Less Indignation, Please

FRENCH TRANSLATION: Un peu moins d’indignation autour de Jeffrey Epstein, svp

Will you cut down on your indignation, won’t you, my American friends? Do you have to replay your Salem Witch routine again and again? I refer to the notorious case of Jeffrey Epstein, for sure.

I can understand (and sympathise with) the practical reasons behind this case. A Trump’s counterattack on Clinton clan; a payback for the Jewish networking abilities; even political blackmail that had to be bridled. I can understand and approve of the hard-nosed reasoning behind the Operation Epstein II. Clintons had it coming to them, after what they did to Trump, and Bill Clinton is the most likely prospective victim of the affair. The Jewish networking in the US had become too powerful to suffer. Epstein had been able to blackmail too many powerful men, and blackmailers are likely to come to trouble. If Epstein was involved in a Mossad scheme, as Acosta implied and our colleague Philip Giraldi alleged, he is a legitimate target.

But there is no room for indignation. Cool it! In the worst case, it is similar to Al Capone tax evasion. Epstein had been tried, admitted his guilt, was sentenced and punished. Now they want to do it again. Fine, for practical reasons mentioned above. But calling him “paedophile” is as ridiculous as calling Julian Assange “a rapist”.

Perhaps he had sex with 14-15-year old girls, and it is considered to be a crime nowadays in the US. (So is bringing a bottle of booze into Pennsylvania.) Some years ago, it was perfectly permitted, and the best American poet of all time, Allen Edgar Poe, had married his Virginia when she was 13 (and he was 27). Mind you, girls (and boys) nowadays are much more sexually aware than their grandmothers were at this age. They are being taught everything there is to know about sex in schools in a very young age.

In Europe (perhaps, in the US too?) children of kindergarten age are forced to learn about homosexual and heterosexual relations; parents who object to such early introduction into adult life are liable to have their children taken away from them and given into care. In the UK, children aren’t allowed to stay away of sex education, because, you know, they all see a lot of pornography, they say. They often go beyond seeing, at 14. In our over-sexed society, you can’t blame them, but childish innocence is gone at very early age.

Did Epstein cause some damage to these young creatures? None of them claimed they were virgins or forced into sex. They probably had enough sexual experience to teach Epstein a trick or two. And since when are you bothered by this consideration? What is worse, for a sexually experienced girl of 15 to have a mutually agreed sex with man, or for eight-year boy to be castrated? Who will suffer more damage?

Castration is not only permitted in the US, it is encouraged and court-enforced, as in the case of James Younger, a Texan boy. When he was three, his divorced mother began dressing him as a girl and calling by the name “Luna.” His father Jeff Younger has been banned by the court from teaching James that he is a boy and banned the father from dressing his son as a boy. Additionally, Younger cannot share religious teaching with his son on sexuality or gender. The courts have required the father to pay at least 50 percent for future boy’s chemical castration at the age of 8.

Now, my indignant friends, please decide. If a boy age 6 can decide he wants to be castrated, and this will may be enforced by a court, why a girl age 15 can’t decide she wants to frolic with a guy in the hay? If a boy of tender age can be given to homosexual couple for adoption, into a situation that his chance to avoid sexual relations with the adoptive parents is nil; why a nubile girl can’t have sex with Epstein?

You should decide whether you want to be Victorian and defend maidenhood, or free and modern and allow castration of boys and their molestation by their adopted “parents”. You can’t have both.

#MeToo movement that allowed for this prosecution became too overwhelming and powerful accusation ground. There is no defence against it; like there was no defence against being declared a witch by Salem court, or indeed a Trotskyite and British spy by the Soviet Special Tribunal of 1937. If they said you are, then you are. Managed by old lesbians who compete with men for fresh pussy, this movement is openly misandrous. As a result, the US has a problem with sex. Underage heterosexual normal sex, in particular. An American judge sentenced a young woman to 22 years of jail for bedding 13-year old boy, though any boy I know of would be envious of the “victim”. Calling a man who has sex with a nubile girl ‘paedophile’ is not only misleading; it plays into hands of perverts who are real paedophiles.

The case against Epstein is so much of hot air. A feminist journalist Vicky Ward compiled Epstein’s profile for the Vanity Fair in 2003. She had met with many girls who were close to Epstein. Nothing damaging was included in the article. In 2011, after Epstein was already sentenced, Vicky Ward wrote in her blog “Jeffrey had his sexual peccadilloes”, that’s all. Now she says there were some claims, but apparently nobody wanted to go public. Today, I am sure, you can find a thousand of girls who will swear under oath they were molested by Epstein when they were twelve, and only a fistful of dollars will help them to recover. Indeed, such claims are a win-win proposition. If he pays, so well, and if he doesn’t pay you lose nothing.

I understand, gentlemen, your desire to Lynch the wealthy and obnoxious Jew, but at some point you have to kick your habit of submission to old hags and recognise normal man-to-woman sex as perfectly ok. Otherwise you American men have little chance to regain your ground in other competitions.

Before you will enquire in your comments whether I would like my underage daughter to be bedded (with her agreement) by Epstein, please ponder whether you would like your underage son to be chemically castrated “because that is what they want”.

No doubt, Epstein was not a model of gentleman. It is very possible that Mr Epstein had it coming to him for many reasons, as any friend of Dershowitz richly deserves. But then, save on outrage. This explosion of public feelings against him shows the Americans can’t cure themselves of Salem-style hysteria. And hysterical public is easily manipulated.