Re: You guys are lucky today!!!

Thanks for your kind words. As I have said many times, paedogenesis isn't yet understood by science, however, my epyphany was magick.

And yes, when you take into account all our hardships of today and all the children that need us, indeed, a lifetime isn't enough...

It would be interesting to know if the more original Russian sources used the word "homosexual" and that word became insidiously or surreptitiously cranked up into the loaded word "pedophile" by the time it was translated into English speaking media.

I don't think so.

The comparison with Chikatilo gives the context. Chikatilo did kill boys, including teenage boys that could really be called young men; but not adult men, while he did kill adult women. Also, Litvinenko described Chikatilo's victims as "53 ребенка" [53 children] in the last Russian paragraph, which is inaccurate because not all of them were children...

I think part of the issue is that by the time this was written, Litvinenko was writing both for the Russian opposition and trying to call Western attention (which he never really achieved before his poisoning, unlike, eg, Politkovskaia) - so he used the word most likely to call Western attention, even in the Russian original. Which also explains the next...

I thought that the whole concept itself of 'paedophilia' was more or less confined to Anglo-American countries, although spreading to a slightly lesser degree into Europe as well in recent years. I would have thought that Russia might have been still lucky enough to be more or less free from the West's insane newly founded morality. I am hoping so.

Kraft-Ebbing's first use of "paedophilia" as a separate psychological concept that can, later, be classified as orientation / fetish / paraphilia has more than 100 years. The concept of paedophilia, therefore, isn't really completely alien anymore to any society that has had enough contact with the modern world - which certainly includes urban Russia. That said, the hysteria about paedophilia, along with the tendency to use that word to describe both teen-attraction and all child sexual abuse (or "abuse"), neither of which is properly paedophilia, is largely confined, as far as public opinion goes, to the Anglosphere. Outside it, whenever it has come, it has come through the pressure of other countries or through ngo's, many of which have bought into the hysteria and propagate it themselves, even if they were supposed to have nobler goals. A good example is Europe itself - European laws are more and more converging with Anglosphere laws, and even getting harsher at times (pan-European warrants for paed crimes!!), even though the general public isn't as intolerant of young sex as Americans are - and that is mostly due to pressures from their own cops and from child abuse ngo's.

What I am saying there are two things: one, don't mistake a country's laws for the public opinion, or viceversa. Two, there's really very few places in the world where "paedophilia" is completely alien as a concept. They just don't think they have to make a big deal of it. And many times they don't, unless an American is watching.

So, I do think that Litvinenko was intentionally labelling Chikatilo, who wasn't a paed, as a paed; so he can establish a comparison between Putin, who arguably is one if what he says is true, and such a notorious murderer.

That might also be the real reason why the last paragraph and half in Russian were not translated into English: to the English-reading public, the shocking anti-Putin part would be the paedophilia; but to the Russian-reading public, the comparison with Chikatilo is the strongest part; but the Rostov Ripper isn't very well known outside the former USSR.