Rabbi Accused of Infecting Infants with Herpes During Circumcisions — And Killing One Boy

180px-Covenant_of_AbrahamNew York City health officials are investigating the death of a baby boy who died of herpes after a circumcision by Rabbi Yitzhok Fischer. Fischer carries the herpes virus and is believed to have infected two other infants while serving as a mohel. Under the Orthodox practice followed by Fischer, he actually uses his mouth to suck the blood from the infant’s penis when he cuts the foreskin.

Infants are particularly susceptible to the virus given their reduced immunity systems. Within ten days of the circumcision, one of twin boys died from the virus and another was infected.

The Book of Genesis stipulates circumcision as a defining mark for the descendants of Abraham: “Throughout all generations, every male shall be circumcised when he is eight days old…This shall be my covenant in your flesh, an eternal covenant. The uncircumcised male whose foreskin has not been circumcised, shall have his soul cut off from his people; he has broken my Covenant.” (Genesis 17:1-14)

Metzitzah b’peh (“suction by mouth”) is rarely used outside of the Haredi and Hasidic communities. Under this practice, the mohel spits the blood into a receptacle provided. While most mohelim rinse their mouths out with alcohol to sanitize them, alcohol may not kill the herpes virus.

This will make for some novel criminal and tort litigation. It is difficult to see how this shocking practice can be allowed as a public health matter. As a matter of torts, the families can clearly sue this rabbi for negligence with punitive damage potential. Indeed, I believe that there could would be a strong case for battery. The question will be reckless homicide and other criminal charges. Presumably, this rabbi knew he was a carrier and yet proceeded to use his mouth rather than the more common suction device.

For the full story, click here

232 thoughts on “Rabbi Accused of Infecting Infants with Herpes During Circumcisions — And Killing One Boy

  1. Now pray for him that was not my child or he would visit an early demise. This is where the law of torts and I agree.

  2. Words fail. I’ve held many infants during the procedure. I cringe every time. I’ve never heard of this level of religious zealotry. In my humble opinion, this is as bad as female genital mutilation in its degree of insanity.

  3. I’ve been at many a circumcision, including my Grandson’s and have even held a baby through one. Never once have I seen this method of sucking blood used. The Haredi and Hassidic (Ultra Orthodox – Fundamentalist) communities have redefined Orthodox Judaism since I was a boy. In their quest for purity, really an
    egotistical attempt to set themselves up as the final authorities, they have gone way overboard and are as obnoxious as any Fundamentalist Christian, Muslim or Hindu you might meet.

  4. From article: “Presumably, this rabbi knew he was a carrier and yet proceeded to use his mouth rather than the more common suction device.”

    I’ll see your Catholic priest pedophile and raise you an Orthodox Haredi or Hasidic mohel. Srsly.

  5. I’m all for religious freedom. I’m also not opposed to circumcision.

    But when your religion allows for a ceremony in which a religious official’s mouth comes in contact with an infant’s penis, it’s really time to crack open the Yellow Pages and find a new church.

    That’s such a no-brainer that one would think it didn’t need to be spelled out. Sheesh.

  6. While I do not agree that this should be performed by a person capable of transmitting a disease and is afoul of the very laws proscribed it is not prohibited and should be performed in strict observance. Here is a exert for the severely uninformed and merely misinformed.

    “Many American male babies are circumcised by medical procedure shortly after birth. However, Orthodox Judaism prescribes circumcision as a religious ritual, to be performed according to strict Talmudic laws. According to those laws, the man who circumcises the infant, the mohel, must suck the infant’s bleeding penis with his mouth.”

    http://www.come-and-hear.com/editor/br_4.html

  7. AY, Call me uninformed, misinformed and downright astonished.

    If you walked up to any person on the street and said ‘you know, when the doctor performs the circumcision on your baby in the hospital, he sucks the baby’s bleeding penis with his mouth as part of the procedure- do you think that’s cool or, you know, perverted?’ I bet 99% of them would say ‘Pre-freaking-verted!’

    That it’s a religious ritual does nothing IMO to alleviate or legitimate the ‘pre-version’ factor.

    I wouldn’t hand my kid a rattlesnake to test his faith or mutilate my little girl either. I’m an atheist- it’s all bs to me; some of the rituals are just more perverted than some others.

  8. Yet, Lottakatz, you seem to think a doctor cutting the most sensitive part off a baby boy’s genitals (often without anaesthetic) with no pressing medical need is not pre-verted? (And looking like his father, or reducing the risk of some rare urinary tract infection that more girls get than boys, is not a pressing medical need.)

    Mike Spindell, this was mainstream practice for centuries, until some babies died of typhoid in the 19th century.

    Is this news, or a rehash of a death in NY in 2004? It was Rabbi Yitzchok Fischer then – also?

  9. lottakatz 1, July 12, 2009 at 9:53 pm

    AY, Call me uninformed, misinformed and downright astonished.

    *************************

    Call me conceptually trapped. I understand the strict observance and respect those that do. How can I say, what they do is against the laws. I would not allow it to be performed on one of my children. If I was of that sect, I would have a moral dilemma, if a Rabbi infected my child. It would certainly mean death for one, I can assure you. It would not be a hard choice to make.

    I cannot say that one area of a religion that I disagree with is good or is bad. The Tanakh is followed and it is strict observance the people keep the laws as they understand them.

    Can you prove that Oral Roberts did not see a 70 foot Jesus in Oklahoma and look him in the eyes and say “Oral build me a University and put your name on it, right here” am I to say that it did not happen, can you?

  10. I bet you that you will not this story on any news program. Not ABC, NBC, CBS, FalseFoxnews, MSNBC, CNN, etc….

    They are all run by jews who protect their own. You never see anything from so-called israel about how these rabbis attack women and spit on Western journalists.
    Pedophiles are all over those yeshivas.
    Talmud tells you it’s alright for a man to have sex with a girl who is three years and one day old. Very sick religion.
    But all you hear in the news is stuff about muslims and catholics.
    I am surprised Turley is writing about this.

    I doubt if Mr. Turley would mention this on American TV.
    This is not the first case.
    It happened before but the jew bloomberg objected to the NY Health Dept from cracking down on these crackpots.

  11. Hugh7: “you seem to think a doctor cutting the most sensitive part off a baby boy’s genitals (often without anaesthetic) with no pressing medical need is not pre-verted?”

    I didn’t speak to that because that was not the thrust of the article- I am inclined against any medical procedure for which there is no medical need or health advantage. If I had a newborn male child today I’d opt against circumcision based on what I have read about it being medically unnecessary but 30 years ago I might have chosen differently based on the prevailing medical wisdom.

  12. This is an old piece of news, but not widely publicized. I guess Jews are too busy producing news on other people. Jews exert a lot of strategic control in the US. Relative to the US population, Jews are disporpotionately presented in positions of power and control, such as media & politics. Americans are sleeping.

  13. OFF TOPIC

    AY: “Can you prove that Oral Roberts did not see a 70 foot Jesus in Oklahoma and look him in the eyes and say “Oral build me a University and put your name on it, right here” am I to say that it did not happen, can you?”
    ——–
    I saw the physical manifestations of a supernatural phenomenon. I can accept that because I am one of those people that believe that there are entirely ‘normal’ things that exist but do so in a matrix of dimensions that we do not always have access to. I just chalk it up to what we culturally refer to as a ‘ghost’ and don’t give it any real thought except at Halloween because it’s a good ghost story. It’s just weird stuff and the world is full of weird stuff.

    Also, on one occasion I saw a room become spherical and the walls. ceiling, floor and everything else in the room dissolve into their constituent molecules (like a Seurat painting) which pulsed in various colors and everything began to emit a harmonious but loud electrical hiss, the various frequencies of which was based on the material the objects in the room were made of. That of course was a chemical delusion and while I dug it I did not confuse my pharmaceutical delusion for reality.

    If Oral says he saw a 70 foot tall Jesus and that Jesus gave him some marching orders and he spent his life carrying them out I won’t dispute that. I won’t even ask for witness’ to his vision (though I had witness’ to my ghost). I don’t accept his ‘vision’ as proof of anything more than that he was in a delusional or hallucinatory state and the associated vision was probably in keeping with his cultural or emotional predisposition.

    That he saw it does not mean it was real, just that he saw it. It certainly isn’t proof of a supreme being or a supreme being as the causal event of the universe. Son of Sam claimed that he got his marching orders from a demon that possessed his neighbors dog and I wouldn’t dispute that either, would you? Why even bother? Delusions abound, there are people that are still saying that Obama’s Birth cert isn’t real. (Update: I did get a certificate of birth from my State and it looks allot like Obama’s. It looks nothing like my original, which I did see but haven’t had possession of for about 30 years. There are I suppose delusions of convenience also.)

    AY: “I cannot say that one area of a religion that I disagree with is good or is bad.”
    ——–
    I find that odd. You seem like a more discriminating thinker than that but I have noticed you stay away from threads that deal with religion. You’re probably wise in that regard. :-)

  14. Mike Spindell,

    What kind of logic is that? Do you dispute what I stated? As soon as you hear something you don’t like, you make such a blanket statement? Boy, am I glad you didn’t call me antisemitic! I have Jewish friends, however I don’t have to like power control by Jews or anyone else disporpotionately. It goes against my understanding of what a democracy should be. Please stay objective if you can.

  15. Hugh 7 or lottakatz (not sure which),
    This is I believe a rehash of the original story in 2004. I’m a lifelong conservative, but I come from a large predominantly very Orthodox family. I had over fifty First cousins, to give you an Idea of family size. I have attended untold numbers of circumcisions through the years and have never seen this sucking practiced, nor have I ever seen a baby in much pain. That this “may” and I use “may” because an Orthodox council ruled against it in 2005, be used by some Heredi, Hassidim (Fundamentalist) Jews is no surprise. To Jews many Fundamentalist practices and beliefs of non-Jews also seem cruel, inhuman and bizarre.

    “In my humble opinion, this is as bad as female genital mutilation in its degree of insanity.’

    Mr.Ed,
    If you think male circumcision is comparable to a cliterectomy you are highly misinformed. The female procedure
    renders orgasm almost impossible, while I can attest to the fact as a circumsized male that that hasn’t been the case.

    To All Others so Horrified by the “Mutilation.”

    I’ve always been very happy with my penis and its’ performance as are most of the other circumsized males I know. The many women in my lifetime who have favored me with sharing sexuality with them have not appeared to complain and many have expressed a preference for a circumcized penis over an uncircumsized one. I must admit not being gay to have seen many uncircumsized penises, but from what I remember of glances in the locker room I was not overwhelmed with wishing that I too had a foreskin. However, we are all entitled to pride, or lack of same in our own bodies.

    As to those so horrified by the barbarity of Jewish practices I would submit to you that some Christian and other religious practices seem barbaric and incomprehensible to me. The “eating of the blood and body of Christ” for one. The RCC coverup of pedophilia and sexual malpractices of Priests is pretty reprehensible. The handling of snakes for another. The belief that the Earth is 6,000 years old also seems barbaric and incomprehensible. The self flagellation still practiced by Opus Dei also is strange to me as is the speaking in tongues by some Baptists and the Mormon underwear. The murder of Doctors by anti-abortionists also is barbaric. As is the picketing of funerals of our war dead by “God Hates Fags.” In fact the fear of homosexuality and need to attack gay men also is bizarre. I could go on and on but why bother. I have the right of freedom of my religion and you have the right of freedom for yours. In America most of those rights should not be interfered with, providing they’re lawful

    Below is the result of a quick Google search, someone can make their own if they want.

    http://judaism.about.com/od/bris/a/bris_2.htm

    http://www.religionfacts.com/judaism/cycle/circumcision.htm

    On page/column 572 in Volume V of “Encyclopedia Judaica” (Keter Publishing
    House, 1971), the following is found;
    “The next stage is the performance of mezizah (‘suction’). This has led to much controversy in recent years. Throughout the ages this was done by suction by the mouth in order, according to Maimonides, to remove the blood from the distant
    parts of the wound (Maim. Yad, Milah, 2:2). It was the recognized method of disinfection at the time. A mohel who refrained from performing it was considered to be endangering the life of the child, and had to be debarred from
    practice. Toward the middle of the 19th and the beginning of the 20th century cases of syphilis, tuberculosis, and diphtheria occurring in infants were ascribed to infection from mohalim using this method of suction. This has been
    contested by a few Jewish doctors, and some communities still follow the original practice. The Paris Consistoire abolished mezizah in 1843.”

    On page 167 of “Encyclopedia of Judaism” (Jerusalem Publishing House, Ltd.,
    1989), the following is found;
    “The circumcision itself takes only a few seconds, and is performed by a circumciser (mohel). Formerly the blood was drawn orally by the mohel but now an
    instrument is used.”

  16. Mike,

    You’ve left off my favorite piece of Fundamentalist Christian barbarianism: The exorcism. Also, most of the Fundies I know still practice circumcision for religious reasons. Thank you Saint Paul.

  17. “Mike Spindell,
    What kind of logic is that? Do you dispute what I stated?”

    spirit of mountain,
    That’s the kind of logic I use with people who actually believe as you do.

    “Jews exert a lot of strategic control in the US. Relative to the US population, Jews are disporpotionately presented in positions of power and control, such as media & politics. Americans are sleeping.”

    So what? Is this a counting thing, or is it a quota thing? Do you really believe there is some sort of Jewish conspiracy afoot? If there is please let me know about it so I can take advantage of it. This is the skinny on Jewish success.

    1. To fully be considered a Jew one must be literate, it’s a tenet of the religion, so Jews have inordinately higher rates of literacy. As do Asians also, not for religious, but for cultural reasons.

    2. Education is highly respected and prized in the Jewish Community above other attributes. Jews typically therefore are more highly educated than the rest of the population. However, Asians also have similar values and are running neck and neck with us.

    3. Highly educated people, who read generally do well in the professions they choose. Some Jews choose politics.

    What would you have Jews do? Should we ration the fields we go into so we don’t threaten people like you or cause you to suspect a conspiracy. Before you go to the obvious place Egypt receives as much US aid as Israel. However, even if that weren’t so, do you remember the problems in Northern Ireland of a few years back and how the Irish American Community, also a community powerful in numbers beyond their population percentage, had almost uniform support and US support for the Catholic cause. Should we suspect Irish Americans as being somehow strangely powerful as an ethnic group?

    “I have Jewish friends, however I don’t have to like power control by Jews or anyone else disporpotionately.”

    I’m so comforted by the fact that you have Jewish friends, perhaps some of them are even among your best friends. Do they feel as you do that Jewish power is wrongfully disproportionate? I’ll bet they don’t, or perhaps they are people of Jewish heritage that feel no connection with that heritage, or even Messianic Jews, who call themselves Jews but are Christians.

    Now I must say I don’t call anyone anti-semetic because that is an appellation given to Jews by 19th Century eugenicists, that was later adapted by Hitler and the Nazi’s. As for you personally, I neither know, nor care if you are anti-Jewish, but your statements are prima facie insulting to Jews and it causes one to wonder how you feel about African Americans, or
    Latinos, or Asians or Indians. All I know is that white people of Anglo Saxon/Scandanavian heritage are far more powerful in this country, than their percentage of the population calls for and I suspect you don’t find that bothersome.

  18. Domino,
    Read your link and noticed that some of the evidence showed that the absence of a foreskin allowed men to keep from orgasming quickly. Do you know there is a whole industry devoted to just that problem? I always wondered why I had so many women tell me I was a good lover. Do you see that as a drawback? The rest of that link was predominantly old hat stuff, that was little more than drivel. I like my circumcised penis and honestly I hope that those without circumcisions like theirs. Nobody I know who is circumcised is in the least upset about it, though I suppose there are always some malcontents.

    As far as Hitchens goes he is an idiot who is taken far to seriously than his content deserves. He is also a cold warrior and a sexist, not to mention currently ex-drunk. He isn’t someone I would go to for information, but then again I’m not you and to you Hitchens viewpoint might seem intelligent.

  19. Thanks Gyges,
    I forgot about that one. When it comes to religion it’s always about looking at the other person’s practice and seeing how wrong it is. Sometimes there is merit in that like for instance Fundamentalist sexism. sometimes with people like spirit and domino there is another agenda afoot.

  20. IS,
    When its the other person it always seems weird. The Rabbi with herpes was a bastard, but one story does not a history make.

  21. To Mike Spindell

    You are correct. I believe based on the talmud and the bible, as well as koran (for all 3 originate from the abraham myth), these self-styled jews are evil. Just read your own talmud. Read israeli newspapers, that’s where I get my information concerning pedophilia in the yeshiva.
    The question for you to ask is, “Are TruthBeKnown’s statements the truth?

  22. My only agenda is to oppose people who think they have the right to violate the physical integrity of a vulnerable child and to wound and permanently alter that child’s body.

  23. Mike,

    I wouldn’t lump Domino in with those others. She’s just plain anti-circumcision, I don’t think it matters who’s doing the cutting, or why they’re doing it. Personally, I can see a pretty good argument against it based on the fact that you’re scarring someone’s body without their permission. On the other hand I do think calling it barbarism is hyperbole.

  24. Barbarous:

    ▸ adjective: (of persons or their actions) able or disposed to inflict pain or suffering (“A barbarous crime”)
    ▸ adjective: primitive in customs and culture

  25. Domino,

    I have both a penis and a dictionary, and I appreciate your concern for both.

    Your source is extremely biased, and even admits that “Without published studies, current knowledge of men’s feelings about their circumcision is generally based on reports from self-selected men who have contacted the Circumcision Resource Center (CRC) and other circumcision information organizations…”

    Most of the paper consists of anecdotes and connections for which little or no evidence is put forth. This is quite simply not good research, instead it is an article that sets out to prove a specific view point.

    Look I agree with you that in any light other than religious, circumcision just doesn’t make sense. I just feel that nothing is gained by exaggeration, and a rational discussion needs to be based on provable facts not unsubstantiated claims.

  26. I don’t know what you’re talking about. Almost every line of the paper references sources and hyperlinks to the supporting research are provided.

  27. Cut: Slicing Through the Myths of Circumcision

    Cut is a documentary film by Eliyahu Ungar-Sargon which examines the subject of male circumcision from a religious, scientific and ethical perspective. Using cutting-edge research, in addition to interview footage of rabbis, philosophers, and scientists, Cut challenges the viewer to confront their biases by asking difficult questions about this long-standing practice.

  28. Circumcision: A Barbaric Practice, A Human Rights Violation

    -Steven Svoboda is a 38-year-old attorney who has reorganized his work life to devote the majority of his time to men’s work. He is founder and director of Attorneys for the Rights of the Child, an organization devoted to developing legal approaches to stopping circumcision.

  29. DOMINO
    “…Almost every line of the paper references sources and hyperlinks to the supporting research are provided.”

    I read most of it and the number of references are impressive. There were two things that struck me about the study: the first was the above quoted passage regarding a lack of studies and the second was the statistic that 80% of the worlds male population are not circumcised. That tells me right there that more studies across the full range of medical and psychological effects of circumcision need to be undertaken and that a significant majority of males seem to do just fine without the procedure. I base that upon the fact that I have never seen a news item stating that males in appreciable number were at risk for some specific health problem due to having a foreskin.

    If in fact there is no medical reason to perform this procedure (or any other elective procedure) on a child as a matter of public policy should it even be legal prior to a child reaching the age of majority absent a specific religious exemption? Is there any other purely elective surgery parents are allowed to have performed on their children legally (or as a matter consistent with with the cannon of medical ethics) absent a religious exemption?

  30. “Male circumcision: pain, trauma, and psychosexual sequelae” addresses Methodological Caveats (p. 14) and says that there is no medical association anywhere in the world that recommends routine circumcision (p. 4).

  31. Sorry to tell you, guys, there is medical evidence that circumcision is still very much consideration with respect to STD prevention.

    And the evidence to support it is even more dramatic as to HIV.

  32. I’m well aware. Circumcision also reduces the risk of bladder infections. So what? It’s an utter absurdity to recommend such a radical measure for treatable infections.

    There are far saner ways to prevent the transmission of HIV. Have you heard?

  33. “I believe based on the talmud and the bible, as well as koran (for all 3 originate from the abraham myth), these self-styled jews are evil. Just read your own talmud.”

    “The question for you to ask is, “Are TruthBeKnown’s statements the truth?”

    TruthBeKnown,
    Answering your second statement first, there is nothing you’ve said that would cause me to think your statements are truth. The Talmud does not equate to the Bible (Christian), or the Koran. The Talmud is a very large compendium of opinions on Jewish Law compiled over many centuries. If you understood what your were talking about you would have equated the Torah (Five Books of Moses) with the Gospels and the Koran. Given that, your other points are suspect. Further more while you quote it freely you don’t realize that the Talmud is such a large corpus that it takes years of study to master it in Yeshivah, which is like a Law School in Hebrew Law. Afterwards though the issues it raises are so complex that most learned Jews spend their lives studying it. I somehow think that you do not fall into that category, so your quoting it is from sources most probably taking what they wish to attempt to prove out of context.

    “They are all run by jews who protect their own. You never see anything from so-called israel about how these rabbis attack women and spit on Western journalists.”

    This and the rest of your initial diatribe clearly show that you are not a fan of Israel or its existence. Now I could of course debate that whole issue with you but it would be fruitless. You have your pre-judgments and the nature of your statements are such that I can see they are deeply held. A debate with you would be an attempt to convince others that they should support my positions on Israel, about which you have no understanding, but which I’ve written about on this site extensively.

    “Pedophiles are all over those yeshivas.
    Talmud tells you it’s alright for a man to have sex with a girl who is three years and one day old. Very sick religion.”

    When did you stop beating your significant other?

    I get it you don’t like Judaism or by extension Jews, but like some others you’ll probably be telling me you have Jewish friends. Is there pedophilia among Jews, of course there is. Is it at a rate approaching that of Catholic Priests, not likely, but certainly possible. Jews are just as likely as any other group to have human foibles and failings.
    However, there are some, like you I think, who would label all Jews evil because we have some bad people. That is your right and no matter how stupid and bigoted I think that might be, the only thing to be gained by debating with you is drawing attention to your nonsensical ideas. I’m not biting.

    As I stated previously: You don’t like Jews, we don’t like you.

  34. “I’m well aware. Circumcision also reduces the risk of bladder infections. So what? It’s an utter absurdity to recommend such a radical measure for treatable infections.”

    Domino,
    That was in response to Patty C’s point that medical evidence shows circumcision is helpful in reducing STD’s and HIV. So bladder infections, STD and HIV reduction might at least point to the fact that there can be some purpose to circumcision, other then “religious barbarism.” To be frank though, I don’t care if non-Jewish males are circumcised, or not. That is their parents business. I’m happy with my penis, the way it looks and the ease of keeping it clean. I’m also happy to be a Jew. Every jewish male I know and realizing what a widespread conspiracy Judaism is that must be millions, are happy to be circumcised.

    To me those who aren’t are ridiculous. Why, because there’s nothing they can do about it, so why get crazy. The have the option of not circumcising their male children. I inherited severe heart disease from my parents and family, a much more serious problem. What profit is there for me to go around blaming my parents for ever having the temerity to have me. There are many Jewish neurotics in the world, Woody Allen and Larry David aren’t kidding, but their need to detail their angst at not having a foreskin is unsolvable and thus absurd. If parents don’t want their male children circumcised that’s fine with me, my own children feel differently on the topic.

    As for your extensive evidence, in the end it is highly anecdotal and at base there is little scientific research backing you up. The African Circumcision piece is illustrative. The conclusion to be drawn is that there shouldn’t be circumcision programs because some men believe it protects them during unprotected sex, which of course it doesn’t. Don’t you realize that the reasoning there is not about circumcision, but about people’s ignorance or mis understandings? Actually, I guess you don’t because this seems to be a very big issue with you. Fine, you have the right to speak freely, but Jews have the right to practice their religion freely as long as its’ practices are not harful to the public good. You fail by far to make the case that circumcision falls into that category.

  35. Actually you are mistaken on both counts. As a physician, I have a differing view of circumcision and the data coming out of Arica is precisely what I refer to, in this study, as well as others.

    J. Sobngwi-Tambekou,1 D. Taljaard,2 M. Nieuwoudt,3 P. Lissouba,1 A. Puren 3 and B. Auvert 4

    1INSERM U687, Hôpital Paul Brousse, Villejuif, France
    2Progressus, Johannesburg, South Africa
    3National Institute for Communicable Diseases, Johannesburg, South Africa
    4INSERM U687, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, University of Versailles, France

    Authors’ Contributions: JT and BA analysed the data and wrote the first draft. DT organised the collection of the samples. MN and AP analysed the samples. All authors contributed to the writing of the paper.

    Competing Interests: Non

    The fact that N gonorrhoeae and C trachomatis are almost exclusively urethral pathogens may explain why male circumcision has no protective effect against them. In contrast, the protective effect against T vaginalis may indicate that T vaginalis is both a sub-preputial and a urethral pathogen.

    There is also evidence that male circumcision reduces T vaginalis acquisition by female partners. A recent randomised study conducted in Rakai, Uganda, among HIV discordant heterosexual couples indicated that the rate of T vaginalis infection among partners of participants from the intervention arms was reduced by almost half (adjusted risk ratio 0.52, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.98).[13] Hence, our study illustrates why male circumcision is protective against T vaginalis infection among women having circumcised partners. Indeed, as shown in our study, male circumcision reduces the risk of T vaginalis infection among men and consequently reduces the exposure of women to T vaginalis. Thus, the risk of T vaginalis infection is lowered among women.

    Some studies have suggested that T vaginalis facilitates the spread of HIV by up to twofold.[15,23,30,31] Thus, the effect of male circumcision on HIV acquisition in young men may partly be due to its effect on T vaginalis. If the results of this study are confirmed by those of the male circumcision trials conducted in Uganda and Kenya, the findings of this study will reinforce the WHO-UNAIDS statement recommending the implementation of male circumcision programmes in African countries with low male circumcision prevalence and a high male circumcision acceptability.[32

  36. Mike Spindell is living proof that even when you possess an IQ below 50 you can still blog on this absurd site. If stupidity were a virtue he would be canonized….

  37. Mike pull your head out of your butt-hole and smell the coffee. You a are a not to bright, law school flunky, who should stick to watching re-runs of love boat, sound about right moron!

  38. The trolls are coming out in force. Either JT is about to write another story critical of the govt. or some more news that will embarrass the govt. is on the way.

  39. When Mike Spindells family moves into a new neighborhood everyone knows it’s the Spindell clan. You know how? The trash cans are empty and the dogs are pregnant!

  40. Domino and Lotta,

    I think you’re missing the point I’m trying to make. The decision to circumcision is in a very emotional, private one, and in most cases religious one. Calling people that circumcise their children barbarians and linking to sensational psuedo-scientific articles is going to do absolutely nothing but make you feel vindicated. I don’t think you’re wrong, I just think you’re using way to aggressive of a rhetorical style for this particular issue.

    To give you a brief glance over of the article in question:

    All of the proof for the effect on the mother section is anecdotal from self selecting sources. From the paper “There are no studies of how these parents respond to observing their son’s circumcision. Personal accounts vary and may include strong emotions…” The rest of that section is carefully qualified by the words such as some, and other, etc.

    I also find the trauma section particularly misleading; “To preserve a semblance of attachment to the mother, a child who has suffered trauma alters reality and ‘forgets’ that the trauma ever happened. [29].” The citation in question refers to a paper on sexual abuse, with no attempt made to prove that an infant’s reaction to circumcision with that of a child to sexual abuse. The paper is rife with this sort of slight of hand. For instance, the studies on ritual circumcision in Turkey were all based on children ages 2-10, and there is a world of difference between how a new born reacts and how a 2 year old reacts.

    Those are just the three most glaring examples of problems, there are others.

  41. I should point out that the only article I’ve had time to read is the Goldman, and my comment about psuedo-science was directed entirely at it.

  42. Mike Spindell, your post sounds pretty stupid. Are you still taking your shit-for-brains pills. You should really cut back, they work just a little to well..

  43. My apologies for the frequent posts; but this thread has attracted some wild stuff and thought some facts might help.

    The picture in JT’s blog is also used by wikipedia and there is a lot of information there. I trust the reader to make up their own mind as to credibility but it might be helpful to some.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circumcision

  44. Gulliver and Glycon,
    Thank you so much for your warm words of support. I’d respond in greater detail but your methodology says it all and with more clarity then I could possibly lend.

  45. “Actually, there is a process by which foreskins can be restored.”

    Domino,
    Then what is the problem? If there is a process to restore the foreskin, then I’d even recommend that it is mandated that health insurance cover it. There is also a procedure to enlarge the penis, some men are just so unsatisfied with their own equipment.

  46. “The trolls are coming out in force. Either JT is about to write another story critical of the govt. or some more news that will embarrass the govt. is on the way.”

    Jill,
    I suspect you’re right. There is someone named patriot posting on:

    http://jonathanturley.org/2009/07/12/report-cheney-ordered-concealment-of-secret-program-from-congress/

    Attacking Mike A in the same dumb manner. My suspicion as to the cause though is another brewing Republican sex scandal, only because they are obviously employing their least skilled operators prior to the Grover Norqvist Tuesday Meeting where the big guys like O’Reilly get the full talking points and marching orders. This is definitely poor quality trolldom.

  47. Although the skin can be stretched over the glans penis again — there is no way to replace the specialized tissue that is lost through circumcision.

    Sadly, it is an irreversible injury.

  48. Domino,
    Dare I say it but you seem somewhat obsessed with sexual organs. Now I can understand why clittorectomy would concern you, since it concerns me. Also the tribal incision rites, rather than circumcision rites in many cultures are also cause for concern. I’m not saying that there are no concerns in genital mutilations, but I am saying categorically that I’m very happy being circumcised.

  49. Royale Deluxe II

    Spokesman…..Dan Aykroyd

    Spokesman: Introducing the 1978 Royal Deluxe II. A luxury name and a luxury ride at a middle-range price? Impossible? We’ve come to Temple Beth Shalom in Little Neck, New York, and asked Rabbi Mayer Taklas to circumcise 8-day-old Benjamin Kanter while riding in the back seat of the elegant Royal Deluxe II. …

    (continued)

    http://snltranscripts.jt.org/77/77aroyaledeluxe.phtml

  50. It is quite commendable that Jews value education as a core of their being, perhaps more people ought to learn from that. And I don’t have a problem with Jewish politicians per se, if they present the interests of the United States first and best. A few years ago, a Jewish representative, whose name and exact quote I cannot recall, said something to the effect that his first priority was to defend the rights of Israel. Shouldn’t his priority have been representing the people of that state and also defending the United States? That is what I am talking about.

    Since people’s religions or lack of, shapes their viewpoints, and attitudes, I believe representatives’ ideas should reflect the people they are representing. The engagement of educated Jews in any line of work does not concern me, however it should not affect the integrity of the political system either.

    You seem to have preconceived ideas about anyone who is critical of Jews must be of a white racist. I am not an Anglo-Saxon, Scandinavian, nor am I racist. ( I hate racists) I value diversity greatly and immerse myself in different cultures and associate with and have friends from so many backgrounds. Perhaps once you evolve from that line of thinking, and become a little less defensive, then you might be able to understand my perspective better.

  51. Mike,

    How can you argue with “A few years ago, a Jewish representative, whose name and exact quote I cannot recall, said something to the effect that his first priority was to defend the rights of Israel?”
    I just can’t think of a more telling indictment of a whole religious group than some guy somewhere saying something.

    That being said, I sincerely hope you’ve reconsidered lumping Domino in with this guy.

  52. Mike S.,

    I saw that sophisticated attack against Mike A. and immediately agreed with it, almost. Comparing Mike A. to mashed grain is giving him TOO much credit. Other than that, great observation by a real patriot!

  53. “How can you argue with “A few years ago, a Jewish representative, whose name and exact quote I cannot recall, said something to the effect that his first priority was to defend the rights of Israel?”

    Gyges,
    I can’t and won’t argue with it. Waste of time and effort.

    “Me: All I know is that white people of Anglo Saxon/Scandanavian heritage are far more powerful in this country, than their percentage of the population calls for and I suspect you don’t find that bothersome.”

    “spirit of mountain,
    “I am not an Anglo-Saxon, Scandinavian,”

    How can you discuss/argue with/debate someone who doesn’t get what you’re writing about? I have no idea what her/his ethnicity is, but it does seem strange that he specifically cites Jews as an ethnicity/religion with power out of proportion to their numbers.

    We must remember, however, that:

    “nor am I racist. ( I hate racists) I value diversity greatly and immerse myself in different cultures and associate with and have friends from so many backgrounds. Perhaps once you evolve from that line of thinking, and become a little less defensive, then you might be able to understand my perspective better.”

    That is so comforting to hear from him and takes all the sting out of:

    “Jews are disporpotionately presented in positions of power and control, such as media & politics. Americans are sleeping.”

    After all maybe he/she was writing that late at night so was just referring to the fact that most of the country was asleep. I don’t think this person is consciously anti-Jewish
    any more that Trent Lott was a conscious racist, that, however, offers she/he little excuse.

    “That being said, I sincerely hope you’ve reconsidered lumping Domino in with this guy.”

    Gyges look back at all my posts on this thread and show me where I lumped Domino in with anyone, called her/him names, or even called he/she anti-Jewish. I haven’t. did I get mildly ironic at times, sure, but I quite understand that this is an issue Domino feels strongly about and most probably not from a sense of bigotry. However, I do take exception to her calling my children barbarous, because my grandson is circumcised and my ethnicity barbarous as well.
    Those were her/his “fighting words” but I eschewed attacking
    him/her personally, while i did disparage the arguments put forth.

    “Domino,
    Barbarous:
    ▸ adjective: (of persons or their actions) able or disposed to inflict pain or suffering (”A barbarous crime”)
    ▸ adjective: primitive in customs and culture”

    While the definitions are correct, the smugness behind her/him’s use of the word is to me annoying. Especially the second meaning. In my mind those who might look at Australian
    Aboriginals, South Sea Islanders and Native Americans from the vision of cultural superiority that they were viewed in European terms bespoke a sense of grandeur undeserved. Domino
    seems to also look down as if from on high, with her/his perch giving the right to judge others. That to me bespeaks a limited range of perspective.

  54. Gyges:

    “I have both a penis and a dictionary, and I appreciate your concern for both.”

    Well said, ROFLMAO.

    Domino:

    as a man I too appreciate your concern, from your posts I will assume that bald avengers are not your cup of tea, shall we say.

  55. you kinda gotta know something about these communities and their slavish devotion to creating more ritual around ritual to protect the commandments. what seems insane, ridiculous, unnatural, weird, to non Jews is just embarrassing to those of us who have some scope of Jewish belief and practice.
    for a while there was a mohel who had parkinsons and still performed circumcisions. at the end of the day, religious observance is particular to those to adhere to it and generally does no harm.
    consider the christians who play with rattle snakes.
    they have theirs. we have ours.
    and yes, any adult who has a viral infection and purposely exposes another human to it, let alone an infant, should be prosecuted. i wonder though, whether parents of these children would pursue this. They tend to be very private and protective of their community.

  56. William Stowell talks about his successful circumcision lawsuit, against the doctor and hospital (that circumcised him as a baby), marching for genital integrity and inspiring others to get involved.

  57. Geeze and I agree with Mike S. Come on you guys get over it and if you can’t go to a support group. This is kinda a lot for something that most males do not care about.

  58. John D. Geisheker, J.D., LL.M., Executive Director of Doctors Opposing Circumcision (D.O.C.) speaks of his personal experience with circumcision and events that led to dedicating his life to ending forced circumcision of infants and children. In the first of a series of interviews, Geisheker discusses the ethical and legal concerns around performing unnecessary genital surgery on infants and children.

  59. Foundational Philosophy of Attorneys for the Rights of the Child
    http://www.arclaw.org/

    A number of human rights documents appear to forbid infant male circumcision based on such important principles as the right to physical integrity, the right to freedom of religion, the right to the highest attainable standard of health, and the right to protection against torture. These documents bind the United States, either through our direct ratification of the treaty or under principles of customary international law. The many laws against female genital mutilation, contrasted with the discriminatory nature of excusing and tacitly condoning male genital mutilation, violate principles of equal protection under both international human rights law and American constitutional doctrines.

    Our own cultural blindness must not be allowed to warp American law by insulating perpetrators of circumcision from liability under a broad range of legal theories. By understanding the medical and psychological harm caused by circumcision and by positioning ourselves to enforce the legal and human rights guarantees of physical integrity and self-determination, we can work for the best interests of children, by guaranteeing them equal protection under the law.

  60. One purpose of the Jewish Circumcision Resource Center is to make known to the Jewish community that there is a growing number of Jews who either have not circumcised their son or would choose not to circumcise a future son. It is an opportunity for Jews who take this position to declare themselves and to be counted.
    http://www.jewishcircumcision.org/

  61. A committal hearing for charges of grievous bodily harm and unlawful wounding was scheduled in Bundaberg yesterday against a father who forced his two sons to undergo circumcision during an access visit to his family home last year. The father, of Muslim faith, arranged for his sons aged 5 and 9 to be circumcised for nonmedical reasons. This was against the expressed wishes of their mother;

    “Being of indigenous Australian descent I understand the importance of freedom of personal beliefs in a multicultural society.”

    “I believe my sons have a right to grow into adult men with intact bodies and choose their own religious and other beliefs; I am devastated that the father has stolen that opportunity away from my boys”

    http://jmm.aaa.net.au/articles/1380.htm

  62. “Whatever is done to stop the terrible practice of circumcision will be of tremendous importance. There is no rational medical reason to support it. It is high time that such a barbaric practice comes to an end.”

    –Dr. Frederick Leboyer, author, Birth Without Violence

  63. “Despite the obviously irrational cruelty of circumcision, the profit incentive in American medical practice is unlikely to allow science or human rights principles to interrupt the highly lucrative American circumcision industry. It is now time for European medical associations to condemn the North American medical community for participating in and profiting from what is by any standard a senseless and barbaric sexual mutilation of innocent children.”
    –Paul M. Fleiss, Circ Info Network

  64. Mike S. “Dare I say it but you seem somewhat obsessed with sexual organs. ”

    Bob,Esq. “Domino doth protest too much. Perhaps he’s not as happy with his penis as Mike S.”

    Ugly territory guys.

    Bob, don’t open any doors to posts about Mike’s obvious pride in lil’ Mike, K? At least one snarky b++++ with a twisted sense of humor posting on this thread has shown MONUMENTAL restraint here regarding those postings by Mike ’cause she has the utmost respect for his opinions and tries not to take cheap shots. Of course, I would never, ever consider speaking for Domino or Patty C. or Jill. :-)
    —————

    Patty C: “T vaginalis is both a sub-preputial and a urethral pathogen.”

    Lady-bits are crevice and moisture rich areas that also can trap unwanted and vagrant pathogens but thorough and frequent washing with soap and water is the best defense against harboring (and passing them along) for both sexes.

  65. Circumcision has few if any medical benefits. Any link between circumcision and the prevention of genital cancer is at best unproved. Circumcision is not only unnecessary but barbaric. It can cripple children, both physically and mentally, for their whole lives. And as for the motives behind circumcision, psychiatrists are agreed that they are irrational and punitive.
    -THE UNKINDEST CUT OF ALL By John M. Foley, M.D.

  66. Patty C: “T vaginalis is both a sub-preputial and a urethral pathogen.”

    Lady-bits are crevice and moisture rich areas that also can trap unwanted and vagrant pathogens but thorough and frequent washing with soap and water is the best defense against harboring (and passing them along) for both sexes.

    T. vaginalis is actually a type of very easily sexually trasmissable bacterial infection and is treated with Flagyl, which you may have heard of, or Fasigyn. It causes other problems if left untreated.

    Plain soap and water are always a good idea, but won’t cover this overgrowth once it has taken over, any more than it would in the case of a yeast infection.

  67. Mike,

    That was easy: “When it comes to religion it’s always about looking at the other person’s practice and seeing how wrong it is. Sometimes there is merit in that like for instance Fundamentalist sexism. sometimes with people like spirit and domino there is another agenda afoot.”

    Domino,

    You’d rather preach than converse. Got it. I’ll leave you to it.

  68. Lottakatz,
    I’m sincerely really not sure about what point you were making in this post:

    “Mike S. “Dare I say it but you seem somewhat obsessed with sexual organs. ”
    Bob,Esq. “Domino doth protest too much. Perhaps he’s not as happy with his penis as Mike S.”
    Ugly territory guys.”

    “Bob, don’t open any doors to posts about Mike’s obvious pride in lil’ Mike,”

    Now I think that you are implying that I was being sexist in my remarks and by the way I don’t name my body parts and I think that is unfair.

    I am dealing with someone who has called a religious practice I believe in barbarous. Who by extension has then called my children barbarous for circumcising my grandson. I haven’t called her names and actually have been quite courteous in my replies, but really Lotta, how does a circumcised male who has liked the fact, respond to someone who proffers “proofs” of serious psychological harm done to circumcised males? Do you really think I’m that shallow that I’m into bragging about my sexual prowess? If you do I’m sorry you read me that way.

    My own view is that the male obsession with penises as the be all and end all of sexual satisfaction is incorrect and immature. This is the view also of the majority of sex therapists both female and male. However, the sob story’s of damaged males, anecdotal of course, that Domino provides are to me the tales of people damaged by far more than their loss of foreskin.

    Now as for Domino in particular. She/He is obviously obsessed with this topic as illustrated by the copious amount of posts she has written and his/her choice to use what are deemed to be authoritative links to express the points being made. To argue with someone doing that I would have to pick apart every link and argue with that, only to then get more links to then pick apart. In that way Domino controls the discussion. When Gyges and Patty C actually offered their own evidence disputing a few of Domino’s links, there was either no response or curt dismissiveness. Given all that I believe that I’ve actually been rather fair to Domino and I’m sorry you didn’t see it that way.

    I’ll see your Catholic priest pedophile and raise you an Orthodox Haredi or Hasidic mohel. Srsly.

  69. “I’ll see your Catholic priest pedophile and raise you an Orthodox Haredi or Hasidic mohel. Srsly.”

    Lottakatz,
    Do you really think we are dealing with equivalencies here in terms of numbers and or percentages? Are you merely being flippant and if so why do you deny me the same right when I talk about women not complaining about my penis? I have many arguments with Jewish Orthodoxy and I have been open about them on this site. I also have some problems with the Israeli Government and have also expressed them openly. This despite the fact that it brings some seriously anti-Jewish trolls out of the woodwork and in their limited minds supplies them with ammunition for their prejudice.

  70. “you kinda gotta know something about these communities and their slavish devotion to creating more ritual around ritual to protect the commandments. what seems insane, ridiculous, unnatural, weird, to non Jews is just embarrassing to those of us who have some scope of Jewish belief and practice.”

    GWLSM,
    A very good point which I agree with, but do you think non-Jews get what the Orthodox “Fence” notion is all about?

  71. If a non Jew lives in a city where there are Orthodox communities, he or she will get it. I think this Domino person could be involved in a lawsuit involving circumcision. That could be what is feeding the obsession.

  72. I’m asking a genuine question and here is my bias behind it: I think a religous practice (not limited to Judaism) that MAY risk physical/mental/spiritual/emotional harm is best left to the decision of an adult who is practicing that religion. When a person is an adult they can decide if this is the religion they wish to follow and if so, they can proceed with the requirements of that religion or be in a position to challenge the necessity of those requirements. So what about leaving circumcision until a man is an adult?

  73. Jill,
    That would be barbaric. check out the difficulties of adult male circumcision. Secondly, by Jewish law the male must be circumcised in the eighth day of life.

    Swarthmore Mom,
    I don’t think whether or not a non-Jew is circumcised has anything at all to do with the Jewish communities, or their size in a given City. By the way all practicing and some non-practicing Jews believe in circumcision. My nephews were circumcised by a mohel and they are not being brought up Jewish.

    Bob,
    One for the “clean team!” Just kidding people.

  74. I didn’t mean that people living in larger cities had anything to do with circumcision. I meant that people living in larger cities are more aware of Jewish communities and different practices among them. I married into a non religious Jewish family.

  75. Mike S.,

    I didn’t know of these risks to adults. Now that I do, that seems like a bad idea. You know I’m an atheist so personally, religious laws of any kind have no intrinsic meaning to me and I would not follow them.

  76. what an interesting thread. Serious discussion about the benefits and deleterious effects of circumcision. One never knows what one will learn on this blog, a veritable cornucopia of intellectual stimulation.

  77. Mike S writes: GWLSM,
    A very good point which I agree with, but do you think non-Jews get what the Orthodox “Fence” notion is all about?

    me: I know Jews who don’t get the “fence” thing — the fence notion is that newer and more stringent laws have been amplified and applied to protect certain torah laws so that there can be no unintentional slip-up which might cause a law to be broken. what I don’t get is that if a commandment is broken we have a vehicle for repair of that — several in fact…. but adherence to arcane ritual is what separates the ultra observant from whose of us whose appreciation of ritual is more, uh, casual.

  78. swarthmore mom writes: if a non Jew lives in a city where there are Orthodox communities, he or she will get it. I think this Domino person could be involved in a lawsuit involving circumcision. That could be what is feeding the obsession.

    me: I don’t think domino is all there. I dont really care what feeds his obsession. it’s unattractive and won’t win him many friends here or elsewhere.

  79. Jill asks; So what about leaving circumcision until a man is an adult?

    you are kidding right?
    Jill, honey, go find a man, any man will do, ask him. I’ll wait here.

    (me…waiting….dee dee dee … still waiting)

    okay then. what did he say? sure, Jill. let me schedule that circumcision for next week? I don’t think so.

    the point of Jewish ritual circumcision is that it brings the new born Jewish male into the covenant. I’ve been present at countless bris ceremonies and the most uncomfortable person there isn’t the infant…. it’s the mother. it may seem barbaric to whose who don’t live and grow up with the expectation that their sons will be circumcised just like their fathers and grandfathers and every male in their family. and none of them were damaged by this ritual.

  80. jill writes: Would you please read my post before you go off the deep end?

    jeez jill. I did read your post — all of it.
    you should lighten up.

  81. GWL,

    No you did not read them or you wouldn’t have said what you did. You seem very threatened by almost anything I write. I plan to ignore your posts from now on and think that it would be a good idea for you to ignore mine as well.

  82. It has become more than obvious, in this thread and others that I arouse the castration anxieties of some of you here.

    This is why they consistently ridicule me as being some kind of sexually threatening or ambiguous entity — when, in fact, many of them are aware that I am a very feminine and beautiful woman. (Visits to my blog from this one are recorded in my statistics. Hi.)

    I am somewhat sympathetic, because I have admittedly hacked away at many of your preconceived notions, sliced through your rationalizations, and sawed away at your complacency.

    I know that it hurts you, but I do it out of kindness and for your own sake. Soon — when circumcision has become illegal, you will have difficulty reconciling with the fact that you have participated in, defended, and celebrated ritualized acts of child abuse.

    I knew that you had nothing to defend yourselves with. Circumcision is indefensible. But your attempts to steal the attention from the injured bodies of children so as to bring pity yourselves as victims of racism was a laughingstock.

    I don’t care what your belief is — Jew, Jehovah, Mormon, Scientologist, Muslim, etc. — your rights to practice those beliefs ends where other autonomous beings begin. Children are not property, and their bodies are not yours to sacrifice.

    That’s my position. Now, go on embarrassing yourselves with your juvenile insults.

  83. *Note:
    The second paragraph of my post should have been identified as an “aside” addressing the readers. My direction returns to the antagonist/s in paragraph 3.

  84. “It has become more than obvious, in this thread and others that I arouse the castration anxieties of some of you here.”

    Domino,
    I’m married to and have always been with strong women. Castration anxiety is one of Freud’s stupider concepts and was very revealing in showing the sexist that Freud was. Castration anxiety is such a strange term coming from you who likens circumcision to castration

    “I am somewhat sympathetic, because I have admittedly hacked away at many of your preconceived notions, sliced through your rationalizations, and sawed away at your complacency.”

    You continue your strange turns of phrase also using language bespeaking castration.

    “I know that it hurts you, but I do it out of kindness and
    for your own sake.”

    Are you a dominatrix perhaps? I say this because your phraseology would fit quite well in that kind of scenario and would also fit with your castration fixation and crusade. Do you like smacking those little bad boys and then telling them its for their own good? That type of scene would crack me up, but not in a good or stimulating way, more for its’ inane silliness.

    “Soon — when circumcision has become illegal, you will have difficulty reconciling with the fact that you have participated in, defended, and celebrated ritualized acts of child abuse.”

    Unfortunately, I was a court recognized expert in child abuse, whereas you are just an obsessive unable to write well, who relies on quotes from dubious sources to back up your ridiculous arguments.

    “But your attempts to steal the attention from the injured bodies of children so as to bring pity yourselves as victims of racism was a laughingstock.”

    Ah now, here we get to possibly the nub of the matter. Who said a word about either racism, or religious bigotry, or accused you of it? Not I.

    “I don’t care what your belief is — Jew, Jehovah, Mormon, Scientologist, Muslim,”

    Interesting, if limited choice of religions. Somehow the bizarre rituals of Christianity are not mentioned, even in passing. Could Domino the Dominatrix be a Christian and could her ranting and false documentation be the ravings of a Christian Fundamentalist, looking at a back door way to attack people who don’t share her beliefs. I honestly don’t know the answer to that but your own words, spewed in anger and frustration at your lack of success in mounting a decent argument, truly reveal an underlying ugly nature of some sort.

  85. “none of them were damaged by this ritual”

    This is simply not true. The complication rate of circumcision is not negligible, and complications range up to death. The inquestion on a Jewish baby is about to open in the UK. As the general Intactivism movement grows (it only began about 1970), a number of Jews – especially those who don’t take the scriptures literally – are questioning circumcision.

    The proposition that babies must be circumcised because if you asked intact adults they would refuse (perhaps with violence) just underlines the human rights issues the custom raises. Imagine applying the same logic to the removal of any other comparable body part.

    If men like being circumcised, that’s good, but it’s also just lucky. Many don’t. Surveys have shown that many more men are happy to be intact than are happy to be cut.

    Mike S. suggested earlier that the existence of foreskin restoration made the question moot, but foreskin restoration can never be complete (it can’t bring back the ~20,000 nerve endings) and is no more a solution than prosthetics are to amputation. The existence of some tens of thousands of men who go to the trouble of restoration just shows how problematic it is becoming.

  86. Hugh writes : This is simply not true. The complication rate of circumcision is not negligible, and complications range up to death. The inquestion on a Jewish baby is about to open in the UK. As the general Intactivism movement grows (it only began about 1970), a number of Jews – especially those who don’t take the scriptures literally – are questioning circumcision.

    my husband, my father, my uncles, brothers-in-law… every man in my life has been circumcised and not a single one thinks anything about it. This topic came up once before, someplace else, and it gave me the opportunity to pose this query to the men in my life. None were embarrassed and all reported that they just didn’t ever think about it. let any parent who wants to skip this procedure skip it. I have no problem with it if they are squeamish about it, but 2000 years of jewish ritual circumcision have still not produced enough accidents or worrisome side effects to cause us to reconsider this.

    Hugh: The proposition that babies must be circumcised because if you asked intact adults they would refuse (perhaps with violence) just underlines the human rights issues the custom raises. Imagine applying the same logic to the removal of any other comparable body part.

    me: my husband is a convert to Judaism. he was circumcised as an infant. when he converted, the rabbi gave him the option of having a pin prick to draw just a few drops of blood to make his conversion kosher and orthodox. he still covers his crotch when he thinks of this. men don’t like the idea of pain “down there” they just don’t. I can’t think of a single man who would opt as an adult to something that was done for them as an infant. anyway the discussion isn;t really about this…
    is it?
    it’s about a mohel who has an infectious disease who knowingly passed it on to infants who then got sick and died during a phase of the ritual that is mot widely practiced. this is outside the norm of jewish ritual circumcision.

  87. As a baby boy, your first experience with your penis is to have it mutilated and then (If you are orthadox) Have a man put his mouth on it?????????

    Seems a bit off here folks…

  88. Domino:

    “I know that it hurts you, but I do it out of kindness and for your own sake. Soon — when circumcision has become illegal, you will have difficulty reconciling with the fact that you have participated in, defended, and celebrated ritualized acts of child abuse.”

    this is exactly what upsets me about most liberals, they want to take our freedoms away for any reason. If someone wants to cut some skin from around their sons glans then what is it to you? I have a right to cut my sons penis if I want. What next making people have appendectomies to save on health care costs. It is this type of nanny state soft tyranny that is so irritating and it usually leads to not so soft tyranny.

    Sic Semper Penis

  89. If you readers want to know about the talmud’s evil, go to http://www.come-and-hear.com and http://www.revisionisthistory.org.

    After reading this Spindell guy’s replies all he does is call people hateful.
    I am sure that jews make critical comments about blacks. Just try to tell these jews that they are anti-black, they’ll explode with denial. But they always you to agree with their charges against you. Jews can never refute what people say about them. All they have is name calling. The world is no longer falling for this bogus antisemitism chage. These people are Khazars, not israelites. A writer named Sand in Israel just wrote a book, The Invention of the Jewish People. Sand claims that Palestinians are the original Israelites.

    The talmud invented the Hamitic Myth. Have you folks heard of that?
    Jews were heavily involved in the transatlantic African slave trade. But they want you to believe that only white gentiles were involved.

    Jews run:
    Porn
    Homo industry
    NAMBLA
    ACLU
    ACLJ
    SPLC
    just to name a few. All anti-White groups.

  90. Hmph. Well, those remarks are repugnant.

    Mind you, it is also repugnant when people insinuate that I hold similar viewpoints just because I disagree with them.

    This repugnant too:

    Since the 1980’s many hospitals have been providing infant foreskins to a number of bio-research laboratories, pharmaceutical companies, and of course cosmetic companies. In Mothering Magazine in the Winter of 1997 issue Paul M. Fleiss, MD stated that “the marketing of purloined baby foreskins is a multimillion-dollar-a-year industry.”
    http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/146761/human_foreskins_are_big_business_for_pg2.html?cat=58

  91. Hey boys, if you want to know where the full and complete enjoyment of your sexuality went, it’s over there in that jar of collagen face cream!

  92. This past April, Vancouver resident Dr. Paul Tinari became the first Canadian man to have a heath-care-funded foreskin restoration. When he was eight years old, doctors at his school performed an operation without his consent. After years of painful erections, and frequent infections, Dr. Tinari — with the support of his doctor and psychiatrist — successfully sued, and as a result, the B.C. Ministry of Health paid for 90 per cent of the $12,000 operation. Dr. Tinari says he hopes that it will set a precedent for legal action that will eventually end the practice of infant circumcision all together.

    …Dr. Tinari estimates that between the surgery and the foreskin’s resale value, each foreskin is worth approximately $100,000. His intention is to launch a legal battle, which he will call “The Head Tax” in which he aims to restore at least 10 per cent of that figure to the portion of the 10 million men in Canada who had the procedure non-consensually. But while Tinari says the issue is a moral one, he aims to fight it on the financial front. “When the cost of lawsuits exceeds the money that they are making from the surgery, that is when it’s going to end. It won’t end before that. Some people will join the class action lawsuit for the money, and although I would hope they did for moral reasons…. I don’t care why they join.”

    http://thetyee.ca/News/2006/07/25/Circumcision/

  93. GWLawSchoolMom: Thank you for the results of your small non-random survey. Even they might be different if they had been asked in private by a non-family member. The pressure men are under NOT to complain about having being circumcised (especially if it was religious) is enormous.

    2000 years? One can think of many customs that have been carried on for a very long time, then abandoned without loss, and we would now consider abhorrent. (Metzitzah b’peh is a good example.)

    You say “done for them” but from here it looks more like “done to them”. We have no reason to suppose that the pain of circumcision is any less than that of hatifat dam berit , and every reason to suppose it is more – especially since a baby can’t see it coming. But pain is only one issue. The big issue is the individual’s right to decide for himself what parts of his own body he may keep.

    So Indentured Servant: shouldn’t libertarians be standing up for the freedom of the individual (not his parents) to decide that? Freedom to cut parts off one’s sons’ bodies (but, significantly, not one’s daughters’) can hardly have been what the writers of the Consitutition and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights had in mind when they wrote of the right to be secure in one’s person, and free of unlawful seizures. It may take that freedom away from the parent, but it gives it back to the person it should more obviously belong to.

  94. IS:
    “I have a right to cut my sons penis if I want. What next making people have appendectomies to save on health care costs. It is this type of nanny state soft tyranny that is so irritating and it usually leads to not so soft tyranny.”
    —————-

    With all respect due you’ve got it wrong, backwards in fact on both counts:

    In 1931-32 my father (18 at the time) was one of the very lucky ones that had a job. After a couple of months on the job (which required a physical exam by the company’s doctor) my father was called into the boss’ office and told that no one that worked at the company could have tonsils, those employees took too much time off with colds so if he wanted the job (and economically he had no choice but to want the job) he would have to have them removed. Which he did, on a weekend, so as not to have to take time off from the job.
    You know, the early 30’s during the depression, the era of rampant liberalism and crushing regulation on business and finance. Those 30’s in the bizarro universe.

    “I have a right to cut my sons penis if I want” is exactly an aspect of what I contend is the “not so soft tyranny” of an unenlightened, religious driven philosophy that encourages and (through government deference) fosters the remnants of a patrimonial model for family relationships. You may have the right in law but that doesn’t make it the right model for the 21st century.

  95. May I suggest that this has gone beyond decent discussion. I know that I am one to speak when I have had my rants, but can we stay focused on the topic at had? So to speak.

  96. I wonder where Anonymously Yours was when I was being called an “it” and a “he/she” and genitally-obsessed, ex-military dominatrix? You didn’t seem to think that was such an impropriety, did he?

  97. Male circumcision is not primarily a medical issue but rather has its roots in deeply held religious beliefs and social customs that defy rational and humane understanding.
    James W. Prescott, Ph.D.
    Institute of Humanistic Science

  98. Perhaps it is now more clear how philosophical and theological moral dualism has conspired against the human body, particularly the female body and the sensual/sexual pleasures that they represent. This moral dualism of Western Civilization is one of the great roots of violence against the human body and the female body in particular. And these moral traditions are not confined to the cultures of Western Civilization which subordinate female to male; assures the continuing inequality of woman to man and the violence of man against woman and her children.

    This fundamentalist/orthodox morality of Western Civilization requires that the sensual/sexual pleasures of the body must be extremely limited if not destroyed to achieve “salvation of the soul” (re, the “virtues” of celibacy, virginity and chastity). What better place to begin than with the mutilation and destruction of the genitals which are designed to experience
    sensual pleasure and share sexual love?

    …It is clear to this writer that before genital mutilations of our children can cease; before male violence against woman can end; and before human violence can be eliminated that a moral revolution must take place. Pain must be declared immoral and pleasure must be declared morally necessary if we are to become moral persons. In the words of Walt Whitman:

    “IF ANYTHING IS SACRED THE HUMAN BODY IS SACRED”

    http://montagunocircpetition.org/genitalpain.pg

  99. “Before discussing the concept of metzitsa b’peh, it should be noted that the unfortunate death of this infant took place in 2005. Though it is always painful to hear of the death of a child, this is not a recent article despite the fact that it was recently posted by the blogger.

    According to our investigation with people involved in the case, the Mohel was not found guilty. According to his son, he underwent court ordered medical testing that was negative for herpes. The New York State Health Department determined that it could not ban metzitsa b’peh, but did put out an official notice discouraging this practice.

    Metzitsa b’peh is a mainly practiced among the Chassidic community. (The majority of other Orthodox Jews perform circumcision without any direct oral contact, with everything sanitized to the highest standard – gloves, handwashing, antiseptic, etc). Interestingly, the original intention of this practice was as a health measure. Bleeding was believed to sanitize a wound, and in those days, instruments were not sanitary, so this was the healthiest way of drawing the blood.

    Susanne Goldstone Rosenhouse
    National Jewish Outreach Program
    Social Media &
    Regional Program Coordinator
    (800) 44-TORAH
    (646) 871-4444 x32
    Susanne@NJOP.org

    So the story that started this thread in the first place took place 4 years ago and the supposed herpes infected Rabbi, didn’t have herpes and was found to be not guilty. But hey why bother with that because there are Jew’s involved, right
    TruthBeKnown, who in his last post showed his true colors.
    As far as skin color, being formerly blond, but still blue eyed, with pale skin, my guess is I look as white as he does but TruthBeKnown wouldn’t consider me that because I’m Jewish.
    How many other posters on this thread decrying circumcision
    would agree with TruthBeKnown’s last diatribe? I suspect none.
    There is a difference between being against a Jewish ritual, or even not being a supporter of Israel and being truly, bigotedly anti-Jewish. I recognize that and my impression is that TruthBeKnown is the only anti-Jewish bigot on this thread.

  100. “This fundamentalist/orthodox morality of Western Civilization requires that the sensual/sexual pleasures of the body must be extremely limited if not destroyed to achieve “salvation of the soul” (re, the “virtues” of celibacy, virginity and chastity). What better place to begin than with the mutilation and destruction of the genitals which are designed to experience
    sensual pleasure and share sexual love?”

    Domino,
    When making what you consider to be valid points it would be nice if you didn’t generalize and lump Judaism in with Western Civilization. Judaism eschews celibacy. While it is true that Judaism believes sex should be reserved for marriage, which is of course rarely followed, or by some religious Jews doing everything but intercourse, Judaism has very positive sexual attitudes that are encompassed in religious law.

    Sexual pleasure in marriage is considered a blessing and the male is commanded to pay as much attention to his wife’s pleasure as she is to his. This is true even in the most Fundamentalist of Jewish Sects. From my perspective, and from your own early evidence here, it can be inferred that the delay of orgasm you associated with circumcision was purposeful to try to assure the woman achieving orgasm in intercourse. I personally find some religious rituals of other religions puzzling and barbaric, but I don’t normally write castigating them because I lack the understanding and perspective. You seem to have no problem in doing so.

    “I wonder where Anonymously Yours was when I was being called an “it” and a “he/she” and genitally-obsessed, ex-military dominatrix? You didn’t seem to think that was such an impropriety, did he?”

    I used he/she because I didn’t know what sex you were and did not want to be sexist in referring to you. You were the first to cast aspersions, Domino, or don’t you think that the followings statements were aspersions?:

    “It has become more than obvious, in this thread and others that I arouse the castration anxieties of some of you here.”

    “I am somewhat sympathetic, because I have admittedly hacked away at many of your preconceived notions, sliced through your rationalizations, and sawed away at your complacency.”

    “I know that it hurts you, but I do it out of kindness and
    for your own sake.”

    Do you really pretend that that was reasonable language? In truth it would be highly appropriate in a D&S porno flick and
    I merely answered your aspersions in kind. Also too there were implications that I was calling you bigoted and/or anti-Jewish which I clearly was not. You have not been victimized here by me, or in fact anyone else. You in fact have been the aggressor and caster of aspersions.

  101. “this is exactly what upsets me about most liberals, they want to take our freedoms away for any reason.”

    IS,
    I appreciate your contributions in this but the statement above is simply not supportable by the facts. The anti-abortion movement is decidedly right wing, for instance. Widespread use of wiretaps by the NSA was instituted by the Bush/Cheney crime
    family and defended by most Republicans. The incursions upon separation of church and state have been also pushed by right
    wingers. Stupidity exists in all ranges of the political spectrum as is the tendency to want to force others to believe as you do. As far as Domino’s political leanings I have no idea where she stands in the political spectrum. Left wing wouldn’t be a bad surmise, given some of her source material, but there really isn’t enough evidence.

  102. lottakatz:

    your dad had a choice and it was his. he was not compelled by force to have his tonsells out.

    The federal government caused the depression of 1929-1941-3 by it’s involvement in the Federal Reserve and stimulus spending.

    government can only make you do something through force or threat of force.

  103. Mike Spindell:

    my apologies, I should have included right wing Neo-Cons in with my broad brush. And I certainly don’t disagree with your statement.

    So I will gladly make the statement again.

    This is exactly what upsets me about most liberals, neo-cons and conservatives, they want to take our freedoms away for any reason. Be it high taxes or abortion or wire tapping the political left and the political right are tyrants.

    I hope you join me in that sentiment.

  104. Mike S,
    I think you need ‘a time out’ in your little chair or I might have to turn you over my knee, you naughty little boy…

    p.s. I have tears straming down my face from laughing and stomach hurts…

  105. “Mike S,
    I think you need ‘a time out’ in your little chair or I might have to turn you over my knee, you naughty little boy…”

    Patty C,
    If any woman who I’ve been involved with ever said that to me tears of laughter would have been streaming down my face and conversely I would have cracked them up if I tried that line. I
    have no problem with anyone’s fetishes, providing they’re consensual and with people of legal age. The idea of them doesn’t float my boat but for others do what turns you on.

    However, you couldn’t make this dialogue she used up in a D&S parody and I find it unlikely that it was done unknowingly. Also too the sobriquet “Domino” would fit that scene so perfectly.

  106. IS, two points: First, you equated a liberal agenda with the nanny state and used forced appendectomies as an example of extending the soft tyranny of that agenda. You were wrong. I used a historic personal anecdote that spoke exactly to the flaw in your statement (I’m just not up to long detailed postings lately). You come back with ‘his choice’.

    Srsly, is that the best ya’ got? Ever hear the term ‘economic capital punishment’? It’s a labor law term to describe firing which describes the impact of firing.

    In 1931 being fired from a job was very much akin to a death sentence even to working class people that raised chickens and vegetables in their yards in the cities to help them get by.

    There were no social programs to deal with poverty, you worked = you ate. If you didn’t work you and your family didn’t eat, didn’t keep a roof over your head and in far too many instances had an enormously degraded chance of physical health. When the unemployment rate is 25% and people get fired from relativly non-skilled jobs they have to worry about survival at it’s most basic level. That is something I heard from many people that live through the Depression, not just one. Kissing Pharaoh’s ass was how you kept your job and forced medical procedures (and just about anything else Pharaoh demanded) was just how it worked. There were no Liberals then. Socialists yes, but they were met with suppression by the government, they certainly had no power.

    ‘Choice’ is a fungible concept historically.

    Second point, you go on to shift or moderate the initial statement to include neo-cons in the very next posting as if that would moderate the flawed position regarding the authorship of ‘soft tyranny’ in your original post. It doesn’t. In terms of taking your freedoms away I suggest you look to neo-cons and conservatives.

    The Democratic party while complicit in the rape of the Constitution are hardly a Liberal party. The only real obvious liberals you have are Kusinich (SP), Sanders and Kennedy and Kennedy has slid by on reputation on several significant votes IMO.

    People in this country haven’t seen a Liberal party in so long they’ve forgotten what constitutes a Liberal party. To let the Who sum it up, ‘the party on the left is the party on the right.’

  107. Mike S, I didn’t respond to your inquiry/reply to one of my earlier postings regards, Bob E’ questioning of Domino’s sex or gender (which both you and Swarthmore mom did in later postings) or your observation that Domino seemed to have an obsession with sex organs. It would have required more effort that I was prepared to give it and your follow-on posting, at the time. I’m doing that now and after rereading the thread this reply is expanded to take into account other observations.

    I made my posting because I saw Bob E’s posting and yours to be the leading edge of a personal affront and is indicative of a subconscious impulse to sex/gender bias or insult. Notice I said subconscious.

    I take your name and avatar to mean you’re male. I take Bob’s to mean he is male. I take Jill’s and Domino’s to mean they are female. Mine was questioned as being ambiguous. I assumed Lottakatz was a ‘feminine’ handle. Apparently not. I don’t care that it was ambiguous nor was I hesitant to declare my sex/gender. I asked the party inquiring why they thought I was more likely to be male (which as I recall they may have alluded to) and warned them to be careful how they answered that in a good natured way. I had been taught to write in a gender neutral manner, with a business not personal voice so if they replied ‘you write like a girl’ I’d have to try to be more professional when making an argument but I didn’t want sex/gender to be an issue regarding my postings either. I didn’t get a response and on second thought that was probably wise of the questioner :-)

    Consequently, to make presumptions on Domino’s sex/gender was offensive to me. I accept your avatars as sex/gender specific. Admittedly, there are a few (very, very, few) arguments that a concealed sex/gender might distort if personal anecdotes are called forth but as long as the argument is not based on those a concealed sex/gender is irrelevant IMO. I don’t use pejoratives based on race, sex etc. They are offensive to me. I tell people to stop it if I hear it in real life too.

    In a culture that majorly respects 2 sexes and 2 clearly defined gender roles (an unrealistic limitation) and meets other sexes and gender roles with disdain at the low end of the spectrum and discrimination and violence at the extreme end of the spectrum; to use language to reassign a sex/gender to someone is to minimize their person, their ideas, and to imply their ideas are driven by their ‘unnatural’ state. That’s ugly territory and I would have thought it beneath the regular posters on this blawg.

    I used a convivial written tone when calling that to your attention because I did not want to couch it in a argumentative tone for the reasons stated in my original response. I also wanted to point out (inappropriately) by an oblique method that persons that speak openly and with some goodly level of affection regarding their genitalia are subject to he same mistaken and inappropriate affront as the sex/gender remarks only from an old school psychological position. I should have been less oblique but you’re a smart guy and I didn’t want to have to lecture someone I respect or get into a pissing contest. My bad.

    I love my Vagina but I’m not going to use my great affection for it as an argument in a debate over the pros and cons of female circumcision. This statement regards your query along the lines ‘how else to respond to’. Your a smart guy. A passing reference to your satisfaction regarding sexual function and ability to achieve orgasm is cool and fair game though. Srsly, if a person is achieving orgasm how much more cool can it get from a purely functional point of view? There are virtues no doubt for the parties regarding foreplay but, functional to the point of orgasm is the aim at a physical level.

    Citations regarding the medical virtue of circumcision are better. So would a flat statement that you respect the custom (of any religion that has it) with no citations required. So is a statement that we will have to agree to disagree. You just told me more than I wanted to know and I found that humorous (but fairly normal), as I generally have when men (for whatever reason) have felt free to go on about how much they like their penis. I get that, I have a sex organ I like too. The opportunity to mix the IMO humorous aspect of those statements with the implication that they could well become the petard upon which to inappropriately and cruelly hoist you (as verbally reassigning someone elses’ sex/gender is cruel and inappropriate) was a too-fer for me and I should not have been so oblique.

    I’m feeling pretty good today so this is becoming a book-length posting. My father as well as my last living best friend were taken to the hospital 12 hours apart two weeks ago today. They both died a week later (last Tuesday) about 12 hours apart and the last funeral was this Tuesday. I haven’t been up to posting properly. I have been sleep disrupted so I’ve been up all hours and skim the blawgs because things like vacuuming at 3:30am is rude to the better half who can sleep. Damn him :-) I really shouldn’t have been posting at all because I was just too tired to elaborate a position beyond a short posting.

    This thread got off track and into ugly territory IMO because:
    Trolls, anti-Jewish Trolls threw gasoline on to a discussion that increasingly became about religion and heads started ‘splodin. I just ignored them hoping they would go away.

    I have to take some credit for that because of my first posting.

    That posting was not in fact about religion though but could because of its brevity be assumed as such. It was about the equivalence IN WEIGHT of an act associated with the circumcision. I would not let my daughter be diddled in some function no matter how traditional it might be nor how efficient it might have been medically some thousands of years ago. Customs, no matter how appropriate at the time of their inception die out later for good reasons. I think someone else also made that point and I second it. That also seems to be the case from information posted subsequently. One can hope.

    Thereafter the discussion became about circumcision which is both a matter of religion and medicine. I have no desire to see religion inform public policy at any level. I also have no desire to see bad medicine practiced. When the two have a mutually supporting relationship it’s a problem greatly magnified. I opt for good medicine.

    If we were talking about ADDING a fully intact penis (or by extension clitoris) it very well might be a much different question on my part but it’s not. It’s about DELETING something that may well have medical benefit and diminishes sensation. I have a problem with that on a purely medical basis.

    If you read my postings you will see that in the main I discuss religion with AY and keep it’s role and my opinion of it separate from my purely medical concerns.

    I think this thread brought together a perfect storm of hot button, strongly held and advocated issues and acted as Troll bait. That’s unfortunate because any one topic, if kept civil, is worthy of dialog.

    I’m not wimping on on the debate on my position on anything here, I’m just trying to tie up some loose ends and give you the courtesy of a response.

    As for IS, well, he just royally pissed me off with his throw-away insult to Liberalism so I had to respond to him first even if it was entirely off-topic.

    To sum up my opinions:
    Religion: bad
    Religion + State deference or support thereto: Soft Tyranny at best and no
    Religious custom as medical policy: no
    Circumcision (for those under the age of majority): public policy based on medical opinion only and revisited regularly as medical knowledge advances
    Anti-Jewish Trolls: STFU
    Liberalism sending the US into the arms of ‘soft tyranny': get a clue
    He/She yada, yada: Ugly, it’sembarrassing to read that stuff on this blawg.

    That some of these opinions are out of the mainstream and in opposition to a majority view: we are just going to have to agree to disagree.

  108. To whomever might be even remotely interested:

    JT’s link was to an MSNBC article dated Feb 2, 2005; when I read it on July 14, 2009 I commented @11:34am that the events in his post may have occurred in 2005; I left links from The New York Times and the Jewish Ledger which described same events in 2005.

    On this thread @11:56am I left links to NYC DOH and CDC fact sheets on circumcision both referenced these events and are good sources of information. Later @12:06pm on July 14 I left the link to the Wikipedia entry which used the same photo as JT’s blog and has quite a lengthy entry on circumcision including this practice.

    I wished to defuse some of the accusations that were taking place on this thread and had hoped some facts might help. Oh well, all was not lost I hope you all saw Bob,Esq.’s SNL joke!

  109. Omg omg! the antisemites must have secretly giving the baby herpes when noone was looking and blamed it on this poor poor Rabbi. Sha-lob a slech-o- ga HOObaboo! God help him!

    the holocaust! the holocaust!

  110. I find interesting that Mike Spindell never addreasses the issues in the posts which he condemns. I am sure that he knows the talmud does say those things that I have quoted. There are numerous books written by jews about their hatred of gentiles. Try “You Gentiles” by Maurice Samuel.

    I am certain one thousand perc ent that Spindell talks bad about blacks and hispanics when he is with his brethren. Jews only pretend to help others.
    This jew named schuerman, don’t recall the actual name, who supposedly cared about blacks in the South, and was supposed to have been killed by the KKK (many members are jews) along with another jew and a black man, said that his main motive was to destroy the Western European Culture of the US. Just do a little research, anybody on this blog can find it.

    Susan Sontagg(not real last name) said that the white man is a cancer.
    Primakov Ignatiev: of Harvard no less, said that all whites should be exterminated.

    Eli Wiesel the weasel: this nobel peace prize winner said that ‘every jew should hold in his heart a visceral deep seated hatred for everything German.

    I am sure that Spindell will say this is antijew.

    But he can’t say it is not the truth.

  111. Hugh7:

    “It may take that freedom away from the parent, but it gives it back to the person it should more obviously belong to.”

    I can assume from the comment that you are against abortion too? If you are for abortion how can you have it both ways? If you are against cicumcision for this reason you then must also be against abortion for the same reason. A fetus is actually a living being while a foreskin is just some extraneous tissue. Shall we wait until the child is old enough to determine whether he or she wishes to die or to live?

    I as a parent have a right to abort my child so why do I not have a right to circumcise my son?

  112. Truthbeknown:

    where do you get all that BS from? If the Jews are so powerful how come you still exist?

    Simple fact Jewish people for the most part work hard and study hard and become professionals so they make lots of money. Not all Jews are rich and not all Asians are good students.

    I think if I were a Jew I would tend to dislike saurbrauten and schnitzel and for very good reason. I am not a Jew and often wonder how the Germans did what they did, the NAZIs were far from remarkable men. Mostly lower class thugs and goons driven by feelings of inadequacy. The fact that the German people followed them is a stain on Germany and Hitlers thousand year Reich is about what it will take for the world to forget their barbarity.

  113. TBK:

    no I have not. I do not believe Jewish people to be evil or to have alterior motives, some may but then some whites do and some blacks do and so do Asians and Muslims and Christians.

    I generally dont believe in conspiracies because if 2 people know it will not be a secret. And anyway world domination is hard work and usually dosent payoff, just ask Adolf and Vladimir and Josef.

  114. Indentured Servant: abortion is a completely different issue – in fact it is a spectrum of issues, because pregancy is not just a state of being but a progressive process. Unlike the Catholic Church, I have no objection whatever to “aborting” a newly fertilised egg. Like almost everybody, I have strong objections to “aborting” a healthy full-term baby. When during the nine months those human rights begin is something we can argue about till the cows come home but it would do no good to do so here. There is no doubt they are present after birth.

    A foreskin on the other hand is the property of the man a newborn baby will, we hope, grow up to be. That is why I work for his right to decide for himself whether he wants to keep it.

  115. truthbeknown writes: find interesting that Mike Spindell never addreasses the issues in the posts which he condemns. I am sure that he knows the talmud does say those things that I have quoted.

    me: Mike has been way more generous with you than he has to be and way more generous with you than I will be. the anti-talmud articles you post all come from standard issue white supremacist websites like Stormfront. That you quote this trash does not give your slurs any credibility. you have no idea at all what the Talmud is and how Jewish holy books serve the Jewish community or what they say about non Jews.

    you: I am certain one thousand perc ent that Spindell talks bad about blacks and hispanics when he is with his brethren. Jews only pretend to help others.

    me: you don’t know Mike. You have not really read his posts. and you have no idea what he talks about when he is with family and friends. We know more about what you talk about, though and it is all pretty standard anti-Jewish hate speech.

    yo: This jew named schuerman, don’t recall the actual name, who supposedly cared about blacks in the South, and was supposed to have been killed by the KKK (many members are jews) along with another jew and a black man, said that his main motive was to destroy the Western European Culture of the US. Just do a little research, anybody on this blog can find it.

    me: oh please. get your facts right or stay home. Michael Schwermer was a civil rights worker who went to Mississippi to register african americans as voters. he along with two others were lynched. by white men. the other two men were James Chaney, an african american man and Andrew Goodman, another jewish man. their only motive was voter registration.

    the rest of your post isn’t worth responding to. it’s trash.

  116. Lottakatz,

    I am sorry to hear of your most recent losses; you have my sincere condolences. I am glad you are beginning to feel well enough to post and hope the diversion gives you solace.

  117. Lottakaz:

    I am very sorry for your losses and we all appreciate your return to the blog.

    Jonathan

  118. I have lost interest in this conversation. Every time Mike speaks to me it’s like a topsy turvy alternate universe where events no longer have any correlation to sequence and a multiplicity of parallel realities devolve into a smoking mass of polymorphous goo.

    For those that took the time to read and reflect on this topic, it was well worth my energy. I am committed to the idea that children’s bodies are not property, and that their rights to autonomy, integrity, and self-determination must be respected as inviolable — without exception.

    Thanks. I won’t be back.

  119. Lottakaz:

    I am very sorry for your losses and I appreciate your return to this blog as well.

    FYI, I did not consider LottaKaz to be a female name. I thunk it was a play on eating at Katz Deli too much, which I could have been accused of. Now if you would have said Ima Hogg, immediately I would have known you were female as that is the name that a former Governor of Texas, yes insanity does not skip generations, in some families, gave to his only daughter.

    Thanks for the insight that you have to offer.

    I hope the Buddha man comes back sometime soon. Life is just not fair sometimes and if you read the Torah or Pentateuch, the first 5 chapters of the bible especially the 5th chapter a lot of grief is told as well as inspiration to do the right thing.

    Best of luck and I too am honored to be able to contribute to this Blawg.

    R

  120. DOMINO 1, July 17, 2009 at 8:36 am

    Sorry to see you go, just remember that when you beat a horse that is already dead too often the leather is not even good for shoes.

  121. Lottakatz,

    I am so sorry about your friend’s and your father’s death. This must be a very painful and difficult time for you. I know I can’t say anything to comfort you over such losses, so please know I keep you in my thoughts.

    Thank you so much for returning to this blog. You are one of the most decent, deep and clear speaking people here. I appreciate the way you write as much as I appreciate what you write. You have added immeasurably to this blog. I have learned so much from you and I know I will continue to do so as I keep reading your posts.

    Again, I am so sorry.

    Jill

  122. Lottakatz,
    I too am sorry for the terrible losses you have sustained within a short period and I well understand that the mourning
    process is a difficult one for us to undergo, particularly when there is a parent involved. I have experienced both the losses you have so recently gone through and Iknow the process is painful and difficult. All you can do is let yourself go through it and hopefully at some point achieve some closure for wounds that can never heal.

    Given that I’m loath to respond to the remainder of your post because you truly have more important issues to deal with. The only point I will make is that until stated openly I really had no idea of Domino’s gender and originally of yours. My near term vision is not that great, nor is the clarity of icons. The use of she/he & he/she was not meant to ridicule her, but merely because of the fact that I was writing quickly and no gender neutral pronouns come to mind. As to any of your other points, I answered them in my previous post to you and you can accept or reject them as you please. I am not a sexist either consciously, or subconsciously.

    The average mourning period for us humans is around six months. This is mourning and allowing one’s life to move on, it does not take into account the painful/beautiful memories of those we’ve lost which are forever with us. The best I can wish for you is that you let yourself mourn fully and then fully resume your life. I hope you can believe my sincerity in
    hoping that you will reach nepenthe.

  123. truthbeknown,
    You say that I don’t answer you when you quote the Talmud based on links at two websites. I know this has to be the basis of your beliefs because the Talmud consists of between 70 and 100 volumes of material and is best read in its original Hebrew, rather than English translations. It requires a lifetime of study and I doubt that you have given it more than a few hours at the two anti-Jewish websites you link. They are run by Michael A. Hoffman II and Karen A. Valentine, both of who don’t like Judaism or Jews. I’m sure to you though that their words are gospel because the same dislike for Jews is inherent in your writing.

    “I am sure that jews make critical comments about blacks. Just try to tell these jews that they are anti-black, they’ll explode with denial. But they always you to agree with their charges against you. Jews can never refute what people say about them. All they have is name calling.”

    Please spare me your concern for Black people because you ended one of your posts with:

    “Jews run:
    Porn
    Homo industry
    NAMBLA
    ACLU
    ACLJ
    SPLC
    just to name a few. All anti-White groups.”

    If you yourself weren’t also a bigot where black people are concerned you would have never used “anti-White groups.”

    You are probably in fact a white supremacist, but in the small chance you’re not, you are still an anti-Jewish bigot.
    Now as far as “Jews can never refute what people say about them” goes, you’re right we can’t. Not because those things are true but specifically because most anti-Jews like you spout so many falsehoods and non-truths, while at the same time refusing to accept counter arguments, that it is a waste of time to argue with a bigot and only lends credence to their views by deeming them worthy of discussion.

    As I said in another post and I’m putting it as kindly as possible: You don’t like Jews, We don’t like you.

  124. CEJ,
    I did note what you had posted and appreciated it. Especially that you caught the fact that this happened about four years ago. In the midst of all the back and for I’m sorry I didn’t acknowledge my appreciation for your clarifying things.

  125. It seems this quote can be applied anywhere:
    “The range of possible human experience far exceeds the ordinary limits of our subjectivity.” [Sam Harris]

  126. lottakatz:

    “I made my posting because I saw Bob E’s posting and yours to be the leading edge of a personal affront and is indicative of a subconscious impulse to sex/gender bias or insult. Notice I said subconscious.”

    Actually, it was meant entirely as comic relief; i.e. relief from the psycho-sexual nightmare of a tangent the discussion had turned into.

    And I am sorry about your loss.

    Bob

  127. Lotta

    I was thinking that you’d been scarce for the same reason as me…. that you were away, enjoying the summer. I am so sorry to hear of your recent losses. The things we say at times like this seem so trite and I usually feel pretty helpless when trying to offer comfort. I hope that as the days as weeks pass your burden grows lighter and that your grief is replaced by loving memories.

  128. lottakatz Thank you for all your deep and thoughtful posts. I am sorry for your losses. I thought your name was lottakatz because there were lots of Katz’s in your family but maybe you have lots of cats.

  129. ALthough I don’t know you, I am also sorry for your double losses, LK…

    I will attribute your ‘ramble’ to an apparent lack of sleep, as you say, likely attributable on both levels- parent and close (girl?)friend, I presume…

    As doctors, we lose people out of our patient families of thousands on any given day. It’s never without some sensations of loss even if we did not know them well, personally.

    Pardon me for being slightly detached when it comes to the natural course of life and events than most folks.

    I couldn’t do my job, otherwise.

  130. Patty C 1, July 17, 2009 at 3:47 pm

    ALthough I don’t know you, I am also sorry for your double losses, LK…

    I will attribute your ‘ramble’ to an apparent lack of sleep, as you say, likely attributable on both levels- parent and close (girl?)friend, I presume…

    As doctors, we lose people out of our patient families of thousands on any given day. It’s never without some sensations of loss even if we did not know them well, personally.

    Pardon me for being slightly detached when it comes to the natural course of life and events than most folks.

    I couldn’t do my job, otherwise.
    ****************************************

    Your utter lack of consideration must make you the most exemplary example of what not to do in your alleged medical practice and therefore an example to be understood.

    Your lack of compassion amazes me, how can you be so inconsiderate and rude to people in times like these? Are you trying to make a lastly impression?

    Go out and walk in wet concrete, stand there for a while, let it set. When no one comes to your aide reread what the hell it is that you wrote here. You would certainly understand why.

    Unfortunately here in Texas they have passed laws that make it obligatory to assist in roadside emergency’s. I am sure that the court would look at the failure to assist you as justifiable.

  131. You have limited comprehension skills.

    You have made it very clear that you despise physicians so I will ignore your editorial as more of the same order of crap you’ve been serving up since you arrived in April under your current handle.

    Get some help. You need sorely it.

  132. SWM: “I thought your name was lottakatz because there were lots of Katz’s in your family but maybe you have lots of cats.”

    Cats, and a best friend was named Katz so it just had to be Lottakatz. When I took that name the better half and I lived with more cats but time has reduced the cat contingent of the life pod down to two kitties. Four just seems to us to be the proper number but circumstance has brought us more on occasion. We have been cat-lite for about a year.

    That changes next week because my deceased friend (who was converted to the cat side through her association with me) also had seen her house-cat population decline to two cats and now they need a home. When the house is vacated next week I’ll bring them home with me. One of her cats is actually a brother to one of mine and they have similar temperaments so I’m hoping the transition works out well for them (us) all.

    All of our kitties have been strays or adopted. I just can’t understand how people consider their pets disposable but they do (drop-off rates at shelters go up in a poor economy and that I do understand) so we have never had a dearth of kitties in our lives for very long.

    Now you are forewarned, obviously that the mere mention of cats could warrant a lengthy posting ( when stopping with “Cats” would have done as well) tips you to the fact that your dealing with a hardcore cat person and means that the word should be used sparingly in my vicinity. :-) I’ll resist the reflexive urge to tell you, in detail, the last cute thing one of our cats did, which was yesterday … no … NO … MUST … RESIST … :-)

    Again, thank you all for your kind words and thoughts. As someone else (AY maybe) mentioned above, I too hope BIL is OK and will return.

  133. TBK/BTK:

    you are one sick individual if you like the stuff on that web site. My contempt for you is beyond words if you adhere to this, this, even shit is to good a word for it.

    I cant even believe that there are people who believe it and that I may interact with them on a daily basis. I don’t necessarily believe in violence but I think I would make an exception for people that believe what that site is saying.

    The total disregard this site has for humanity and the human intellect is appalling, there is nothing even remotely redeeming about it. I am not one for censorship but I would ask Prof. Turley to remove TruthBeKnown’s July 18, 2009 at 11:45 am post in the name of the human intellect and decency.

  134. WOW!!!

    IndenturedServant!!!!More like slave of the jews….

    I am sure that you would not have any problems with me if I were promoting killing Muslims for IsRaHell.

    And you pretend to be open minded and tolerant.

  135. IS,
    Some scum does a service by revealing their true selves as they go along. This one is beginning to get hysterical because no one is paying attention to him. He is more to be pitied than hated because his bigotry has crippled him.

  136. Spindell

    You are the one who is hysterical. I have done nothing here remotely resembling irrationality. I have simply stated the facts which anyone can verify if he wanted the truth. Typical of jewish behaviour is to accuse others of bad behaviour. Not a single one of my statements has been refuted on this site.This IndenturedServant now is advocating killing me. Tisk! Tisk! You people are such hypocrites. You can’t stand truth so the trheats and name-calling begin.
    Don’t worry I will not continue to cast my pears.

  137. TBK/BTK:

    I have not said anything about killing but a good American ass whooping would be deserved for that BS.

    I also would feel the same way if you were sending me to an anti-Islamic site or whatever. There is no place for this type of thinking in civilized society.

    take your Heinrich Himmler and Hitler dolls and play bury the swastika somewhere else.

  138. IS writes: There is no place for this type of thinking in civilized society.

    take your Heinrich Himmler and Hitler dolls and play bury the swastika somewhere else.

    me: actually, IS, I like seeing people like TBK out in the open. Do does Morris Dees of the Southern Poverty Law Center and so does Abe Foxman of the ADL. While this kind of thinking is anathema to me and to others here, while I find it repulsive, I kind of like the Mel Brooks approach… make jokes at their expense…laugh at them…show that they are ridiculous and you take away their power. where do you think “springtime for hitler” comes from?

    anyway, as much as I am sickened by their beliefs I don’t deny them the right to believe as they will. so let them have their websites and their collections of nazi memorabilia and their swastikas.
    the more they do this in the open the less we have to worry about.

    they are not civilized, but since when is being a jew hater against the law?

  139. GWLSM:

    I am sorry but one must confront evil with more than humor.

    this person is a threat to individual freedom and liberty and humor in my mind just dosent cut it.

    You are a better person than I am to approach it the way you do.

  140. IS writes: I am sorry but one must confront evil with more than humor.

    this person is a threat to individual freedom and liberty and humor in my mind just dosent cut it.

    You are a better person than I am to approach it the way you do.

    me: I am a Jew and a victim of what would now be called a violent hate crime but then it was just a game that two kids played on me that went terribly wrong.
    My freedom is not affected at all by racists and bigots. they simply do not have the power to limit where I go, what I say, what I do, who I associate with. they don’t. I think they are wasting their lives with hate and stupidity, but that is their right and far be it for me to try to change that. the more time they spend hating the less time they have for other things, like enjoyment of life. the more time they spend in basements goose-stepping to nazi rock the less time they have to hike in parks, body surf by favorite spots, so what I do and go where I go. I’d say that they are already limited in their pursuit of freedom by the shackles on their closed up constipated world view.

    I know I am not a better person — I just have a way of looking at things that works for me

  141. Check out Israel Shahak’s books
    Also check out

    ——————————————————————————–

    Top: Jewish Genocides Today and Yesterday: Jewish Religious Hatred of Gentiles Published by Israel Shahak

    ——————————————————————————–

    Jewish History, Jewish Religion: The Weight of 3,000 Years

    By Israel Shahak, with a foreword by Gore Vidal. Published by Pluto Press (London, 1994).

    When the Roman historian Tacitus pointed out 19 centuries ago that the Jews are unique among the races of man in their intense hatred and contempt for all races but their own, he was only repeating what many other scholars had discovered before him. For the next 1,900 years other investigators came to similar conclusions, either from a study of the Jews’ religious writings or from a study of the Jews’ behavior toward non-Jews.

    Notable among these was the Great Reformer, Martin Luther, who in 1543 wrote in Von den JØden und Ihren LØgen :

    Does not their Talmud say, and do not their rabbis write, that it is no sin to kill if a Jew kills a heathen, but it is a sin if he kills a brother in Israel? It is no sin if he does not keep his oath to a heathen. Therefore, to steal and rob, as they do with their usury, from a heathen is a divine service. For they hold that they cannot be too hard on us nor sin against us, because they are of the noble blood and circumcised saints; we, however, are cursed goyim. And they are the masters of the world, and we are their servants, yea, their cattle….

    Should someone think that I am saying too much, I am not saying too much, but much too little. For I see in their writings how they curse us goyim and wish us all evil in their schools and their prayers.

    The Jews responded to Luther like they responded to all the others. They put him down as just another “hater,” blinded by religious bigotry. And today that’s still the Jews’ standard answer to everyone who says or writes anything about them except the most fawning praise.

    When British newsman William Cash, Los Angeles correspondent for London’s Daily Telegraph , reported late last year in a magazine article the simple fact that the executives in Hollywood’s motion picture industry are nearly all Jews, they shrieked at him, “Hater!” and denied his fact. When spokesmen for the National Alliance, America’s premier patriotic organization, discuss on the group’s radio programs the Jewish control of the news and entertainment media or Jewish backing for gun confiscation or for racial mixing, the Jews also denounce them as “haters,” and a call goes out to prohibit “hate” on the airwaves.

    Thus, Israel Shahak’s book is all the more important for being a document by a knowledgeable Jew–a Jewish “insider”–about the beliefs and behavior of his fellow Jews. Born in Warsaw in 1933, Shahak spent a portion of his childhood in the concentration camp in Belsen, from which he immigrated to Palestine in 1945. He grew up in Israel, served in the Israeli military, and became a chemistry professor. Like all Israelis, he became fluent in Hebrew. He also became acclimated to the peculiar moral atmosphere of Israeli society: a combination of overweening arrogance and deceit, a mixture of pugnacious self-righteousness and duplicity.

    Unlike his fellow Israelis, however, Professor Shahak is deeply troubled by this peculiar atmosphere. Whereas the Jews around him take it for granted that the goyim on whom they depend for economic, military, and diplomatic support are too stupid ever to figure out what the Jews think about them and say about them behind their backs and plan to do to them when they can, and too sheeplike ever to take effective action if they do figure it out, he worries. He remembers that the Romans figured it out, and they consequently sacked Jerusalem and chased the Jews out of Palestine. He remembers that the Germans figured it out, and that’s why he became an involuntary tenant in a concentration camp. He’s worried that if his fellow Jews continue behaving as they always have, they will get themselves into some really serious trouble–again.

    In particular, Professor Shahak is concerned about the behavior of those of his race who adhere to Judaism. He is not one of these himself, and so he is able to look with some degree of objectivity at the mixture of superstition, Jewish chauvinism, and hatred of non-Jews which makes up the Jewish religion and its sacred writings. He deplores traditional Jewish teachings, not only because of the danger that some new Martin Luther will come along and spill the beans to the Gentiles, but because of the spiritually debilitating effect these teachings have had on the Jews themselves. Of the world of medieval Jewry in Europe, the world of the ghetto and the shtetl which modern Jewish writers refer to in euphoric tones as a world of quaint tradition and piety, Shahak says: “It was a world sunk in the most abject superstition, fanaticism, and ignorance . . . .”

    He cites a number of specific instances of the ways in which Jewish religious authorities have kept their flocks under control. In general, the rabbis have taught their fellow Jews that their Gentile neighbors are spiritually and morally unclean; that they are subhuman, on a level with the beasts of the field; and that they hate Jews and must be hated in return. Jews are taught that the Christian religion is a religion fit only for animals, and that its founder, Jesus, was the son of a prostitute and is presently immersed in a pit of boiling excrement in hell.

    Among the Hassidim (Hebrew for “pious ones”) all of these teachings are kept current. Shahak points out that a central thesis of the Hassidic doctrine is that only Jews are human beings, and that the universe was created for them alone. Non-Jews were created only to be used by Jews. Although this teaching about the subhumanity of Gentiles is most open and explicit among the bearded, sidelocked, black-hatted Orthodox Jews that one sees in Jewish strongholds such as New York City, it comes from the core of Jewish tradition and is accepted to a greater or lesser degree by all pious Jews. It is, for example, a specific tenet of the Jewish Defense League and is cited in the membership handbook for that group.

    Especially frustrating to Professor Shahak is the clever deception which his fellow Jews use to conceal the true nature of Judaism from their Gentile neighbors. Regarding the veil of false piety which conceals from Gentile eyes the malevolent doctrine of the Hassidim, he writes: “A chief deceiver in this case, and a good example of the power of deception, was Martin Buber. His numerous works eulogizing the whole Hassidic movement (including Habbad) never so much as hint at the real doctrines of Hassidism concerning non-Jews.” Buber (1878-1965) promoted Hassidism in Germany during the rise of the National Socialists–in fact, until 1938, when he left for Palestine–and Shahak considers Buber’s efforts, despite their deceptiveness, at least partly responsible for the National Socialist reaction to the Jews. There were, after all, plenty of National Socialists perceptive enough to see through the veil. One of these was Adolf Hitler’s early comrade, the editor and playwright Dietrich Eckart, whose booklet Der Bolschewismus von Moses bis Lenin is especially revealing in this regard (available in English translation from National Vanguard Books for $5.00, postpaid).

    Another example of Jewish deception given by Professor Shahak concerns the etymology of the Yiddish word for a Gentile girl, shiksa . He cites the popular English-language book The Joys of Yiddish (New York, 1968), by Leo Rosten, which tells its readers that shiksa comes from the Hebrew word sheqetz , meaning “blemish.” Writes Shahak, “This is a barefaced lie, as every speaker of Hebrew knows. The Megiddo Modern Hebrew-English Dictionary, published in Israel, correctly defines sheqetz as follows: `unclean animal; loathsome creature, abomination . . . .'”

    Professor Shahak writes with passion. He evidently feels that liberating Jews everywhere from the shackles of their misanthropic superstitions and freeing Israeli state policy in particular from the stifling influence of Judaism is a matter of some urgency. He focuses our attention especially on the inherent hatefulness of Judaism with citations from a number of Jewish religious writings.

    This has been a favorite activity of anti-Jewish writers for centuries, who have belabored us with the Talmud’s insulting and hostile comments about Gentiles. The inaccessibility to Gentiles of many of the Hebrew texts, however, together with the deception veiling them, has made Talmudic exegesis a problematic task for all Gentiles with less scholarship or determination than that of Martin Luther. For this reason one must exercise considerable discretion in quoting from many anti-Jewish writings: translations are often questionable, and references are often garbled.

    Professor Shahak does not have these limitations: he knows where to look; he understands the secret meanings of all of the deceptive euphemisms; and he gives us clear and reliable translations. In a chapter titled “The Laws against Non-Jews,” he writes:

    . . . [T]he Halakhah, that is the legal system of classical Judaism–as practiced by practically all Jews from the 9th century to the end of the 18th and as maintained to this very day in the form of Orthodox Judaism–is based primarily on the Babylonian Talmud. However, because of the unwieldy complexity of the legal disputations recorded in the Talmud, more manageable codifications of talmudic law became necessary . . . . The most authoritative code, widely used to date as a handbook, is the Shulhan ‘Arukh . . . .

    He then cites the teaching of this code regarding homicide:

    According to the Jewish religion, the murder of a Jew is a capital offense and one of the three most heinous sins (the other two being idolatry and adultery). Jewish religious courts and secular authorities are commanded to punish, even beyond the limits of the ordinary administration of justice, anyone guilty of murdering a Jew. . . . When the victim is a Gentile, the position is quite different. A Jew who murders a Gentile is guilty only of a sin against the laws of Heaven, not punishable by a court. To cause indirectly the death of a Gentile is no sin at all.

    Thus, one of the two most important commentators on the Shulhan ‘Arukh explains that when it comes to a Gentile, “one must not lift one’s hand to harm him, but one may harm him indirectly, for instance by removing a ladder after he had fallen into a crevice . . . there is no prohibition here, because it was not done directly.” . . .

    A Gentile murderer who happens to be under Jewish jurisdiction must be executed whether the victim was Jewish or not. However, if the victim was Gentile and the murderer converts to Judaism, he is not punished.

    Then Shahak gives us a rabbi’s answer to an Israeli soldier who has asked whether or not it is proper to kill Arab women and children. In his answer the rabbi quotes from the Talmud: “The best of the Gentiles–kill him; the best of snakes–dash out its brains.”

    Perhaps even more offensive are the Jewish beliefs on sexual matters. Shahak writes:

    Sexual intercourse between a married Jewish woman and any man other than her husband is a capital offense for both parties, and one of the three most heinous sins. The status of Gentile women is very different. The Halakhah presumes all Gentiles to be utterly promiscuous and the verse “whose flesh is as the flesh of asses, and whose issue [of semen] is like the issue of horses” is applied to them. . . . Therefore, the concept of adultery does not apply to intercourse between a Jewish man and a Gentile woman; rather the Talmud equates such intercourse to the sin of bestiality. . . .

    According to the Talmudic Encyclopedia : “He who has carnal knowledge of the wife of a Gentile is not liable to the death penalty, for it is written: `thy fellow’s wife’ rather than the alien’s wife . . . and although a married Gentile woman is forbidden to the Gentiles, in any case a Jew is exempted.”

    This does not imply that sexual intercourse between a Jewish man and a Gentile woman is permitted–quite the contrary. But the main punishment is inflicted on the Gentile woman; she must be executed, even if she was raped by the Jew: “If a Jew has coitus with a Gentile woman, whether she be a child of three or an adult, whether married or unmarried, and even if he is a minor aged only nine years and one day–because he had willful coitus with her she must be killed, as is the case with a beast, because through her a Jew got into trouble.”

    The Talmud’s overriding concern with matters of money and property mirror that of the Jews, and Professor Shahak offers a number of hair-splitting examples of Jewish beliefs on the subject and the way in which distinctions are made between the property of Jews and Gentiles, and between Jewish dealings with another Jew and with a Gentile. Two of these examples will suffice here:

    If a Jew finds property whose probable owner is Jewish, the finder is strictly enjoined to make a positive effort to return his find by advertising it publicly. In contrast, the Talmud and all the early rabbinical authorities not only allow a Jewish finder to appropriate an article lost by a Gentile, but actually forbid him or her to return it. . . .

    It is forbidden to defraud a Jew by selling or buying at an unreasonable price. However, “Fraud does not apply to Gentiles, for it is written: `Do not defraud each man his brother’ . . . .”

    Shahak points out that “the Halakhah interprets all such idioms [as `each man his brother’ or `neighbor’] as referring exclusively to one’s fellow Jew.”

    How have the Jews managed to keep teachings of this sort concealed from the Gentiles among whom they live? The truth of the matter is that they have not always been able to do so. Luther was not the only Christian scholar who learned Hebrew, peered into the Talmud, and was horrified by what he saw. Sometimes the Jews were able to bribe the Christian authorities to overlook such things, but throughout the later Middle Ages there were prohibitions and burnings of talmudic literature by outraged popes and bishops.

    The Jews developed a clever system of double bookkeeping to circumvent such “persecution.” They modified or deleted the offending passages from new editions of the Talmud, and they made up a separate compendium–Talmudic Omissions , or in Hebrew Hesronot Shas –which circulated surreptitiously among the rabbis. In Israel today, feeling cocky enough to dispense with most such deceptions, the Jews are putting the passages which formerly had been omitted or modified back into the latest editions of the Talmud or the Shulhan ‘Arukh in their original form. They are still careful with translations into Gentile tongues, however. Professor Shahak gives an example:

    In 1962 a part of the Maimonidean Code . . . the so-called Book of Knowledge , which contains the most basic rules of Jewish faith and practice, was published in Jerusalem in a bilingual edition, with the English translation facing the Hebrew text. The latter has been restored to its original purity, and the command to exterminate Jewish infidels appears in it in full: “It is a duty to exterminate them with one’s own hands.” In the English translation this is somewhat softened to: “It is a duty to take active measures to destroy them.” But then the Hebrew text goes on to specify the prime examples of “infidels” who must be exterminated: “Such as Jesus of Nazareth and his pupils, and Tzadoq and Baitos [the founders of the Sadducean sect] and their pupils, may the name of the wicked rot.” Not one word of this appears in the English text on the facing page (78a). And, even more significant, in spite of the wide circulation of this book among scholars in the English-speaking countries, not one of them has, as far as I know, protested against this glaring deception.

    Professor Shahak is too naive. If he ventured out of Israel more and came to know Christian scholars better, he would understand what a pathetic and Politically Correct rabble they have become. There is not the slightest spark of Martin Luther left in the lot of them. Traitors to their own people as well as to their religion, they smile and genuflect at every insult from the Jews and are capable of feeling indignation only when the Jews receive some slight. The Jews are able to enlist them by the regiment to denounce in unison as “hate” any criticism of Jewish policies or doctrines, but they turn a blind eye to the virulent hatred which permeates Judaism and motivates the great majority of Jews, religious as well as secular.

    Israel Shahak is a rare Jew indeed, and his book is essential reading for anyone interested in the problem of the Jews.

  142. Check out Israel Shahak’s books
    Also check out Israel Shamir’s

    ——————————————————————————–

    Top: Jewish Genocides Today and Yesterday: Jewish Religious Hatred of Gentiles Published by Israel Shahak

    ——————————————————————————–

    Jewish History, Jewish Religion: The Weight of 3,000 Years

    By Israel Shahak, with a foreword by Gore Vidal. Published by Pluto Press (London, 1994).

    When the Roman historian Tacitus pointed out 19 centuries ago that the Jews are unique among the races of man in their intense hatred and contempt for all races but their own, he was only repeating what many other scholars had discovered before him. For the next 1,900 years other investigators came to similar conclusions, either from a study of the Jews’ religious writings or from a study of the Jews’ behavior toward non-Jews.

    Notable among these was the Great Reformer, Martin Luther, who in 1543 wrote in Von den JØden und Ihren LØgen :

    Does not their Talmud say, and do not their rabbis write, that it is no sin to kill if a Jew kills a heathen, but it is a sin if he kills a brother in Israel? It is no sin if he does not keep his oath to a heathen. Therefore, to steal and rob, as they do with their usury, from a heathen is a divine service. For they hold that they cannot be too hard on us nor sin against us, because they are of the noble blood and circumcised saints; we, however, are cursed goyim. And they are the masters of the world, and we are their servants, yea, their cattle….

    Should someone think that I am saying too much, I am not saying too much, but much too little. For I see in their writings how they curse us goyim and wish us all evil in their schools and their prayers.

    The Jews responded to Luther like they responded to all the others. They put him down as just another “hater,” blinded by religious bigotry. And today that’s still the Jews’ standard answer to everyone who says or writes anything about them except the most fawning praise.

    When British newsman William Cash, Los Angeles correspondent for London’s Daily Telegraph , reported late last year in a magazine article the simple fact that the executives in Hollywood’s motion picture industry are nearly all Jews, they shrieked at him, “Hater!” and denied his fact. When spokesmen for the National Alliance, America’s premier patriotic organization, discuss on the group’s radio programs the Jewish control of the news and entertainment media or Jewish backing for gun confiscation or for racial mixing, the Jews also denounce them as “haters,” and a call goes out to prohibit “hate” on the airwaves.

    Thus, Israel Shahak’s book is all the more important for being a document by a knowledgeable Jew–a Jewish “insider”–about the beliefs and behavior of his fellow Jews. Born in Warsaw in 1933, Shahak spent a portion of his childhood in the concentration camp in Belsen, from which he immigrated to Palestine in 1945. He grew up in Israel, served in the Israeli military, and became a chemistry professor. Like all Israelis, he became fluent in Hebrew. He also became acclimated to the peculiar moral atmosphere of Israeli society: a combination of overweening arrogance and deceit, a mixture of pugnacious self-righteousness and duplicity.

    Unlike his fellow Israelis, however, Professor Shahak is deeply troubled by this peculiar atmosphere. Whereas the Jews around him take it for granted that the goyim on whom they depend for economic, military, and diplomatic support are too stupid ever to figure out what the Jews think about them and say about them behind their backs and plan to do to them when they can, and too sheeplike ever to take effective action if they do figure it out, he worries. He remembers that the Romans figured it out, and they consequently sacked Jerusalem and chased the Jews out of Palestine. He remembers that the Germans figured it out, and that’s why he became an involuntary tenant in a concentration camp. He’s worried that if his fellow Jews continue behaving as they always have, they will get themselves into some really serious trouble–again.

    In particular, Professor Shahak is concerned about the behavior of those of his race who adhere to Judaism. He is not one of these himself, and so he is able to look with some degree of objectivity at the mixture of superstition, Jewish chauvinism, and hatred of non-Jews which makes up the Jewish religion and its sacred writings. He deplores traditional Jewish teachings, not only because of the danger that some new Martin Luther will come along and spill the beans to the Gentiles, but because of the spiritually debilitating effect these teachings have had on the Jews themselves. Of the world of medieval Jewry in Europe, the world of the ghetto and the shtetl which modern Jewish writers refer to in euphoric tones as a world of quaint tradition and piety, Shahak says: “It was a world sunk in the most abject superstition, fanaticism, and ignorance . . . .”

    He cites a number of specific instances of the ways in which Jewish religious authorities have kept their flocks under control. In general, the rabbis have taught their fellow Jews that their Gentile neighbors are spiritually and morally unclean; that they are subhuman, on a level with the beasts of the field; and that they hate Jews and must be hated in return. Jews are taught that the Christian religion is a religion fit only for animals, and that its founder, Jesus, was the son of a prostitute and is presently immersed in a pit of boiling excrement in hell.

    Among the Hassidim (Hebrew for “pious ones”) all of these teachings are kept current. Shahak points out that a central thesis of the Hassidic doctrine is that only Jews are human beings, and that the universe was created for them alone. Non-Jews were created only to be used by Jews. Although this teaching about the subhumanity of Gentiles is most open and explicit among the bearded, sidelocked, black-hatted Orthodox Jews that one sees in Jewish strongholds such as New York City, it comes from the core of Jewish tradition and is accepted to a greater or lesser degree by all pious Jews. It is, for example, a specific tenet of the Jewish Defense League and is cited in the membership handbook for that group.

    Especially frustrating to Professor Shahak is the clever deception which his fellow Jews use to conceal the true nature of Judaism from their Gentile neighbors. Regarding the veil of false piety which conceals from Gentile eyes the malevolent doctrine of the Hassidim, he writes: “A chief deceiver in this case, and a good example of the power of deception, was Martin Buber. His numerous works eulogizing the whole Hassidic movement (including Habbad) never so much as hint at the real doctrines of Hassidism concerning non-Jews.” Buber (1878-1965) promoted Hassidism in Germany during the rise of the National Socialists–in fact, until 1938, when he left for Palestine–and Shahak considers Buber’s efforts, despite their deceptiveness, at least partly responsible for the National Socialist reaction to the Jews. There were, after all, plenty of National Socialists perceptive enough to see through the veil. One of these was Adolf Hitler’s early comrade, the editor and playwright Dietrich Eckart, whose booklet Der Bolschewismus von Moses bis Lenin is especially revealing in this regard (available in English translation from National Vanguard Books for $5.00, postpaid).

    Another example of Jewish deception given by Professor Shahak concerns the etymology of the Yiddish word for a Gentile girl, shiksa . He cites the popular English-language book The Joys of Yiddish (New York, 1968), by Leo Rosten, which tells its readers that shiksa comes from the Hebrew word sheqetz , meaning “blemish.” Writes Shahak, “This is a barefaced lie, as every speaker of Hebrew knows. The Megiddo Modern Hebrew-English Dictionary, published in Israel, correctly defines sheqetz as follows: `unclean animal; loathsome creature, abomination . . . .'”

    Professor Shahak writes with passion. He evidently feels that liberating Jews everywhere from the shackles of their misanthropic superstitions and freeing Israeli state policy in particular from the stifling influence of Judaism is a matter of some urgency. He focuses our attention especially on the inherent hatefulness of Judaism with citations from a number of Jewish religious writings.

    This has been a favorite activity of anti-Jewish writers for centuries, who have belabored us with the Talmud’s insulting and hostile comments about Gentiles. The inaccessibility to Gentiles of many of the Hebrew texts, however, together with the deception veiling them, has made Talmudic exegesis a problematic task for all Gentiles with less scholarship or determination than that of Martin Luther. For this reason one must exercise considerable discretion in quoting from many anti-Jewish writings: translations are often questionable, and references are often garbled.

    Professor Shahak does not have these limitations: he knows where to look; he understands the secret meanings of all of the deceptive euphemisms; and he gives us clear and reliable translations. In a chapter titled “The Laws against Non-Jews,” he writes:

    . . . [T]he Halakhah, that is the legal system of classical Judaism–as practiced by practically all Jews from the 9th century to the end of the 18th and as maintained to this very day in the form of Orthodox Judaism–is based primarily on the Babylonian Talmud. However, because of the unwieldy complexity of the legal disputations recorded in the Talmud, more manageable codifications of talmudic law became necessary . . . . The most authoritative code, widely used to date as a handbook, is the Shulhan ‘Arukh . . . .

    He then cites the teaching of this code regarding homicide:

    According to the Jewish religion, the murder of a Jew is a capital offense and one of the three most heinous sins (the other two being idolatry and adultery). Jewish religious courts and secular authorities are commanded to punish, even beyond the limits of the ordinary administration of justice, anyone guilty of murdering a Jew. . . . When the victim is a Gentile, the position is quite different. A Jew who murders a Gentile is guilty only of a sin against the laws of Heaven, not punishable by a court. To cause indirectly the death of a Gentile is no sin at all.

    Thus, one of the two most important commentators on the Shulhan ‘Arukh explains that when it comes to a Gentile, “one must not lift one’s hand to harm him, but one may harm him indirectly, for instance by removing a ladder after he had fallen into a crevice . . . there is no prohibition here, because it was not done directly.” . . .

    A Gentile murderer who happens to be under Jewish jurisdiction must be executed whether the victim was Jewish or not. However, if the victim was Gentile and the murderer converts to Judaism, he is not punished.

    Then Shahak gives us a rabbi’s answer to an Israeli soldier who has asked whether or not it is proper to kill Arab women and children. In his answer the rabbi quotes from the Talmud: “The best of the Gentiles–kill him; the best of snakes–dash out its brains.”

    Perhaps even more offensive are the Jewish beliefs on sexual matters. Shahak writes:

    Sexual intercourse between a married Jewish woman and any man other than her husband is a capital offense for both parties, and one of the three most heinous sins. The status of Gentile women is very different. The Halakhah presumes all Gentiles to be utterly promiscuous and the verse “whose flesh is as the flesh of asses, and whose issue [of semen] is like the issue of horses” is applied to them. . . . Therefore, the concept of adultery does not apply to intercourse between a Jewish man and a Gentile woman; rather the Talmud equates such intercourse to the sin of bestiality. . . .

    According to the Talmudic Encyclopedia : “He who has carnal knowledge of the wife of a Gentile is not liable to the death penalty, for it is written: `thy fellow’s wife’ rather than the alien’s wife . . . and although a married Gentile woman is forbidden to the Gentiles, in any case a Jew is exempted.”

    This does not imply that sexual intercourse between a Jewish man and a Gentile woman is permitted–quite the contrary. But the main punishment is inflicted on the Gentile woman; she must be executed, even if she was raped by the Jew: “If a Jew has coitus with a Gentile woman, whether she be a child of three or an adult, whether married or unmarried, and even if he is a minor aged only nine years and one day–because he had willful coitus with her she must be killed, as is the case with a beast, because through her a Jew got into trouble.”

    The Talmud’s overriding concern with matters of money and property mirror that of the Jews, and Professor Shahak offers a number of hair-splitting examples of Jewish beliefs on the subject and the way in which distinctions are made between the property of Jews and Gentiles, and between Jewish dealings with another Jew and with a Gentile. Two of these examples will suffice here:

    If a Jew finds property whose probable owner is Jewish, the finder is strictly enjoined to make a positive effort to return his find by advertising it publicly. In contrast, the Talmud and all the early rabbinical authorities not only allow a Jewish finder to appropriate an article lost by a Gentile, but actually forbid him or her to return it. . . .

    It is forbidden to defraud a Jew by selling or buying at an unreasonable price. However, “Fraud does not apply to Gentiles, for it is written: `Do not defraud each man his brother’ . . . .”

    Shahak points out that “the Halakhah interprets all such idioms [as `each man his brother’ or `neighbor’] as referring exclusively to one’s fellow Jew.”

    How have the Jews managed to keep teachings of this sort concealed from the Gentiles among whom they live? The truth of the matter is that they have not always been able to do so. Luther was not the only Christian scholar who learned Hebrew, peered into the Talmud, and was horrified by what he saw. Sometimes the Jews were able to bribe the Christian authorities to overlook such things, but throughout the later Middle Ages there were prohibitions and burnings of talmudic literature by outraged popes and bishops.

    The Jews developed a clever system of double bookkeeping to circumvent such “persecution.” They modified or deleted the offending passages from new editions of the Talmud, and they made up a separate compendium–Talmudic Omissions , or in Hebrew Hesronot Shas –which circulated surreptitiously among the rabbis. In Israel today, feeling cocky enough to dispense with most such deceptions, the Jews are putting the passages which formerly had been omitted or modified back into the latest editions of the Talmud or the Shulhan ‘Arukh in their original form. They are still careful with translations into Gentile tongues, however. Professor Shahak gives an example:

    In 1962 a part of the Maimonidean Code . . . the so-called Book of Knowledge , which contains the most basic rules of Jewish faith and practice, was published in Jerusalem in a bilingual edition, with the English translation facing the Hebrew text. The latter has been restored to its original purity, and the command to exterminate Jewish infidels appears in it in full: “It is a duty to exterminate them with one’s own hands.” In the English translation this is somewhat softened to: “It is a duty to take active measures to destroy them.” But then the Hebrew text goes on to specify the prime examples of “infidels” who must be exterminated: “Such as Jesus of Nazareth and his pupils, and Tzadoq and Baitos [the founders of the Sadducean sect] and their pupils, may the name of the wicked rot.” Not one word of this appears in the English text on the facing page (78a). And, even more significant, in spite of the wide circulation of this book among scholars in the English-speaking countries, not one of them has, as far as I know, protested against this glaring deception.

    Professor Shahak is too naive. If he ventured out of Israel more and came to know Christian scholars better, he would understand what a pathetic and Politically Correct rabble they have become. There is not the slightest spark of Martin Luther left in the lot of them. Traitors to their own people as well as to their religion, they smile and genuflect at every insult from the Jews and are capable of feeling indignation only when the Jews receive some slight. The Jews are able to enlist them by the regiment to denounce in unison as “hate” any criticism of Jewish policies or doctrines, but they turn a blind eye to the virulent hatred which permeates Judaism and motivates the great majority of Jews, religious as well as secular.

    Israel Shahak is a rare Jew indeed, and his book is essential reading for anyone interested in the problem of the Jews.

  143. Alright boys and girls, how do you like them apples?

    All you Talmud scholars in the electronic world, are you not familiar with these quotes in Shahak’s book?

    I can’t wait to hear the name calling, “you’re sick, you’re disgusting, you’re a dead animal:.

    Tisk!!!Tisk!!!
    Poor jew!!!He can’t even accept what his own Talmud says.

  144. And now, for something completely different. Not!!

    “The Jewish people as a whole will become its own Messiah. It will attain world dominion by the dissolution of other races, by the abolition of frontiers, the annihilation of monarchy and by the establishment of a world republic in which the Jews will everywhere exercise the privilege of citizenship.

    In this New World Order the children of Israel will furnish all the leaders without encountering opposition. The Governments of the different peoples forming the world republic will fall without difficulty into the hands of the Jews. It will then be possible for the Jewish rulers to abolish private property and everywhere to make use of the resources of the state. Thus will the promise of the Talmud be fulfilled, in which is said that when the Messianic time is come, the Jews will have all the property of the whole world in their hands.”

    — Baruch Levy, Letter to Karl Marx, ‘La Revue de Paris’, p.574, June 1, 1928

    ——————————————————————————–

  145. BTK:

    now you are just foolish. go back to watching Spring Time for Hitler and eating mushrooms.

  146. Just foolish?

    Becuase I quote one of your masters

    You jews are devoid of any content. You lack integrity. Your own fellows have said that the jew only knows two things: money grubbing and causing trouble through communist revolution.
    You will never research this yourselves. You either know the truth or you are afraid to find out that I am correct.

    Jews have subverted Americans through the jew story of superman. Did you know that it’s a jew story?
    The jews are letting the cat out of the bag because they think they own us. There is a new movie out now where a jew is wearing a T-shirt with a superman symbol in a hexagram.

    You blind gentiles on this board better wake up.

  147. TBN writes: “If a Jew kills a gentile, the Jew is to go free.”
    –Babylonian Talmud: Sanhedrin 57a

    me: hahaha you have no idea what the Talmud says. admit it. you wouldn’t recognize a volume of the Talmud if one hit you in the head. and neither do the jew haters who wrote this. if given one of the many volumes of the Talmud you could not find this entry or any other like it. your bible is the stormfront website and the protocols of the elders of zion. which is all perfectly fine and legal but a scholar you never will be. what a rube. whzt a maroon. so you believe what your white supremacist cohort writes on their websites. so what. you have no authority over anyone but yourself and no power here. begone with you.

  148. IS writes: wake up to what, your stupidity?

    me: shhhh. keep this quiet. don’t tell anyone, but btk is partly right…. my uncle is the vice president of the world wide jewish bannking conspiracy. how do you think I got this swell computer and how I pay my kid’s tuition? that’s right. from money I get from the banking conspiracy. and you know what they say about how jews run the media? tbk isn’t far from wrong there either. my brother in law is a reporter. well that’s what everyone things. in reality he runs the news media. all of it. well most of it. well, really he runs the zerox machine at his office and services the big copiers. shhhhh.

  149. TBK: “Jews have subverted Americans through the jew story of superman. Did you know that it’s a jew story? The jews are letting the cat out of the bag because they think they own us. There is a new movie out now where a jew is wearing a T-shirt with a superman symbol in a hexagram.”

    Seriously, get help.

  150. double posting but worth the redux:

    Off Topic re: mods to the site.

    If Word Press doesn’t have a ‘lock-out’ function based on name or URL the Professor might want to find a template that does ie: TBK and that ilk. Just say’n.
    ———

    DNFTT
    ———

    GWLSM: Brother runs the media remark:
    Whooooosh, the sound your posting makes as it flies above his head; WAY too sophisticated what with all that sarcasm and irony and stuff.

  151. lotta writes: GWLSM: Brother runs the media remark:
    Whooooosh, the sound your posting makes as it flies above his head; WAY too sophisticated what with all that sarcasm and irony and stuff.

    thanks, doll, but I didn’t write that for him. I wrote it for you and my other friends here. really, I’ll bet tbk is a pimply-faced 17 year old who can’t get a date and found sudden popularity on the racist bigot websites. he lives in his mother’s basement and drinks beer with his friends while they listen to nazi rock. if this were 20 years ago he’d have a benign little public service tv station like wayne’s world. my guess is that he’d love to have a friend like wayne or garth but they are too, uh, evolved.

    otoh, superman, was created by two jewish guys, jerry siegel and joe shuster in 1934. their idea came from divine inspiration of a jewish superhero who could fight nazis. naturally tbk would find this offensive. as for me, the Man of Steel was and remains my favorite comic book super hero and I should have saved all my books. I took really good care of them and had I saved them I might not have had to go to Uncle Izzy, V.P. of the Worldwide Jewish Banking Conspiracy for law school tuition for my kid.
    either way, we Jews do find a way to rule the world. happily we like all our non-jewish friends and do not mind cutting them a big slice of the pie. makes for better parties.

  152. BTK:

    I spent half the night doing research and guess what I found out-you were right the whole world is run by Jews, they are everywhere. I even read the back of a box of cereal and it had some reference to Judaism. I am really starting to freak out, bankers, doctors, the media, my penis (its circumcised how did that happen? It must be part of the larger Jewish conspiracy to turn us all into Jews.)

    Oh my god BTK what am I going to do?

  153. GWLSM:

    Jews created Superman? we are all going to die. Those wascally Jews, they are trying to take over the world, I can see it know.

    BTK thanks for opening this gentiles eyes.
    How can I reverse my circimcision?

  154. TruthBeKnown,
    You don’t like Jews:Jews don’t like you.

    How about though showing how stupid you are? If Jews are as powerful as you claim we are, don’t you realize that you and your NAZI buddies are toast? Given the awful tortures you referred to that are committed by Jews, if I were you I would be very afraid. Problem is though, this is not the case and you’re just an idiot who’s filled with self loathing and projects it out onto others.

  155. IS writes: Jews created Superman? we are all going to die. Those wascally Jews, they are trying to take over the world, I can see it know.

    BTK thanks for opening this gentiles eyes.
    How can I reverse my circimcision?

    well,yeah. two jewish guys created Superman. really. I’d say that by the end of world war two jews pretty much did take over the entire world. we’d been at it for about 200 years before but planning the fake holocaust put us over the top.

    you mean you are circumcised and want to get un-circumcised? since I am a woman and don’t know any men who want to undo theirs I’m kind of the last person to ask for this sort of advice but let me ask you this: now that you can pass for a jew while changing clothes at the gym or at the men’s room line up ( I know, you all say that no one looks) why wouldn’t you want to take advantage of the Man of Steel thing?

  156. Mike S writes: How about though showing how stupid you are? If Jews are as powerful as you claim we are, don’t you realize that you and your NAZI buddies are toast? Given the awful tortures you referred to that are committed by Jews, if I were you I would be very afraid. Problem is though, this is not the case and you’re just an idiot who’s filled with self loathing and projects it out onto others.

    Mike, you make too much sense. seriously. how do you expect to get through to TBK with this strategy?

  157. “Mike, you make too much sense. seriously. how do you expect to get through to TBK with this strategy?”

    GWLSM,
    Can’t a guy have a little fun? You must understand that it’s hard running my little share of the world for the WJ Conspiracy, especially with all our other power brokers down here in Florida. All these long days at toil hurting the goyim, put a lot of pressure on an old guy. The weight of the tremendous authority and wealth alone feel heavy on my shoulders. I was just taking a little fun break and now I’ll have to go back to work again, because after all it is the Christian Sabbath, so I must work twice as hard.

  158. Mike S writes: GWLSM,
    Can’t a guy have a little fun? You must understand that it’s hard running my little share of the world for the WJ Conspiracy, especially with all our other power brokers down here in Florida. All these long days at toil hurting the goyim, put a lot of pressure on an old guy. The weight of the tremendous authority and wealth alone feel heavy on my shoulders. I was just taking a little fun break and now I’ll have to go back to work again, because after all it is the Christian Sabbath, so I must work twice as hard.

    me: well, since you put it that way, and since this is fun for you, I suppose you can continue to engage TBK. how many goyim did you cheat today ?
    Uncle Izzy is checking quotas later this week…. I’v e fallen off my personal best since its too hot to golf and the waves are pretty flat and this makes me cranky. maybe I can get back to persecuting gentiles once it cools off a bit. everyone needs a vacation right?
    but no kidding, if things are getting rough down there is florida, call the central office… they’ll be happy to send help. all those college students on summer break can combine a little mischief making with a visit to see the grandparents.

  159. GWLSM:

    no one would believe me, I tried that line once in my 20’s a woman told me I looked like Clark Kent and I told here that I turned into Superman when I took my clothes off. She just laughed and started talking to the guy next to her.

    I was just making fun of BTK and was not asking for advice. I was trying to tie my comments into the thread so no one would accuse me of diverging.

  160. IS writes: no one would believe me, I tried that line once in my 20’s a woman told me I looked like Clark Kent and I told here that I turned into Superman when I took my clothes off. She just laughed and started talking to the guy next to her.

    I was just making fun of BTK and was not asking for advice. I was trying to tie my comments into the thread so no one would accuse me of diverging.

    good line. I’ve never heard it and I thought I’ve heard everything…but I’ve also never met a guy who looks like Clark Kent.

    of course you were making fun of BTK. see how easy it is? and better for the blood pressure? uh-oh there I go with advice again…. my bad

  161. “how many goyim did you cheat today?”

    GWLSM,
    I hacked into my local country clubs computer system and significantly lowered the handicaps of all goyim, while raising those of the Jewish golfers by three strokes. There’s gonna be a lot of money won on the golf course this week.

  162. Mike Spindell:

    thats really cold, us goyim cant golf worth sh** anyway. Your team already has all the money and power would you please change them the other way so us goyim can feel, at least on the golf course, that we are sticking it to the man.

  163. MIke S writes: GWLSM,
    I hacked into my local country clubs computer system and significantly lowered the handicaps of all goyim, while raising those of the Jewish golfers by three strokes. There’s gonna be a lot of money won on the golf course this week.

    When the handicap is a smaller number that is good. when it is a higher number that is bad. but your intent was righteous.
    I will pass this on to operatives in other states.

  164. GWLSM:

    by lowering goyim handicaps you have made it harder for them to win.

    for example if your handicap is 18 strokes normally you are shooting around a 90 based on a course par of 72. So if Mike lowered goyim handicaps say from 18 to 10 to shoot the same game they would now have to have a game with 82 strokes vs. 90. No way the average goyim is going to shoot that well on a Saturday in the presence no less of their Jewish masters.

    I think I have that right.

  165. IS writes: by lowering goyim handicaps you have made it harder for them to win.

    the way I was thinking, a player with a 5 handicap is a better player than one with an 18 handicap.

    either way, home office is impressed with Mike’s creativity.

  166. Your site is really interesting to me and your subject matter is very relevant. I was browsing around and came across something you might find interesting. I was guilty of 3 of them with my sites. “99% of website owners are guilty of these five mistakes”. http://tinyurl.com/cuyfkfj You will be suprised how fast they are to fix.

Comments are closed.