilty by association?

Because once they are people will see that his network was VAST and that a large amount of his contacts did nothing overly dodgy. In the mean time the secrecy allows individual leaks to be weaponised, with the connection alone amounting to instant guilt of being a paedo or paedo apologist.

This is what Epstein used to do; cultivate friendships and contacts. He was a professional socialite who used this vast network he built to protect himself. This is also why the files will never be released in full.

Our place used to be run by an ex-squaddie, I put them up in celebration when he left and tend to snarl at anyone who questions them 😁

A HUGE amount of stuff in the UK is decided by 'convention', with no official rules in place, including most of the powers of the government!

Apparantly its just nmseen as a non political tine management task in the judicial office, so some pen pusher there will have the last word / accountability, and ultimately the lord chancellor i think . We need to know who was leaned on

Ew

Yes, which destroys our illusion of superiority

I agree with the control point. This gives off strong 'declining regime' vibes, because its so ham fisted