“One time I was helping in the kitchen. I don’t know if the chef was [messing] … with me. I hope so, but he was separating what looked to me like the torso of a very young, skinned pig. It had been roasted and he was chopping it into quarters, the ribs to be served that evening and the rest broken down for soups and casseroles. I said jokingly that it looked like a little kid. He just gave me this awful dead-eyed look for a second and said, ‘watch it.’”
Alleged Epstein staff testimony, 2011
[Taken down from 4chan]
“I was sitting near the head of the body. Nihoul had begun cutting up the shoulders, asking who wanted a nice fleshy part, saying this was the best meat. As he was carving, I saw that a tooth fell out of the boy’s open mouth onto the tray…. Nihoul served me last: a chunk of thigh meat, grayish brown. He jokingly offered salt and pepper. I took the salt shaker and soused my plate with salt, tore off a piece of flesh, put it in my mouth and tried to swallow without chewing. Meanwhile, Nihoul kept jabbering, talking about the importance of chewing your food well for good digestion. I hurriedly ate everything off my plate without thinking. The meat was slightly rotten, but so overcooked I tried to focus on the burned taste.”
Anneke Lucas
Quest for Love:
Memoir of a Child Sex Slave[i]
“The part which made me believe this child’s story, he talked about different babies being killed, but this particular one being stabbed, he curled up in a fetal position, he was 9 years old when he was telling the story. He curled up in a fetal position, and his eyes got real glazed, and he said, ‘They cooked that baby on the grill.’ And I thought, he has really flipped out. I mean, I didn’t know. And he said, ‘Oh, gross, it smelled like rotten chicken, or rotten deer.’”
Kathleen Sorenson
TV Interview, 1989[ii]
In a book titled Hysteries, Elaine Showalter argued that mass hysteria recurs throughout history. As an influential feminist, literary critic, and an Ivy League professor, she cites religious fundamentalism as an underlying cause of “satanic panics.” She tends to see Christianity itself as a “moral panic,” producing a kind of “pre-millennial anxiety.” And given her ideological commitments, this is perfectly understandable. Of course, such panics have been documented, and it would be wrong to deny that such things happen, or that fundamentalists can get carried away (like anyone else); but then, Showalter believes that all allegations of ritual abuse are “confabulations.” In drawing this conclusion, she may have missed something. A literary critic who delves into social science, who comments on matters of fact, ought to know that in a world of several billion people there might be a black swan (i.e., an genuine instance of ritual satanic abuse). Even if we were to admit that all swans observed are white, there are more things in heaven and earth than are dreamt of by feminist literature professors. We might ask Showalter, rhetorically, why rituals involving blood sacrifice would be so inconceivable when nearly every human society practiced such rites before the coming of Christianity? Even in the case of Christianity, Roman officials were concerned about the appearance of a cult in which members “ate the body” and “drank the blood” of their savior.[iii]
It would behoove Professor Showalter to consider, in fact, that Christianity is a religion of around 2.5 billion followers. The mysteries of Christianity, for both Protestants and Catholics, hold that Jesus offered himself as a definitive and literal blood sacrifice on the Cross. This is a core belief found in nearly all Christian denominations. In addition, Catholicism teaches the doctrine of transubstantiation, which says the Eucharist does not merely imitate the eating of Christ’s blood and body, but that the real blood and flesh of a living person (i.e., Jesus Christ) is consumed during the ritual for the purpose of acquiring spiritual grace.
Throughout the present discourse, the reader will be left in little doubt that ritual blood sacrifice is one of the oldest practices of mankind, going back to ages when nearly all nations were polytheistic (i.e., pagan). Secret cults, dangerous to civilized order, have appeared at intervals throughout history. Some of these cults were so wicked in their practices that they were stamped out with murderous efficiency by the state. Others crushed by the Church.
It may be the case, in this world of several billion people, that an Ivy League feminist is a protected person, not protected by a man as much as coddled by warped institutions that have become smug and stupid. The crisis of our civilization owes much to the undiscerning scientism of academics. The milieu of Professor Showalter cannot see past the liberal utopia they dream of. They cannot see to the heart of a deception, of an evil, that has been devouring us little by little for a very long time. It is my contention that the Epstein case is a marker, and no ordinary marker, pointing to clandestine operations of a criminal kind that are spiritually subverting our elite institutions. I submit that blackmail and perversion have been deployed as weapons by an enemy. This thesis would, no doubt, be denounced by Showalter as another instance of “moral panic.” She believes there never was a threat of communist subversion in the United States, as she makes clear in the last chapter of her book. Following a similar logic, she also refuses to believe that elite pedophile networks exist. Instead, she believes that allegations about these networks derive from “false memories” that result in “confabulations.” Since evidence for the existence of elite pedophile networks typically comes from people who have sought professional psychological help, Showalter blames psychotherapists even more than she blames religious fundamentalists. She cites The False Memory Syndrome Foundation in the United States and the False Memory Syndrome Society in the UK. These organizations are actively combatting psychologists who are helping patients recover suppressed memories of abuse.
It is curious that anyone familiar with the literature of psychology should obscure the fact of dissociation (i.e., memory loss) in childhood sexual abuse cases. Here is a political campaign, referred to by Showalter, organized to combat a major discovery of modern psychology. Please note: The work of Sigmund Freud’s contemporary, Pierre Janet, showed that childhood trauma can be so intense that it cannot be integrated by the mind. Instead of the abuse being remembered, the memory of the abuse is “split off” or dissociated. Janet discovered that these dissociated memories do not disappear; rather, they become “fixed ideas” that live in a secondary part of the mind, subsequently manifesting as physical symptoms (like hysterical paralysis, chronic pain, or tics). Dissociation can also manifest in the form of alternate personalities. Janet found that traumatic memories could be “triggered” by certain sounds or smells. According to Janet, victims of childhood abuse often develop what he called “phobia of memory,” where the mind suffers from a reflexive fear of its own past. What is significant, in respect of the psychological profession, is the discovery during the 1980s, by large numbers of psychologists, of a rising tide of sexual and physical abuse. In 1986 there was a meeting of the International Conference on Multiple Personality/Dissociation in Chicago. Psychotherapists were then worried because 25 percent of their Multiple Personality Disorder (MPD) patients were describing memories of torture and abuse in secret satanic cults. According to Showalter,
“By 1989, George Ganaway, director of the Center for Dissociative Studies at the University of Georgia, disclosed that almost half the patients in his clinic and elsewhere were ‘reporting vividly detailed memories of cannibalistic revels and extensive experiences such as being used by cults during adolescence as serial baby breeders for ritual sacrifices.”[iv]
Many therapists believed in the testimony of their patients, though some expressed skepticism. A split developed. The psychiatric profession found itself divided. As we see from Showalter’s documentation, these reports of satanic ritual abuse were not coming from one country, or one region within the United States. Reports of ritual satanic abuse were coming from many places. And the stories were identical. How could patients in different places, speaking different languages, simultaneously come up with the same set of stories? Showalter suggested that American therapists contaminated therapists in other countries with what they allegedly discovered. Showalter argued that children and adults reporting satanic abuse were confabulating. She wrote, “As witch-hunters’ accusations became wilder and wilder, as courts rejected lawsuit after lawsuit for lack of evidence, many therapists became uneasy. Years of lawsuits and intensive investigations have unearthed no proof that these satanic cults even exist.”[v]
In this matter we must be careful. False claims of abuse undoubtedly will arise. But the explanation Showalter offers is weak. Lack of evidence in a courtroom process, in a situation where evidence would be difficult to acquire, should not be surprising. Add to this the possibility that a cult network might have already extended its tentacles to the police and court system. In fact, you have two problems: (1) the unbelievable assertion that a pedophile-connected conspiracy exists within the criminal justice system; and (2) a negative reaction within the system to the allegations (whether the allegations are true or false).
It is only a matter of time before the system itself, annoyed at this rising “hysteria” of satanic abuse claims, criminalizes the accusations themselves. As we remember from the Pizzagate controversy, many commentators were deplatformed for suggesting the existence of an elite pedophile ring in Washington, D.C. The barons of social media put a lid on this. And there has been, for many years, an ongoing campaign to criminalize those who accuse others of satanic ritual abuse. There is even legislation under consideration to sanction therapists who recover certain memories from dissociated patients. According to Showalter:
“The False Memory Foundation wants to regulate the practice of psychotherapy through a Mental Health Consumer Protection Act, which would require the patient’s informed consent, prohibit insurance funding for questionable or unproved treatments, criminalize false accusations of abuse, ban memory recovery and enhancement as courtroom evidence, and create a Model Licensing Act. They believe that the law should require psychotherapists to keep records, carry malpractice insurance, and be liable for several years after the treatment.”[vi]
Before we see what lurks behind all this, we must again acknowledge that there are irresponsible therapists using unethical methods to “recover memories.” But when we put a magnifying glass on the False Memory Foundation we come up with some disturbing details. For example, leading researchers for the False Memory Foundation, Paul and Shirley Eberle, were previously publishers of pornography.[vii] Their publications were called Finger and L.A. Star. In 1972 they also wrote an illustrated book for children titled, The Adventures of Mrs. Pussycat. Of special interest, given the Epstein revelations, they published a book on the McMartin preschool trial of the 1980s which Alan Dershowitz (named in the Epstein files) praised as “a wakeup call to those who believe that prosecutors and their experts can be trusted to do justice in the emotional context of child abuse.”[viii] As a chilling afterthought, the wife of a McMartin preschool victim wrote in a Wikipedia article:
“It kills me to hear people call this trial a hoax. My husband is a survivor of the damage that these people wrought. It has touched every aspect of his life, and as I watch him struggle I know in my heart the accusations of abuse were indeed true. ‘It wasn’t some satanic ritual like these articles keep saying,’ he told me after reading a case history I was pursuing. ‘It was just a sick man getting drunk and doing terrible things to children. By the time it got to court the media had turned it into such a circus that even if they did do it, they’d never be convicted.’”[ix]
Why did the media, otherwise so careful, turn this case into a circus? The way this played out makes very little sense. But if you had a case of this kind, and there was a real satanic cult, maybe you want to muddy the waters. One angry researcher, on the same thread, wrote, “Who, in God’s name, are the people who fight so hard to try and debunk those of us who come here to try and present evidence and the facts?”
Is there an ongoing information war over pedophilia that carries over to satanic ritual abuse? Showalter says that confabulation is a technical term “for narratives or memories constructed dialogically between client and therapist” that “cannot be distinguished from truth on the basis of internal evidence alone.”[x] How easy, then, it would be to pile absurdities onto a simple case of pedophilia, bringing ridicule not only to the subject of child sexual abuse, but on the idea that satanic abuse takes place anywhere. There is, indeed, in ongoing information war surrounding the sexual abuse of children. And in some cases, we find that those who are attacking the reliability of recovered memories in child abuse cases are themselves pedophiles!
Adding more fuel to the fire, the founder of the False Memory Foundation, Ralph Underwager, wrote something rather strange in the Dutch pro-pedophilia journal Paidika. He suggested, “Pedophiles can be bold and courageously affirm what they choose … I am also a theologian and as a theologian, I believe it is God’s will that there be closeness and intimacy, unity of flesh, between people….” Underwager was asked to step down from the False Memory Foundation when he refused to disavow this statement.[xi]
It seems clear that pedophiles are afraid of recovered memories. They want to make life difficult for therapists who help victims remember who victimized them. They are actually lobbying to pass laws criminalizing those who would expose pedophiles. And yet, the False Memory Foundation is taken seriously by Professor Showalter, who sees millennial madness and fundamentalism behind it all. Too many therapists are, she suggested, eliciting false memories from patients. According to Showalter, “In a supportive cultural environment … hysterical syndromes multiply as they interact with social forces such as religious beliefs, political agendas, and rumor panics.”[xii] In her eyes, mass hysteria becomes especially dangerous when it involves traditional enemies or scapegoat groups. “The longer the epidemic [i.e., hysterical delusion] continues, the greater the participants’ need to believe it is genuine,” she noted. The chain of belief, once entrenched, is hard to break as each wave of publicity adds to the mounting hysteria.
According to Showalter, anorexia and bulimia are examples of modern hysterical epidemics; so are claims of alien abduction, chronic fatigue syndrome, satanic ritual abuse, recovered childhood memories, gulf war syndrome, and multiple personality disorder [MPD]. But then, as we read on, Showalter fails to properly define hysteria. She thrashes about, rolling through an ever-changing number of definitions. Furthermore, she does not say where mass hallucinations or delusions come from. Is it malice or madness? To get out of her difficulties she points to historian Richard Hofstadter’s “The Paranoid Style in American Politics” because Hofstadter uses the word “paranoid,” even though Hofstadter was a historian rather than a clinician. The atheist or agnostic liberal, in this instance, identifies anticommunism or anti-Satanism with an irrational faith in God and, more significantly, a paranoid belief in the existence of the Devil. This must be a mental illness, says the feminist literary critic under her breath. It never occurs to her, as it never occurred to Hofstadter, that Devil worshippers, or occultists, or child traffickers, or communists, or witches, might exist.
It was Fedor Dostoevsky who suggested that people like Showalter and Hofstadter are dangerous fools. Dostoevsky thought that disbelief in the existence of the Devil signified naivete about the depths of human evil. The soul is center stage in life’s drama, and the soul’s landscape is about good and evil, right and wrong. In Dostoevsky, this is passionately portrayed. To believe in God without acknowledging the Devil makes moral choice meaningless. It is to embrace a kind of nihilism – the nihilism Dostoevsky bore witness against. “Dostoevsky took [his] … shocking revelations about man’s nature for granted,” wrote William Hubben. “Man was corrupt, but there was infinitely more to say: he was also capable of greatness and even saintliness.”[xiii] Elaine
Showalter and Richard Hofstadter will never see any genuine saintliness or heroism in man because their philosophy will not recognize evil. Instead, they quote Arthur Miller and wax eloquent about his play – The Crucible – where the Salem witch trials of 1692 serve as an allegory for McCarthyism. The old liberal shibboleths remain as dull and smug as ever. These academics will never admit that McCarthy’s imperfections were exaggerated; that they themselves have committed every offence attributed to McCarthy. Who, indeed, in all this talk of witch-hunts and “satanic panics” were busy destroying the reputation of Senator McCarthy? Who was blacklisted and who were the blacklisters? And why, in a book about hysteria, did a feminist like Showalter dismiss the testimony of so many women, raping them again with the hard tool of her gynocritical psychologizing? If she had wanted the truth, she should have turned to Dostoevsky, who prophetically wrote in the 1860s that socialism would kill 100 million Russians in the twentieth century; and who wrote a novel alternately translated into English as The Possessed (or, The Devils) – a book that has been called his “greatest onslaught on Nihilism.”[xiv]
In her chapter on satanic ritual abuse, Showalter is not embarrassed by her refusal to meet with Dr. Valerie Sinason, the most distinguished advocate of satanic ritual abuse in the United Kingdom. Sinason was a psychotherapist at the Tavistock Clinic, who edited a book titled Treating Survivors of Satanist Sexual Abuse. But Showalter says this is ridiculous. Even Wikipedia says that ritual satanic abuse is a “moral panic consisting of over 12,000 unsubstantiated cases.” But then, if you have 12,000 witnesses to something, how do you claim it is “unsubstantiated”? How do you justify the claim that 12,000 witnesses are confabulating?
It seems that Showalter follows the method of those “academics” who, in 1800, refused to believe the testimony of thousands of peasants who said rocks fall from the sky. It is hardly surprising that meteorites refused to cooperate by falling directly on universities. Instead, meteorites fell on peasant fields, and the peasants who reported this falling of rocks from the sky, were disbelieved. How absurd and ignorant, said the scientists. Silly peasants. Everyone knows that rocks cannot fall from the sky. But then, in 1803, following a massive meteorite shower in L’Aigle, France, Jean-Baptiste Biot found that rocks did, indeed, fall from the sky.
For many decades, especially in the 1920s through the mid-1950s, the existence of the Mafia was officially denied by U.S. law enforcement, especially by FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover. It did not matter what people reported on the street. In those days, for the FBI, the Mafia was a myth. And so, today, our Ivy League feminists tell us that satanic ritual abuse is a myth, despite 12,000 reported cases. Satan-worshippers simply do not exist. And yet, one shudders to think that rocks falling from the sky might have been written off as a form of hysteria that gripped peasants, or that the Mafia was a “moral panic.”
One purpose of Showalter’s book was to dismiss ritual abuse. What is her motive? We may suspect that “religious fundamentalism” has become her Devil. “Child molesters, pornographers, and child sex rings exemplify real abuse that has no documented connection to satanism,” says Showalter. How, then, does she explain the views of Dr. Sinason? Obviously, says Showalter, Sinason persists in her absurdities because it “would be more than awkward for her to back down.” Unfortunately, the same argument may be applied to Dr. Showalter; though we wonder, at some point in the future, whether she might be compelled to eat humble pie; for what, after all, was this temple on Epstein’s island? or Epstein’s demonic statuettes? or that crystal ball on the stairs of Epstein’s New York residence? How does she explain that the Epstein files reflect the claims of Sinason’s patients, with victims suffering at the hands of “elite and super-rich” perpetrators?
Are we hallucinating when we see references, in Jeffrey Epstein’s correspondence, to pics of nine and ten-year-old girls, or to “torture videos”? We find, in Epstein’s emails, evidence that he was paying parapsychologists to run experiments, making mention of “taboo science” and “wacko” scientists, like Rupert Sheldrake. If the FBI is glossing over 100 witnesses in the Epstein case, Showalter glosses over 12,000 witnesses who are said to be “confabulating” or dredging up “false memories”? Are we to say, with Showalter, that there is nothing to any of this? Are we all victims of a “moral panic”? Or are we opposed in principle to recognizing the existence of evil? – in Dostoevsky’s sense.
Showalter claims there is no forensic evidence for ritual abuse. But then, there is the case of Marc Dutroux, in 1996.
Here we find something that is undeniably “forensic.” Let us, out of respect, name the victims: Julie Lejeune and Melissa Russo, both eight-years-old, found buried in the garden of Dutroux’s accomplice, Bernard Weinstein. Adding to the carnage, Mr. Weinstein’s body was also buried in the garden. Two other girls, Sabine Dardenne (12), and Laetitia Delhez (14), were rescued alive from a secret dungeon. Witnesses and victims’ families told police that Dutroux was part of a pedophile ring that was bound to a satanic cult connected to a self-styled “Institute of Black Magic,” based near Charleroi. A letter was found at Mr. Weinstein’s house which said the group needed to procure victims for use by their High Priestess. The site of the group’s temple was raided by police. The police found human skulls and jars of animal blood. There were several other witnesses who named more than thirty victims who were allegedly murdered. These turned out to be children that had gone missing. And there the trail ended because the police decided that enough was enough.
There is your forensic evidence, backed by testimony. Was Marc Dutroux a Satanist or shall we present the Institute of Black Magic as non-satanic? There were many potential witnesses in this case. Some were undoubtedly terrified into silence. In fact, some were murdered – like Christine Van Hees, Katrien De Cuyper, and Carine Dellaert.[xv] Régina Louf (witness X1) told police she had watched rituals involving sadism, torture, rape, murder, and blackmail. She even admitted to committing murders because the network had ordered her to carry them out on pain of death. Everything was connected to big business and government, she said. Even the police were compromised. She testified to satanic ceremonies involving children. She identified Marc Dutroux and Michel Nihoul as perpetrators. Nihoul was a Belgian businessman and radio host known for organizing “sex parties” at various castles, which included high-ranking VIPs, government officials, and police. Dutroux said that Nihoul was connected to a “powerful international network of pedophiles.” This admission was explosive at the time, and not unlike the Epstein revelations. What, then, happened? Did the police follow through on their leads? The police, who were implicated by the testimony of Dutroux and Louf, claimed that Régina Louf’s testimony was not credible. Belgium was convulsed by this case, and Dutroux was convicted. But his powerful friend, Nihoul, was acquitted. Researcher Philip Fairbanks, laying out the Dutroux case in his Pedogate Primer, tells us that the Belgian police destroyed evidence and dragged their feet. Consider, as well, that it took nearly 8 years to convict Dutroux (even though the evidence against him was indisputable). After 29 businessmen were named as part of the network, noted Fairbanks, “[Thirty] witnesses died under mysterious circumstances before being able to testify. DNA tests and hair samples disappeared and other evidence was ignored or destroyed….” All crimes, in this case, were pinned on Marc Dutroux. It is worth noting that Dutroux’s wife, who had helped him kidnap girls in the 1980s, had been an elementary school teacher.[xvi]
If thirty potential witnesses die, against all odds, how many willing witnesses are left? It is important to add that Dutroux’s own mother tried to turn him into the police some years earlier. But the police were not interested in arresting him. Why? Others had reported Dutroux to the police. Again, nothing was done. This is the same pattern we find with Jeffrey Epstein and the Franklin coverup in Nebraska. Much is known in advance by many, though nobody does anything.
It seems we are looking at a pattern. For years the witnesses are disbelieved, ignored, threatened, or bought off. In some cases, the witnesses are discredited or the investigation muddied with injections of false information, exaggeration, wild rumors (i.e., McMartin preschool trial). In some cases the weight of evidence forces the system to press charges. The case is narrowly construed so that the blame is placed on one or two people who take the fall for the larger network. End of story. The newspapers and media either exaggerate or mitigate the magnitude of what is reported.
Consider the present situation, when nobody can deny the extensive nature of Epstein pedophile network. Important people have been implicated, but their identities are nonetheless protected by the state. Why? We learn of rich and powerful people participating in sex parties with underage girls. The public becomes aroused. The government and FBI try to put a lid on it, close the case, mask the names of perpetrators. There is complexity here, and many elements to the story.
Elite opinion, erupting out of the Ivy League and the New York Times, will sneer. They hate Donald Trump and would like to see him hang. But the accuser’s finger points in more than one direction. And now, we must give this Devil his due. It will therefore not be long before we hear the following question: Should it be a crime to sleep with a 17-year-old girl? That is, after all, what Epstein was convicted of. They will forget that this was a plea deal. They will ignore all the other evidence and concentrate on this. Let us not dwell on stories of torture and rape, of blackmail and hints of cannibalism, temples, or demonic statuettes. Whole articles were written about Dutroux without mentioning the “institute for black magic,” or the name of the satanic group that was whispered in those days throughout Belgium. Who will, in the end, remember that Epstein financed parapsychologists, that Epstein had a temple and a refrigerator full of “jerky”?[xvii]
It must be admitted that the imagination can run away with itself. People have believed in things that are untrue, especially where superstition has taken hold. There are mind viruses that cause epidemics; and we should not kid ourselves about people taking rumor or speculation as fact. Conspiracy theories, antisemitism, and witch-hunting, have led to untold loss of life. In moral panics, thousands of innocent lives can be lost. But then, we must remind ourselves that ritual abuse has claimed many victims in recorded history. Ritual human sacrifice was practiced by Scandinavians, Etrurians, Aztecs, Mayans, Incas, Shang Dynasty Chinese, Scythians, Celts, Carthaginians, and early Egyptians. Ritual human sacrifice often involves heart extraction, decapitation, burying alive, drowning or burning. The reason for such sacrifices was, in most cases, to satisfy bloodthirsty deities whose supernatural powers could be tapped to assure good harvests or success in war.
Readers should also be reminded that ritual animal sacrifice was practiced by nearly all nations from before 3500 BC to the late Roman period. Animals favored for sacrifice included bulls, sheep, pigs, dogs, goats, horses and llamas. Thousands of animals were sometimes sacrificed at one time. Today, animal sacrifice is practiced by Hindus and Muslims and by Afro-Caribbean faiths like Santeria and Voodoo. It was the advent of Christianity, more than anything, that reduced the practice of animal sacrifice worldwide. And all throughout, even those societies that did not prefer human sacrifice, believed in its efficacy and occasionally practiced it.[xviii]
In Prescott’s famous history of Mexico and Peru we see that ritual blood sacrifice, especially the slaughtering of human beings, was regularly practiced in Mexico during the century before the coming of the Spanish. Prescott says in a footnote, based on the testimony of Bishop Zumarraga, who lived in Mexico shortly after the conquest, that 20,000 victims “were yearly slaughtered” in the Aztec capital. The number of those sacrificed are disputed today, especially by scholars who want to rehabilitate the reputation of Aztec culture; yet even the most conservative estimates suggest that thousands were sacrificed annually. Prescott describes a famous instance of Aztec ritual human sacrifice as follows:
“At the dedication of the great temple of Huitzilopotochli, in 1486, the prisoners, who for some years have been reserved for the purpose, were drawn from all quarters to the capital. They were ranged in files, forming a procession nearly two miles long. The ceremony consumed several days, and seventy thousand captives are said to have perished at the shrine of this terrible deity!”[xix]
What did the Aztecs imagine this was for? What could have prompted them to such a grizzly spectacle? We should avoid the presumption that the Aztecs were irrational, superstitious, or psychotic. What psychic mechanism turned the Aztecs into a mass murdering nation of Moloch-worshippers? There is a lot of work in slaughtering human beings. There is the work of capturing or persuading people to go along. There is the work of chopping them up and eating some of their body parts, mounting their severed heads on racks, and dealing with their angry relatives. Why go to the trouble? This cries out for an explanation.
By some accounts, ritual sacrifice and ritual cannibalism is about “nourishing” the sun god in his battle against eternal darkness. Yet the “nourishing” of this “god” is more than a little sinister. The Incas, in their turn, preferred to sacrifice children because children are pure and innocent. What kind of “sun god” eats babies? I wrack my brain to understand why any sensible king would suggest baby-sacrifices as part of the state religion; or why people would go along with it. We assume, when explaining all this, that these “gods” are imaginary beings. But maybe we are dead wrong. Some physicists believe there are other dimensions. Perhaps there are intelligent beings in those other dimensions – beings that like to feed.
This idea is affirmed by the clinical experience of three psychologists (Jerry Marzinsky, Sherry Swiney, and Wilson Van Dusen) who claim that schizophrenia is caused by vampiric entities who are “not of this world.” According to Marzinsky, the voices heard by schizophrenics generate “an enormous amount of negative emotional energy from their victims by … bringing to mind memories of past unhealed trauma. They would dig up vexing memories of incidents long forgotten with devastating effect.”[xx]
Are there intelligences, extradimensional in origin, that derive pleasure or power from tormenting innocent victims? Is there a molester inside every molester? “The voices are consummate liars,” noted Marzinsky; “they will tell any lie, or bend perception, to produce the most negative, emotionally wrenching interpretation. They are constantly in search of information coming from the environment that will inflame a patient’s unhealed traumas….”[xxi]
Did Jeffrey Epstein induce trauma in his victims because something wicked had infected his soul? There is no corroborated testimony of “satanic” rituals in the Jeffrey Epstein case, though some observers might argue that Epstein’s funding of parapsychologists like Dean Radin and Rupert Sheldrake imply a satanic agenda. In hankering after “wacko” scientists in areas of “taboo science,” Epstein begins to resemble Heinrich Faust from Goethe’s tragic play. And this much is relatable. Black magic is central to the plot line of Faust, who conjures a devil named Mephistopheles; and Faust resembles Epstein. Magic, in this sense, is all about cheating; and that was Epstein’s forte – his chief mode of interacting. Like Faust, he destroys the life of an innocent woman (or women). He craved power and knowledge. Survivor Jennifer Araoz said, “This evil man had no remorse or caring for what he did to anyone.” Linda Gates called him “the personification of evil.”[xxii]
Epstein believed himself to be “special.” He brought the biologist Rupert Sheldrake to Zorro Ranch so he could discover the magic power of touching at a distance by directing his to a targeted person. He was fascinated by British neuropsychiatrist Peter Fenwick’s studies on near-death experiences. Both these scientists suggested that the mind could project itself outside of the body. Nothing was out-of-bounds for Epstein. Heinrich Faust did not fear the Devil either. He was unafraid of the madness that comes by playing with devils. Indeed, Epstein wanted to acquire psychic powers and began a correspondence with Dr. Jeffrey Martin, found of the “Finder’s Course.” In a 2017 email, Martin made a request for legal age slave girls “of my own choosing.” For the price of $10 million he offered to give Epstein specific “weird” spiritual peak experiences, also known as Persistent Non-Symbolic Experiences (PNSE), leading to advanced states of consciousness. Epstein was clearly interested, though the Epstein documents do not show whether he paid the $10 million. Also, Epstein was interested in people with psychic abilities, and he was interested in vulnerable people with these abilities. “I view nothing as out of bounds,” he explained. Here is the very image of Goethe’s Faust.
As an intriguing aside, Goethe’s Faust was influenced by the writings of scientist and mystic Emanuel Swedenborg, who was the inspiration of Wilson Van Dusen and Jerry Marzinsky’s treatments for patients who hear voices. The architecture of the modern mind, as depicted in Goethe’s Faust, was described using occult and supernatural images drawn from Swedenborg. In fact, Goethe became interested in Swedenborg through his mentor, Fraülein von Klettenberg, in Frankfurt. The structure of the afterlife depicted in the final scene of Faust Part II closely resembles Swedenborg’s depiction in Heaven and Hell. Goethe shared Swedenborg’s opposition to literalism and emphasis on “correspondence” – the idea that the natural world is the physical manifestation of a higher spiritual reality. The linkages here are meaningful, while the degradation of Faust, like the degradation of Epstein, offers an unsettling parallel and testament to an ongoing process of modernity’s Mephistophelian course.
The psychologists – Van Dusen, Marzinsky, and Swiney – underscore something that pedophiles and black magicians knew thousands of years ago; namely, that traumatizing children is a method for summoning and perhaps interacting with powers and principalities; a tool for controlling presidents and prime ministers; a source of secrets and a passage to a Faustian mastery of the universe. “Present day psychosis always involves some degree of self pride,” wrote Dr. Wilson Van Dusen in a book on Swedenborg. This spiritual madness, he added, leads to obsession and possession. If the barrier that separates us from evil is ever compromised, then a “man would be in grave danger for his mental health, and even for his life. If evil spirits knew they were with [a] man, they would do all sorts of things to torment him and destroy his life.”[xxiii]
Van Dusen and his colleagues tested the theory that the voices heard by schizophrenic patients are independent of the patients. They effected cures where drugs and traditional psychiatry could only mask symptoms. Their inspiration in using this method was, of course, Emanual Swedenborg, who wrote, “The nature of evil spirits is such that the more innocent a person is, the greater is their ardor to inflict harm upon him.”[xxiv] In his book, The Presence of Other Worlds: The Psychological Findings of Emanuel Swedenborg, Van Dusen embraces Swedenborg’s theory that spiritual influences surround us at all times. Van Dusen was forced to conclude that patients who hear voices are, indeed, afflicted by demons. He took this very seriously when he wrote,
“We are mostly unconscious of the other spiritual worlds. It is meant to be that way, for it is very dangerous when these worlds are opened up to a person, just as Swedenborg said. He did not advocate that anyone try to follow him.”
In a book titled Heaven and Hell, Swedenborg said there were good spirits, or Angels, who are full of love; and demons or “Satans,” who choose a life of cruelty and gravitate toward hell. Swedenborg postulated the existence of a “spiritual homeostasis” which is maintained between heaven and hell, preserving human free will on Earth by balancing the influences of good and evil.[xxv] Van Dusen explained,
“Both Swedenborg and medieval literature spoke of the aim of spirits to possess and control some part of a patient’s body. Parts involved in my observations have been the ear, eye, tongue, and genitals. Medieval literature speaks of intercourse between a person and his or her possessing spirit, giving these spirits the names ‘incubi’ and ‘succubi,’ depending on their sex. One female patient described her sexual relations with her male spirit as both more pleasurable and more inward than normal intercourse.”[xxvi]
Swedenborg wrote extensively on the relationship between spirits and sexual obsession, giving a detailed analysis in a 1768 book titled Conjugal Love, which contrasted the “pleasures of insanity” with the “delights of wisdom.” He claimed that evil spirits can “feed” perverse inclinations, amplifying obsessions. While outright demonic possession is rare, internal dominance by evil spirits is more common as demons actuate their own lust through human victims. Malevolent spirits will exploit a person’s desire to indulge in unhealthy activities, ultimately destroying the person from within. Swedenborg called this “scortatory love,” which he described as a type of insanity involving cycles of passionate courtship, jealousy, love, and hatred. Forbidden sexual activities (adultery and perversion) violate what Swedenborg saw as the union of “goodness and truth” within the soul.
An evil spirit, lusting for the blood of innocent victims, burrows its way into the psyche of the pedophile and torturer. Persons who descend into ritual human sacrifice, noted Swedenborg, are engaged in a “profanation” rather than a valid religious act. Swedenborg further stated that anyone harming children would, without question, draw the attention of demons (if demons were not already present and active). It was, he added, our inner intentions that determined the spiritual influences around us. In hell, he explained, there were societies whose “most intense pleasure” is to punish, torment, and inflict pain. Engaging in activities which harm the innocent will align a person with evil. Swedenborg held that children were special in this context, on account of their innocence. He also said that children were protected by angels; that the person who repeatedly attacks and harms children would end up in hell.
Catholic exorcists and demonologists have long warned that exploitation of the innocent can create “doorways” or spiritual opening for demonic influence. Grave sins include sexual abuse and murder, which are seen as a rejection of God’s order. Such sins invite demonic infestation, oppression, and possession. A pedophile ring, in this context, would be the ultimate portal to hell.[xxvii]
All ancient societies had some knowledge of these things. The ancient Romans, though they were pagans, conducted rituals to expel evil spirits. They employed purifying torches, lustral water, and a “sweeping ceremony” using sheepfolds. Under the Republic, the Romans passed laws against the use of magic for private, malevolent purposes. The earliest Roman legal code was The Twelve Tablets (450 BC), which forbade the casting of harmful spells. In 81 BC the Lex Cornelia de sicariis et veneficiis, forbade “evil rites” and “sorcery.”
Related to all this, there was a “satanic panic” recorded under the Roman Republic in 186 BC. The leading Roman historian of antiquity, Titus Livius, did not think it was a case of superstitious hysteria. He reported the event as something very serious which was handled responsibly by Rome’s magistrates. A Roman consul discovered a subversive cult during his term of office. His investigation showed that rape and murder were among the cult’s initiatory rites. The chief witness was terrified to tell the truth, fearing for her life. The leading consul of that year, Spurius Postumius, called it a Bacchic cult. Initiation into the cult involved an oath to do evil. Titus Livius said this cult spread “like a plague” throughout Italy. When the Roman government declared this cult illegal, thousands fled Rome so that the city was partially depopulated. Livius puts the following speech into the mouth of the Consul Spurius Postumius:
“Unless you are on your guard, Citizens of Rome, this present meeting, held in the daylight, legally summoned by a consul, can be paralleled by another meeting held in the night. Now, as individuals they are afraid of you, as you stand assembled in a united body; but presently, when you have scattered to your houses in the city or to your homes in the country, they will have assembled, and will be making plans for their own safety and at the same time for your destruction; and then you as individuals, will have to fear them as a united body. That is why each one of you ought to hope that all those whom you care for may be of sound mind. If lust, if madness, has snatched off any of them into that whirlpool, then the person concerned should deem such a one to belong not to himself but to those with whom he has conspired to commit every kind of wrongdoing and crime.”[xxviii]
The consul offered a warning to the people of Rome “so that no superstitious fear may agitate your minds when you observe us suppressing the Bacchanalia and breaking up these criminal gatherings. All this we shall do,” he promised. It seems that Postumius was aware of the dangers attending a “moral panic.” He did not want the Roman people to be filled with “superstitious fear.” He wanted everyone to act with care and caution.
This episode from Roman history shows that nothing is new, everything has happened before. What we call “ritual abuse” or “satanic cults” existed before the birth of Christ. Ancient politicians actively suppressed these illicit sex cults. They believed this kind of activity was a danger to society. Today we deny that such things take place. Few would publicly call for the suppression of sexually licentious cults. As with the Franklin coverup in Nebraska, and the Dutroux case in Belgium, authorities are quick to cover the tracks of powerful perpetrators. Were the ancient authorities stupid in acting against such things? Or did they preserve their society against disaster? Everything we know about political stability suggests that this kind of activity, if allowed to infect a society’s elite strata, could take the whole system down. In this context, it would be nice to know if MAGA is actually MMGA – Make Moloch Great Again; For the leaders of MAGA appear to be avoiding the issue. The communists and the Russians, the Chinese and the Iranians, will exploit the Epstein affair. They are already saying that capitalism coincides with a “Satanic elite.” At long last, said Alexander Dugin in a recent X posting, “the right and the left can unite to overthrow capitalism.”
Epstein’s pedophile ring is a cult equivalent. For all we know it has interlocking ties with the Belgian ring connected to Marc Dutroux. It may not be satanic in a literal sense, yet if we employ Swedenborg’s non-literal methodology we cannot deny that Epstein’s character was of the Devil. Those who saw Steve Bannon’s videotaped interview with Jeffrey Epstein may remember a peculiar question that Bannon asked: “Do you think you’re the Devil himself?” Epstein seemed a little confused or even nonplussed by this question, so that Bannon asked again, explaining that the Devil had good attributes, such as being “incredibly smart” and “brilliant.”
Sorry – Say what?
We know that Jeffrey Epstein was trafficking underage girls to powerful men even as his residences had video cameras in every room – even in the bathrooms. And yet, with important people using those bathrooms, the U.S. Government has not dealt with the problem in a forthright manner (as seen in Pam Bondi’s testimony before Congress two weeks ago). Clearly, this is not a case of “satanic panic.” Quite the opposite. The country’s concern about child trafficking in high places is not hysteria, whatever Showalter’s literary criticism suggests. People want answers and they are fed up.
It is a desperate situation. We have a confluence of espionage, child trafficking, blackmail, insider trading, and weird science. Is the investigation over? Epstein was, at one time, a close friend of the current U.S. president, and a good friend of a former president. Hillary Clinton: “I don’t remember meeting him.” Bill Clinton: “I saw nothing…. I did nothing wrong.” Donald Trump: “The Epstein files exonerate me.” These answers are clever. “I don’t remember” does not mean Hillary did not meet him. “I saw nothing” from the man who “did not have sex with that woman, Monica Lewinsky,” is what? “The Epstein files exonerate me,” says Donald Trump. But where, dear Donald, are the FBI 302’s that were withheld by the DOJ (linking you to crimes)?
It is the most serious scandal in the history of the United States. It is a scandal involving two presidents, a former secretary of state, a commerce secretary, a senator, scientists, billionaires, celebrity lawyers, European royalty from two countries, an Israeli prime minister, a former Norwegian prime minister who was hospitalized a few days ago after a suicide attempt. And the Department of Justice withholds 2.5 million pages of evidence. If this does not leave you sitting bolt upright, then nothing will ever wake you from your slumbers. New Mexico’s Commissioner of Public Lands Stephanie Garcia Richard has, “called on federal and state law enforcement to investigate allegations that two girls were buried in the hills surrounding sex offender Jeffrey Epstein’s Zorro Ranch.”[xxix]
Where there are two bodies there are many. Anyone who has spent time researching these pedophile rings knows that many murders happen. Not just murders in snuff-videos, but murders to silence witnesses, to kill people who know too much. What is most disturbing, perhaps, is when we look at Epstein’s lawyers: Allen Dershowitz and Kenneth Starr. Readers will forgive this digression; but given Starr’s epic failure to bring President Bill Clinton to justice in the 1990s, we wonder why Starr is showing up in the Epstein mix. Such a cozy pack of elite politicians and lawyers! Everyone is covering for everyone. Instead of getting proof of Clinton’s real crimes, Starr focused on the Monica Lewinsky affair. This proved to be the ultimate diversionary sideshow that succeeded in keeping Bill and Hillary Clinton out of prison. In fact, that is what Judicial Watch’s Larry Klayman told me some years ago when I interviewed him. It was known to many investigators at the time that the Clintons were selling secrets to China. Then there was the strange death of White House Council Vince Foster, and the 45-caliber bullet hole in Commerce Secretary Ron Brown’s head. Each case was covered up. No one was held accountable. Is it possible that Ken Starr, playing the role of prosecutor, was making sure the prosecution went the wrong way? Perhaps, having heard all this from Larry Klayman more than a decade ago, it is not so strange to find Ken Starr writing a warm email to Jeffrey Epstein, dated 15 March 2012: “My friend, my brother – all is well. Come see me. Otherwise, I’ll come knocking on your door. Best, Ken.” As it turns out, Starr was the “most powerful force” behind Epstein’s 2008 plea deal. Some might ask what is wrong with Ken Starr being Epstein’s lawyer. Nothing at all. But as one journalist noted, “Zealously representing a criminal defendant does not require being their buddy.”[xxx]
There is something very crooked in these cozy relationships between sexual predators and political crocodiles. Maneaters, every one of them. Something wicked has burrowed into the system, occupying our institutions and exposing us to untold dangers. Nebraska state Senator John DeCamp, after investigating the pedophilia and satanic abuse claims of Paul Bonacci (during the Franklin Federal Credit Union scandal), penned a paragraph of melancholy regret:
“I have often said that I wish I had never heard of Franklin Credit Union, Larry King, or Paul Bonacci. I sincerely mean this. Why? Simply because I believe Paul Bonacci is telling the truth [about the pedophile rings], and that our institutions of government have been as badly corrupted as that implies.
“If I still had the luxury of believing, as I once did, that the allegations of drug abuse, child abuse, pedophilia, theft and satanic cult activity were exaggerated imaginings of some over-active child and adult imaginations, then I would not have to do anything about Franklin. I could still be enjoying an income of $400,000 per year as a lobbyist, without having to work so hard, instead of being financially strangled as clients are intimidated away from hiring me, because of the Franklin connection.”[xxxi]
Perhaps we have a system where good citizens are punished and malefactors protected. This setup has been called the “Swamp.” We ought to remember how Donald Trump promised to drain the swamp almost a decade ago. But he drained nothing. He is not like Roman Consul Spurius Postumius who put down the Bacchanalian cult of 186 BC. In fact, Trump was recently caught on a microphone wishing people would kowtow to him like they do to North Korean Supreme Leader, Kim Jong Un. Trump has no love of the Republic. Like other demagogues, he admires dictators. If it is not a disgrace to wish for toadies after the fashion of an Asian sociopath, it nonetheless indicates his anti-republican disposition. The situation is particularly alarming when we see how President Trump regards the Epstein Files. His name as well as his Mar-a-Lago resort are mentioned 38,000 times across 5,300 files. On 3 February Trump said, “I think it’s really time for the country to maybe get onto something else….” Incredibly, Trump added, “it was a conspiracy against me, literally by Epstein and other people.”[xxxii]
Of course, it is always about him. Trump is the center of the known universe. All stars, all planets, all happenings revolve around him. And yet, this overblown clown, full of overblown claims, is very nervous about releasing anything further. He would prefer to release more secret UFO files. Why is Trump so eager to divert attention at this moment? One might call it a conspiracy on Trump’s periphery, involving his friends. But how did they become his friends? How did he prosper within these circles, rubbing shoulders with child rapists? How can he be clean? Where are the missing FBI 302s?
And what about Trump’s commerce secretary, Howard Lutnick, who lied about his association with Epstein? And there is Pam Bondi, who has no real desire to go after a large gang of scofflaw predators. There is no statute of limitations on child rape. Why is she so determined to sweep this under the rug? Around the world, powerful people are resigning from their positions – like Sultan Ahmed Bin Sulayem, who stepped down as CEO of DP World after it became known that he wrote an email to Epstein which stated, “I loved the torture video.”
Torture video?
There have been some crazy allegations related to Epstein, which the police refused to believe because the accusers appeared unhinged. But given the nature of the crimes, why wouldn’t Epstein’s victims lose their sanity? We have an allegation about babies being dismembered, “their intestines removed, and individuals eating the feces from these intestines.” Then we have emails about babies being better than cream cheese: “There are millions of babies, very little good vegatble [vegetable] cream cheese.” In the same email exchange we read, “Lol, I don’t know if cream cheese and baby are on the same level.” Snopes awkwardly acknowledges that Epstein’s correspondence contains references to cannibalism and ritual sacrifice; but hey, there is no proof of any wrongdoing. Right? Nothing to see here, folks. These guys are only referring to cannibalism and ritual sacrifice in a joking manner – like we all do (wink, wink).[xxxiii]
Following this we see an email released by the DOJ from one Bryan Miller, dated 2 October 2020, which says,
“Back in the 90s Ghislaine Maxwell recruited a girl … for a modeling career. Instead of modeling she was sold as a sex slave for sex and torture. Prince Andrew was an accessory to her death as he tortured her and me to force her murder.”[xxxiv]
Then we have an email that refers to Sabrina Bittencourt’s accusations against Joao Teixeira de Faira, who was arrested after being accused by 600 women and girls of running a sex slave farm and selling babies on the black market. It says, “[redacted] spoke of this going on at Zorro Ranch. She has said on record that Epstein offered her money to do this. Birth babies for black market use.”[xxxv] There follows a link to an article saying that Faira was promoted by Oprah Winfrey in 2013, and that Bill Clinton was allegedly one of Faira’s clients, according to the Daily Wire. Then we read that Sabrina Bittencourt “committed suicide in her home in Barcelona, Spain.”[xxxvi]
Suicides, suicides, and more suicides. We lose track of how many, including the alleged suicide of Mr. Epstein himself. Can murders be made to look like suicides? And what of the more easily disposable victims? Wood-chippers, drums of sulfuric acid, sharks, anyone? Here is another gem sent from COLOM, Olvier to Jeffrey Epstein, about “shrimp,” which may be code language for children. It begins with “I can’t even think of the smell of black shrimp – ugh.” Then the response, “I like shrimp. But not so much if it’s too pink, although I’m definitely more into white than into any other color. I like your philosophy.” Then back again with, “no, some are like shrimp, you throw away the head and keep the body.” And then, the last response: “As long as you don’t have any hammerhead ones… I like white sharks.”
So that everyone understands the case: There are monsters who devour children. And then there are monsters who protect the monsters who devour children. To take a specific case, investigator Nick Bryant asks whether House Speaker Mike Johnson is compromised, pointing out that “Johnson would rather shut down Congress than have the House vote on a bill that would mandate an investigation into Jeffrey Epstein’s network of child molesters.” Bryant writes,
“I’ve found that Americans have a collective naïveté about politicians’ sexscapades, believing that they are the dalliances and moral failings of a select few. My fellow Americans have great difficulty accepting that many of our politicians are endowed with a potent psychological alchemy of power, arrogance, and lust that fluently translates into extramarital affairs, aberrant behavior, and even illicit deeds.”[xxxvii]
When you see victims choking back tears, struggling to relate the things they saw, you begin to realize the evil that is being hidden. The fact that former House Speaker Dennis Hastert was a child predator necessitates a simple question: Was Hastert promoted to House Speaker because of his sexual preference for children? The theory here is that our system promotes people who are amenable to control. But who is in control? Epstein’s assistant was Russian. His pilot was Russian. His bodyguard was Russian. Most of the girls he exploited were imported from Russia. Epstein was honey-trapping Westerners, not Russians. And his partner, Ghislaine Maxwell, was the daughter of a KGB agent (Robert Maxwell).[xxxviii] And Robert Maxwell was also involved in blackmailing Mossad. But he was not blackmailing Russians. He was blackmailing Israelis. Among the DOJ files is an email in which Epstein says that Robert Maxwell was murdered by Mossad after he attempted to expose all Mossad operations unless he was paid £400 million to save his collapsing businesses.[xxxix]
Are there any known instances of a Western agent blackmailing the KGB or the SVR? This whole intelligence game appears to be a one-way street. In Russia the criminals run everything. Blackmail against officials in Russia can have no meaning because the state controls the media and all enemies of the state are jailed or murdered. The courts in Russia are under the control of someone who might just be the world’s leading controller of pedophiles: Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin. (More on him in Part 4).
The vulnerability of America’s leaders, by contrast, may be illustrated by a simple reference, given by Nick Bryant, as to how many U.S. legislators have been entangled in sexual scandals in recent years. Here is the list: Gary Condit (D-CA), Ed Schrock (R-VA), Steven C. LaTourette (R-OH), David Dreier (R-CA), Don Sherwood (R-PA), Mark Foley (R-FL), David Vitter (R-LA), Larry Craig (R-ID), Tim Mahoney (D-FL), Vito Fossella (R-NY), John Edwards (D-NC), John Ensign (R-NV), Chip Pickering (R-MS), Eric Massa (D-NY), Mark Souder (R-IN), Christopher Lee (R-NY), Anthony Weiner (D-NY), Scott Desjarlais (R-TN), David Wu (D-OR), Vince McAllister (R-LA), Blake Farenthold (R-TX), Dennis Hastert (R-IL), Tim Murphy (R-PA), Al Franken (D-MN), Joe Barton (R-TX), Trent Franks (R-AZ), John Conyers (D-MI), and Pat Meehan (R-PA).[xl]
And yes. There will be more to come….
End of Part 3 of 5
Interviews and Discussions
Notes and Links
[i] Anneka Lucas, Quest for Love: Memoir of a Child Sex Slave (Kindle), Chapter Five, Loc 971.
[ii] John W. DeCamp, The Franklin Coverup: Child Abuse, Satanism, and Murder in Nebraska (Lincoln, Nebraska: AWT, Inc., 1992), p. 204.
[iii] See, in this matter, the letters of Pliny the Younger, Roman governor of Bithynia-Pontus, written to the Emperor Trajan between 110-113 AD. Pliny had heard rumors that Christians were engaging in ritual cannibalism and incest, but when he investigated the matter, he found that Christian gatherings were “innocent” and that Christians did not eat infants or drink their blood. Also, the fact that men referred to women in the church as “sister,” or that women referred to men as “brother,” no incest was taking place. Finding no crime among the Christians, Pliny struggled with the question as to whether Christians should be punished, even though he regarded their beliefs as a bizarre and “contagious superstition” that might indeed threaten the Roman social order. In his reply, Trajan directed Pliny to punish Christians upon conviction while explicitly forbidding any active pursuit of Christians or use of anonymous evidence against them. To receive pardon Christians merely had to recant their believes and worship the Roman gods.
[iv] Elaine Showalter, Hystories: Hysterical Epidemics and Modern Media (New York: Columbia University Press, 1997), p. 171,
[v] Ibid, p. 173.
[vi] Ibid, p. 155.
[vii] Philip Fairbanks, Pedogate Primer: The Politics of Pedophilia (Kindle), p. 23.
[viii] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_and_Shirley_Eberle
[ix] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk%3AMcMartin_preschool_trial%2FArchive_1
[x] Showalter, p. 147.
[xi] Fairbanks, p. 24.
[xii] Showalter, p. 19.
[xiii] William Hubben, Dostoevsky, Kierkegaard, Nietzsche & Kafka (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1997), p. 61.
[xiv] Called such by Ronald Hingey, who has translated Dostoevsky into English.
[xv] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regina_Louf
[xvi] Philip Fairbanks, Pedogate Primer: The Politics of Pedophilia (Kindle), p. 115. (See, especially, https://cwasu.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Confronting-An-Atrocity.pdf)
[xvii] But the Dutroux dungeon did exist. https://allthatsinteresting.com/marc-dutroux#:~:text=He%20also%20led%20police%20to,too%2C%20had%20been%20buried%20alive.
[xviii] The Roman Republic, according to Titus Livius, sacrificed a man and woman after Hannibal defeated two consular armies at Cannae during the Second Punic War.
[xix] William Prescott, History of the Conquest of Mexico (Modern Library), p. 49.
[xx] Marzinsky and Swiney, Breaking the Spell of the Ivory Tower, p. 94.
[xxi] Ibid, p. 95.
[xxii] https://theconversation.com/victims-have-told-us-the-worst-of-epsteins-crimes-for-decades-and-they-are-still-being-ignored-275137#:~:text=Victims’%20rights%20lawyer%20Brad%20Edwards,sexual%20predator%20in%20US%20history%E2%80%9D.
[xxiii] Marzinsky et. al., p. 96.
[xxiv] Emanuel Swedenborg, Heaven and Hell, p. 208.
[xxv] See, especially, Swedenborg’s book, Heaven and Hell.
[xxvi] Wilson Van Dusen, The Presence of Other Worlds (West Chester, PA: Swedenborg Foundation, 2004), p. 150.
[xxvii] https://www.mdpi.com/2077-1444/12/10/811#:~:text=Fr.,a%20cult%20(Gafni%202018).
[xxviii] Livy, Rome and the Mediterranean (Middlesex, England: Penguin Books, 1981), pp. 410-11.
[xxix] https://sourcenm.com/2026/02/10/nm-land-commissioner-seeks-probe-into-allegation-that-two-girls-were-buried-near-epstein-ranch/
[xxx] https://abovethelaw.com/2026/02/ken-starr-writing-to-my-friend-my-brother-jeffrey-epstein/
[xxxi] John DeCamp, The Franklin Coverup, p. 245.
[xxxii] https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2026/02/04/trump-says-america-move-on-epstein-files/88506192007/
[xxxiii] DOJ files refer to cannibalism-related words and sensational tips, but they do not provide verified evidence that Jeffrey Epstein or his associates “ate babies” or engaged in ritualistic cannibalism. See, especially, https://www.timesnownews.com/world/us/us-news/jeffrey-epstein-files-cream-cheese-messages-eating-babies-cannibalism-claims-fact-check-article-153568835
[xxxiv] https://www.scrippsnews.com/us-news/crime/new-mexico-doj-investigating-claims-of-burials-near-jeffrey-epsteins-zorro-ranch
[xxxv] https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%209/EFTA00165118.pdf
[xxxvi]https://www.dailywire.com/news/report-woman-who-accused-faith-healer-john-god-james-barrett
[xxxvii] https://nickbryantnyc.com/blog/f/is-speaker-of-the-house-mike-johnson-compromised
[xxxviii] The Daily Mail cites sources in British intelligence alleging that Maxwell was a KGB agent. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-15516349/Epsteins-sex-empire-KGB-honeytrap-Paedophile-financier-Putin-Russian-girls.html
[xxxix] https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/epstein-believed-ghislaine-maxwell-s-newspaper-magnate-dad-was-assassinated-by-mossad/ar-AA1VF5nk
[xl] As listed at the end of Bryant’s article, above, with citations.
Donate to the Site: $20
Or Donate to Receive one of the last remaining copies of my book, Origins of the Fourth World War: $30
Send a check or money order to:
(Shipping is free)
Jeff R. Nyquist
P.O. Box 1062
Mocksville, NC 27028
288 responses to “Making Moloch Great Again (Part 3 of 5)”
jwffrey nyquist see here some random news that supposedly trump didn’t want this whole war but his vice said it would be good and I also saw that they are taking equipment from South Korea to the Middle East. Could it be that Trump is falling for a trap and the weapons stocks will be fragile? Or does the US have the capacity to create more ammunition?
A trap or a quagmire? How long can this go on? Not much longer for our side.
Such verses come to mind, Historian. A mature man; a complete man -a wise man- doesn’t boast. We may all slip from time to time, but to do it excessively and constantly is a mark that something is lacking. I’ve cluttered up Jeff’s comments enough. I just wanted to be more clear on where I stand on this, because I see a lot of good, intelligent folks around me in your shoes, feeling for some reason that Trump is a hero and must be supported. Maybe I go too far. Maybe my mind was poisoned against him when he betrayed his base January 6, 2021, and the poison only spread as in my eyes he betrayed Ukraine, our allies, and now, maybe the Iranian people.
At any rate, God’s will will be done in the world regardless of what I think or want. Goodnight.
Maybe
Pro 25:27 It is not good to eat much honey: so for men to search their own glory is not glory.
Pro 27:2 Let another man praise thee, and not thine own mouth; a stranger, and not thine own lips.
Pro 25:14 Whoso boasteth himself of a false gift is like clouds and wind without rain.
Text got moved around where I was typing “maybe I go too far”, and I forgot to delete “Maybe” at end. Sorry about that. It wasn’t meant as something sarcastic or sinister.