[Zuider]

>To the extent that Stallman used his position at MIT and the FSF to help Jeffrey Epstein evade prosecution under the federal RICO statute for several decades

Can you present any evidence that Stallman did anything of the sort?

[selfishgene]

The evidence at this time is largely circumstantial:

i) Mr. Stallman's job was to raise money for the FSF.

ii) Mr. Stallman's friend and possible mentor was accused of sexual misconduct involving an underage girl who was allegedly being trafficked by Mr. Epstein on "Pedophile Isle."

iii) Mr. Stallman's statements appear more designed to justify and rationalize Mr. Epstein's sexual abuse of underage girls than to defend the reputation of his friend and possible mentor Mr. Minsky against accusations that he presumably wanted to believe were false.

iv) Mr. Stallman was presumably aware of Mr. Epstein's donations to Harvard and the reason why he was making them given the accusations that had been leveled against Mr. Epstein in the press through articles like this one:

https://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/03/us/03epstein.html

v) Mr. Stallman presumably knows that he is a public figure who is recognized around the globe for his lifelong contribution to the free software movement, and that any statements which he makes in support of Mr. Epstein personally, or in defense of his alleged illegal behavior, could be seized upon by attorneys like Mr. Dershowitz to help Mr. Epstein negotiate his next "sweetheart deal," much like Mr. Epstein's "CIA connection" was used to bamboozle federal prosecutors for the first deal.

Regarding this last bullet point, do realize that this was exactly what Mr. Reif was doing for Mr. Epstein when he handed him that personally signed thank-you note that has caused so much public outcry and calls for his resignation.

By the way, Reif's thank-you note is also eerily similar to what happened here:

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/11/world/europe/gabriel-matz...

Note that in this case, pedophile prize-winning author Gabriel Matzneff received his "thank-you" note not from the president of MIT, but from the former president of France!

Matzneff openly bragged about taking multiple eight year-old boys to bed that he picked up at a shopping plaza in the Philippines so that he could enjoy sexually abusing them all at the same time, to only then celebrate it in one of his most despicable novels, and like Epstein, he also managed to evade prosecution for these crimes over the course of several decades, because he had his set of "protectors" sitting in powerful places too.

So Stallman should think about answering his critics at the appropriate time, because it sure as hell looks like he was providing "reputation laundering" for Mr. Epstein along with MIT president Rafael Reif, and in the court of public opinion, what Mr. Stallman has hopefully learned by now is that circumstantial evidence is often all that's needed to convict.

[Zuider]

i) False. Richard Stallman's primary concern is with the philosophy and ethics of free software. He has never shown any notable concern with money.

ii) True, but has no bearing on Richard Stallman's character or motives. It invites guilt by association.

iii) False. I take issue with the expression 'more designed' That imputes a motive to Mr. Stallman to the effect that he was deliberately and specifically covering for Epstein rather than reacting spontaneously to learning of the accusations against Marvin Minsky.

iv) Mr. Stallman may or may not have been aware of Mr. Epstein's largess, but given Mr. Stallman's known lack of concern with money, it cannot be inferred that he had any interest in soliciting donations.

v) Mr. Stallman is surely aware that he is a public figure, but that does not change the fact that he is no politician or diplomat, but a nerd who is more comfortable with computers.

>and that any statements which he makes in support of Mr. Epstein personally, or in defense of his alleged illegal behavior

Richard Stallman has made no statements in defense of Mr. Epstein personally. A case could be made that his ill-chosen words could provide cover indirectly for the activities of Mr. Epstein, but that is not the same thing.

The rest of this argument is sensationalist and irrelevant.