…by Jonas E. Alexis
Pedophilia is no longer a choice, says Margo Kaplan of Rutgers University. It is simply a mental illness and seems to be biological. Kaplan proceeds to say that pedophilia has
“neurological origins. Pedophilia could result from a failure in the brain to identify which environmental stimuli should provoke a sexual response. M.R.I.s of sex offenders with pedophilia show fewer of the neural pathways known as white matter in their brains.
“Men with pedophilia are three times more likely to be left-handed or ambidextrous, a finding that strongly suggests a neurological cause. Some findings also suggest that disturbances in neurodevelopment in utero or early childhood increase the risk of pedophilia.
“Studies have also shown that men with pedophilia have, on average, lower scores on tests of visual-spatial ability and verbal memory.”
I certainly would love to see those studies and how those researchers arrive at those conclusions. As we shall see in a moment, Kaplan was quick to formulate a morally deficient idea but quickly stay away from its implications in the political and historical world. It is like Einstein postulating that “I know that philosophically a murderer is not responsible for his crime, but I prefer not to take tea with him.”
I simply could not hold my laugher after I read Einstein’s hysterical statement here. Didn’t Einstein left Germany on the eve of the Third Reich? Didn’t he say that “Because of Hitler, I don’t dare step on German soil”? Didn’t Einstein view Hitler as a “cold, barbaric, animalistic resoluteness”?
If Hitler was not responsible, why do the Dreadful Few hate him so much? Why can’t they understand people like Ernst Zundel who happen to admire Hitler?
Kaplan locks herself in the same kind of argument, which is intellectually vacuous and morally repugnant. She argues that pedophiles “remain responsible for their conduct.” Yet in the same paragraph—yes, same paragraph!—Kaplan moves on to say that people “do not choose to be pedophiles.”
How in the world can they be held accountable for their actions? And doesn’t responsibility entail the power to choose?
Here Kaplan and genetic theorists (those who believe that Jewish behavior is genetic and not moral) run into the same moral and philosophical problem. They both end up saying indirectly that the mistake of the typist is not the typist’s mistake—a logically impossible and impressively incoherent argument from which moral death inexorably flows.
To be fair, I contacted Kaplan to get her response, and it was pretty obvious that she was running away from the implications of her article. She quickly admitted that she did not write the title of the article, but the principles which flow from the essay are right in line with the title itself. In one particular response, she brought up a point which indirectly and subtly destroys the Holocaust project:
“You are confusing pedophilia (the attraction) with child abuse (the act)…Pedophilia is not the act. It is the attraction. The attraction is not chosen. The act is chosen. You are not morally responsible for your attraction. You are morally responsible for your act.”
Kaplan, of course, did not deal with other definitions of pedophilia, which include: “Sexual perversion in which children are the preferred sexual object.”
In any event, I would grant her premise, which goes like this: “One can live with pedophilia and not act on it.” But the real question which I pointed out to her is this: “Why do we begin and end at pedophilia?” Why don’t we explore this idea in other possible worlds?
Kaplan’s logic was that since pedophilia is an attraction, it cannot be a crime if the attraction remains a thought. Kaplan did not know that she was undermining her own mines.
What about people who have “illicit” and “perverse” thoughts on the so-called Holocaust and express those thoughts out loud without acting upon them? Why are they being persecuted when they have not acted upon their thoughts?
Why have Jewish thought police such as Alan Dershowitz literally stripped people like Norman Finkelstein of their livelihood for having “illicit” thoughts on Dershowitz and the whole Zionist project?
Again, why has my good friend Fredrick Toben been literally humiliated and imprisoned for just thinking that the Holocaust establishment has hijacked serious history and scholarship? Why has he been punished for simply asking historical questions and making rational points such as,
“Show me the evidence and I’ll believe you completely—my philosophical training does not allow me to accept extraordinary claims without rigorous testing and irrefutable evidence”?
How did the Dreadful Few end up holding the Germans by the balls and criminalizing anyone who even probes serious questions about the Holocaust narrative?
Why did Steven Salaita get fired from his academic position? Why did Denis Rancourt get fired after teaching at the University of Ottawa for more 25 years as a physicist? Why has Bishop Williamson been charged for saying that no Jew was gassed in a gas chamber?
To push the envelope even further, why has Ernst Zundel been literally crushed by the Dreadful Few for his thoughts on Nazi Germany and the Holocaust? If Zundel and others suffer from some kind of “mental disorder,” should not Kaplan make a case arguing that we ought to protect them and not burn down their houses or harass them?
Zundel lived in Canada for more than 40 years, but the government refused to give him citizenship because he had committed one of the most horrible crimes in history: he denied the Holocaust narrative.
According to the Southern Poverty Law Center, Zundel incited “racial hatred” in Canada. Let us suppose that this was true. If we use Kaplan’s logic, Zundel never acted on that thought and he has not committed any crime. So, he needs protection. Will Kaplan help?
Perhaps what angered the SPLC was that Zundel had some “perverse” thoughts on the Jews:
“The Jews are particularly adept at seizing or insinuating themselves into strategic positions in our society where they wield power far beyond the extent of their numbers.”
Once again, suppose we place this thought in the category of “mental disorder.” Where, then, is Kaplan? Isn’t she supposed to defend people who have “mental disorders”?
Zundel would not be the only person on the planet to suffer from this kind of disease. Jewish historian Yuri Slezkine does have the same “mental disorder” when he postulates in the first paragraph and on the first page of his study The Jewish Century that
“The modern age is the Jewish Age, and the twentieth century, in particular, is the Jewish Century…Modernization, in other words, is about everyone becoming Jewish.”
In the same vein, Jewish propagandist Edward Bernays, known as “the father of public relations” and whose uncle was none other than Sigmund Freud, declares that “we are dominated by the relatively small number of persons—a trifling fraction of our hundred and twenty million—who understand the mental processes and social patterns of the masses.”
America, according to Bernays, is like a scientific lab, where people are being experimented like animals. Who are “the scientists”? Bernays moves on to say that they are “invisible governors” who covertly “pull the wires which control the public mind, who harness old forces and contrive new ways to bind and guide the world.”
Bernays took the Jewish cat out of the bag when he said:
“If we understand the mechanism and motives of the group mind, is it not possible to control and regiment the masses according to our will without their knowing about it? The recent practice of propaganda has proved that it is possible, at least up to a certain point and within certain limits.”
The war in Iraq proved that Bernays was right. The Dreadful Few used propaganda to sell the poison to the American people—and this will cost us all at least six trillion dollars.
So, the twentieth century alone proves that Bernays’ theory was true: the rich and the powerful, namely the Dreadful Few, began to control and manipulate the masses for their diabolical end.
Slezkine, who is a Russian Jew, got great accolades for publishing The Jewish Century (Princeton University). Bernays’ book is still in circulation. Zundel, however, has been imprisoned, harassed, and beaten for basically saying almost the same thing that Slezkine and Bernays have articulated. Zundel said,
“I was incarcerated in six different prisons on two continents in three countries—the USA, Canada, and Germany—without relief of any kind. Throughout my imprisonment, basic human rights principles were trampled underfoot repeatedly and with impunity.
“The worst prisons were the Canadian detention centers at Thorold, Ontario and at Toronto West, where I was held for two long years in isolation cells, ice-cold in the winter, no shoes or socks allowed. The electric light in these cells, bright enough to be able to read, was kept on 24 hours a day.
“Through a glass slot in the door I was checked every 20 minutes, and my activities were meticulously noted by the guards: one sheet for every day. No dignity, no privacy.
“My toothbrush was kept in a plastic bin in a hall. I was not allowed to speak to other prisoners. Bed sheets were changed only after three months. No pillows. No chairs.
“When I wrote to my wife or to my attorneys, I had to sit on a makeshift pile of my court transcripts. No radio, no television, not even an electrical outlet to sharpen my pencils. No ball point pens, only pencil stubs, cut in half with a saw. No spoons, forks, or knives were permitted; only a white plastic spoon with a fork called a “spork” that had to be returned every time at the end of the meal.
“With very few exceptions when furtive guards showed me some kindness away from the surveillance cameras, I was treated as though I was the worst of criminals. That’s Canada for you, where I have lived and worked without a criminal record for more than 40 years.”
The SPLC has a section on their website entitled, Zundel’s “Criminal History,” which includes “‘knowingly publishing false news’ in connection with his pro-Nazi propaganda.” The ADL declares that people like Zundel are “poisoning the web.” Again, will Kaplan write an article defending those people?
As it turns out, Kaplan does not seem to lack moral sophistication to address those important issues. She is a law professor and was certainly trained in logic. But her weltanschauung, which is Jewish and essentially Talmudic, does not allow her to see the obvious. It is no surprise that she never tackled those issues in our correspondence.
For Kaplan, pedophilia is not a moral choice but a “mental illness,” which she says is compatible with the definition of “mental disabilities.” Kaplan continues, “Our currently law is inconsistent and irrational.”
Well, in order to understand Kaplan’s weltanschauung better, one needs to go back to what she has written in the past. In 2013, she declared in the Washington Post:
“[O]ur courts and legislatures are still strangely squeamish about sexual pleasure, tending to treat it as a topic to be avoided or an immoral indulgence the state should prevent.
“When they address sex, they often reveal their embarrassment by using Victorian-sounding euphemisms such as ‘an intimate relation of husband and wife’ or awkwardly clinical terms such as ‘the physical act.’ Other times, they express outright disgust.”
The courts are “squeamish about sexual pleasure”? Kaplan is trying to be clumsy here because no court denies sexual pleasure. What she meant by “sexual pleasure” was same-sex marriage or “the criminalization of sadomasochistic activities.”
Kaplan concludes her Washington Post article by saying, “I’d like to think that courts, legislatures and voters are up to the challenge. So, let’s talk about sex.”
Again, why doesn’t she move that “free speech” argument elsewhere? Do the Dreadful Few allow free speech when it comes to examining the Holocaust, Zionism, Israel’s extermination of the Palestinians? Why have Jewish Neocons and others equated anti-Zionism with anti-Semitism? Why has the Israeli-run NSA been snooping on virtually much of the entire world? Will Kaplan ever address those issues in a future article?
Kaplan concludes her New York Times article by saying,
“Acknowledging that pedophiles have a mental disorder, and removing the obstacles to their coming forward and seeking help, is not only the right thing to do, but it would also advance efforts to protect children from harm.”
Kaplan, whether she likes it or not, is indirectly proposing an idea that can only work for her Jewish brethren. If pedophilia and its offshoots are not crimes, then people like Dominique Strauss-Kahn, Brian Singer, Woody Allen, and perhaps even Alan Dershowitz can get away with their immoral acts.
Harvey Weinstein for example (thanks to a reader who pointed this out) has been accused of groping a 22-year old Italian model in his office. But if this behavior has a biological origin, how are we going to hold him accountable? It gets worse. Listen to this:
“Rabbi Nuchem Rosenberg—who is 63 with a long, graying beard—recently sat down with me to explain what he described as a ‘child-rape assembly line’ among sects of fundamentalist Jews. He cleared his throat. ‘I’m going to be graphic,’ he said…
“‘I opened a door that entered into a schvitz,’ he told me. ‘Vapors everywhere, I can barely see. My eyes adjust, and I see an old man, my age, long white beard, a holy-looking man, sitting in the vapors. On his lap, facing away from him, is a boy, maybe seven years old. And the old man is having anal sex with this boy.’Rabbi Rosenberg paused, gathered himself, and went on:
“‘This boy was speared on the man like an animal, like a pig, and the boy was saying nothing. But on his face—fear. The old man [looked at me] without any fear, as if this was common practice. He didn’t stop.
“I was so angry, I confronted him. He removed the boy from his penis, and I took the boy aside. I told this man, ‘It’s a sin before God, a mishkovzucher. What are you doing to this boy’s soul? You’re destroying this boy!’
“‘He had a sponge on a stick to clean his back, and he hit me across the face with it. ‘How dare you interrupt me!’ he said. I had heard of these things for a long time, but now I had seen.”
One rabbi even
“forced his victims to eat feces, claiming that this cruelty was necessary to ‘purify’ the children he abused.”
Rosenberg continues to be graphic:
“I have children come to me with their parents, and the blood is coming out of the anus. These are zombies for life.”
We know that pedophilia is a big issue among ultra-Orthodox Jews. Back in 2008, the Jewish Daily Forward reported,
“Sexual abuse of children has periodically arisen in the ultra-Orthodox community through high-profile cases like that of Yehuda Kolko and Avrohom Mondrowitz, a teacher and a youth counselor, respectively, who were accused of abusing their students.
“Leaders in the community told the Forward that they generally treated those cases as isolated incidents. But both the Kolko and Mondrowitz cases have bubbled back up, and in the past few months a number of community leaders have forcefully taken the issue to a new plane.
“Perhaps the most influential voice has been of Brooklyn Assemblyman Dov Hikind, who over the past year — and, particularly, over the past two months — has started a somewhat personal campaign and argued that the ultra-Orthodox community has become a haven for child molesters…
“The largely Brooklyn-based ultra-Orthodox community, which spans many different sects, has seen a handful of explosive cases, beginning with that of Mondrowitz, who was indicted in Brooklyn on five counts of sodomy and six counts of sexual abuse in 1985, but fled to Israel during the scrutiny.”
In short, pedophilia is a not a crime for the Dreadful Few, but it is a crime for Catholic priests. Listen very carefully to the words of Jewish medical doctor Gustav Schonfeld,
“When these priestly misbehaviors, which in fact are punishable crimes, were brought to the attention of their priestly supervisors, the bishops either did nothing, counseled the priests in house, or sent them to friendly psychologists or psychiatrists for treatment, and forgave them their sins.
“Then, the Church transferred the priests to other parishes or schools where they had continuing access to children for abuse. The crimes were not reported to the police. Somehow the stories leaked out and created a media storm. Hundreds of children reported having been abused…
“Recently, similar reports have emanated from Europe. One particularly disturbing set of news stories reported that the current pope permitted more than one pedophile priest to continue contact with children. The size of the legal costs in Europe for the Church is not yet known.”
Isn’t that lovely? Here is a man who keeps pointing out that Catholic pedophilia is wrong but has written zero articles on Jewish pedophilia. And he wants us to take him seriously! Moreover, he forgot to tell his readers that the Dreadful Few were very influential in the sexualiztion of the West and even Catholic priests. As E. Michael Jones pointed out,
“the trouble started in the ‘60s with the sexualization of the culture in general and the culture of the Catholic clergy in particular. Carl Rogers set out to liberate the Immaculate Heart order in Los Angeles, and the result was Lesbian Nuns. The same sort of thing happened at Notre Dame summer schools for the clergy during the ‘60s…
“When it comes to sexual abuse, the rich Jew is innocent until proven guilty, but the Catholic priest is guilty until proven innocent. The same legal system that is used to exonerate Woody Allen is used to destroy Catholic priests. The double standard is impossible to ignore.”
Jones meticulously documents that Catholic priests largely got seduced by the sexual philosophy of Wilhelm Reich, who postulated that quite explicitly that masturbation and sexual corruption could be used to destroy the Catholic Church.
When Catholic priests began to mimic the sexual mores of their oppressors, it was an infallible sign that they were on the brink of prostrating before the enemies of all mankind and therefore lost their moral ground. Once that was done, a flood of sexual misbehavior came on the scene, which largely destroyed the effectiveness of the Church in the culture. As Jones continues to point out,
“The next fatal step occurred when the Church substituted counseling for traditional Church discipline. This was a major source of the problem in Chicago.
“When ‘a 13-year-old boy reported in 1979 that a priest raped him and later threatened him at gunpoint to keep quiet,’ the Archdiocese of Chicago did not investigate the matter and punish the perpetrator.
“Instead, they ‘assured the boy’s parents that . . . the cleric would receive treatment and have no further contact with minors.’”
Put simply, Kaplan is implicitly treading on Wilhelm Reich’s philosophy with a slightly different spin. But the end result is always the same. Reich wanted to change the sexual milieu and even entitled one of his books The Sexual Revolution. Kaplan is now asking for “sexual pleasure.” In other words, the West had to wait for thousands of years to learn about sexual pleasure from Kaplan.
Didn’t we learn our lesson from Oscar Wilde, Michel Foucault, Friedrich Nietzsche, Arthur Schopenhauer, Guy de Maupassant, Gustave Flaubert, Jean Paul Sartre, and even Franz Shubert?
 Margo Kaplan, “Pedophilia: A Disorder, Not a Crime,” NY Times, October 5, 2014. Thanks to Laura Lee Solomon for sending me Kaplan’s article.
 Quoted in Walter Isaacson, Enstein: His Life and Universe (New York: Simon & Schuster, 2008), 393.
 Ibid., 404.
 Quoted in Jurgen Neffe, Einstein: A Biography (New York: Farrar, Straus & Giroux, 2005), 287.
 Quoted in Victor Fiorillo, “Q&A: Rutgers Law Professor Who Says Pedophilia Is Not a Crime,” Philadelphia Magazine, October 6, 2014.
 Margo Kaplan, “Pedophilia: A Disorder, Not a Crime,” NY Times, October 5, 2014.
 Yuri Slezkine, The Jewish Century (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2004), 1.
 “Edward Bernays, ‘Father of Public Relations’ And Leader in Opinion Making, Dies at 103,” NY Times, March 10, 1995.
 Edward Bernays, Propaganda (New York: Ig Publishing, 1928), 38; For cultural history on this, see E. Michael Jones, Libido Dominandi: Sexual Liberation and Political Control (South Bend: St. Augustine’s Press, 2000).
 Bernays, Propaganda, 71.
 Kourosh Ziabari, “Testing the Limits of Freedom of Speech: Ernst Zundel Speaks Out,” Foreign Policy Journal, April 30, 2010.
 Kaplan, “Pedophilia: A Disorder, Not a Crime,” NY Times, October 5, 2014
 Margo Kaplan, “Why the Law Should Recognize the Joy of Sex,” Washington Post, November 22, 2013.
 Sam Sokol, “Anti-Zionism Is Anti-Semitism, Says TAU Director,” Jerusalem Post, May 21, 2014; Robert Wistrich, Anti-Zionism and Anti-Semitism,” Jewish Political Studies Review, Fall 2004; Emanuele Ottolenghi, “Anti-Zionism Is Anti-Semitism,” Guardian, November 29, 2003; Judea Pearl, “Is Anti-Zionism Hate?,” LA Times, March 15, 2009; Eylon Aslan-Levy, “Why Anti-Zionism Is Inherently Anti-Semitic,” Times of Israel, December 8, 2013.
 Kaplan, “Pedophilia: A Disorder, Not a Crime,” NY Times, October 5, 2014
 “Dominique Strauss-Kahn DNA ‘linked to maid,’” BBC, May 24, 2011; Philippe Sotto, “Strauss-Kahn Denies He Knew The Women At His Orgies Were Prostitutes,” Huffington Post, February 10, 2015; Dan Bilefsky, “Dominique Strauss-Kahn’s Defense: He Didn’t Know Prostitutes Were at the Orgies,” NY Times, February 10, 2015.
 Ted Johnson, “‘X-Men’ Director Bryan Singer Accused of Sexually Abusing Teenage Boy,” Variety Magazine, April 16, 2014; Anthony McCartney, “Bryan Singer Accused Of Sexually Assaulting Underage Boy,” Huffington Post, April 17, 2014.
 See for example E. Michael Jones, The Jewish Revolutionary Spirit and Its Impact on World History (South Bend: Fidelity Press, 2008), 996-1003; 1007-1010; E. Michael Jones, “Woody Allen and the Double Standard,” Culture Wars, March 2014.
 “Alan Dershowitz Denies Sexual Assault Allegations As ‘A Complete And Total Lie,’” Huffington Post, January 3, 2015; Ann Oldenburg, “Dershowitz on sex slave case: ‘I’m hiding nothing,’” USA Today, January 23, 2015.
 See for example Lana Gersten, “Haredim Begin Confronting Pedophilia,” Jewish Daily Forward, October 2, 2008.
 Gustav Schonfeld, “Pedophilia, the Pope and the Jews,” History News Network, April 26, 2010.
 For a cultural history on this, see E. Michael Jones, Libido Dominandi: Sexual Liberation and Political Control (South Bend: St. Augustine’s Press, 2000).
 E. Michael Jones, “Woody Allen and the Double Standard,” Culture Wars, March 2014.
 See for example Patrick Guinan, “Modern Psychology and Priest Sex Abuse,” Culture Wars, May 2004.
 E. Michael Jones, “Woody Allen and the Double Standard,” Culture Wars, March 2014.
 See for example Franz Schubert, The Music and the Man (Berkley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1999).
Posted by Jonas E. Alexis on April 5, 2015, With 9270 Reads Filed under Investigations, Life. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0. Both comments and pings are currently closed.