Sunday, September 21, 2014

OUSTANDING FOOTAGE OF EXPLOSIONS GOING OFF IN BUILDING 7 OF THE WORLD TRADE CENTER ON 9/11 -- THIS BUILDING COLLAPSED DESPITE NEVER BEING HIT BY A PLANE

Clearly this is controlled demolition!!!


Building 7 Going Down 911 Truth
http://youtu.be/58zzfsbcda8

LIBERIA'S LARGEST NEWSPAPER CLAIMS US DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE MANUFACTURED EBOLA VIRUS -- IS SPREADING THE DISEASE THROUGH VACCINES



If you ignore the ridiculous assumption that this is a "conspiracy theory" -- you will easily see that the people of Africa know The Truth -- i.e., that the US engineered the Ebola virus as a biological weapon and is spreading the disease through vaccination.

Source Article:
Liberia's Largest Newspaper: US Dept. of Defense 'Manufactured' Ebola, AIDS
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2014/09/10/Liberia-s-Largest-Newspaper-Ebola-and-AIDS-Manufactured-by-US-Dept-of-Defense

The largest newspaper in Monrovia, Liberia, has published an outrageous conspiracy theory column arguing that the United States is directly responsible for scientifically engineering the Ebola virus in a bioterrorism lab and injecting Africans with it through the guise of vaccinations.

The wildly accusatory article, by Dr. Cyril Broderick, a former professor of Plant Pathology at the University of Liberia’s College of Agriculture and Forestry, claims the Ebola virus--and HIV--are products of the Cold War. Titled "Ebola, AIDS Manufactured By Western Pharmaceuticals, US DoD?" Broderick's article claims--using evidence such as the science fiction novel The Hot Zone--that the Department of Defense unwittingly used Africans to test experimental bioweapons by pretending they were vaccinating them against disease. "Reports," he argues, without actually citing any reports, "narrate stories of the US Department of Defense (DoD) funding Ebola trials on humans, trials which started just weeks before the Ebola outbreak in Guinea and Sierra Leone."

He cites the 1996 Leonard Horowitz work Emerging Viruses: AIDS And Ebola: Nature, Accident or Intentional? to claim that a facility in Maryland had "a lot of problems with strange illnesses" during the Cold War, a clear sign that many of these diseases were the product of U.S. experimentation to Broderick. He also claims the book definitively proves "the existence of an American Military-Medical-Industry that conducts biological weapons tests under the guise of administering vaccinations to control diseases and improve the health of 'black Africans overseas.'”

Broderick also accuses the World Health Organization (WHO) and Doctors Without Borders of bringing Ebola to Africa through vaccination programs. He asserts, too, that "many reports also conclude that the US government has a viral fever bioterrorism research laboratory in Kenema, a town at the epicentre of the Ebola outbreak in West Africa."

Perhaps most outrageously, Broderick attempts to cite a real source, The Guardian, alleging that a report in the paper said, "The US government funding of Ebola trials on healthy humans comes amid warnings by top scientists in Harvard and Yale that such virus experiments risk triggering a worldwide pandemic." A routine Internet search finds no evidence that such a sentence was ever written in the pages of The Guardian.

Broderick concludes, somehow, by calling for a class action lawsuit against Tulane University to combat the Ebola virus. "Africa must not relegate the Continent to become the locality for disposal and the deposition of hazardous chemicals, dangerous drugs, and chemical or biological agents of emerging diseases," he rails.

The text, for Westerners, is undoubtedly outrageous and easily dismissible. It is not the first time for such rumors in Africa, however; the last time, it was discovered that the KGB had planted stories in African media, accusing the United States of inventing the AIDS virus. But for Africans, many of whom operate under assumptions that they are under the constant threat of Western exploitation due to a history of colonialism, such a report is not so easy to ignore. As experts have noted, much of the violent resistance to Western science that has led to such a rapid spread of the virus is the product of a rejection of what Africans perceive as Western "paternalism" in coming to their continent and offering medical care.

That the Liberian Daily Observer is currently featuring it on its front page is of particular concern. The Observer is Liberia's largest newspaper, with a circulation of 30,000, mostly in the capital, Monrovia. Given the backdrop of panic into which this "report" is being disseminated, the consequences could be devastating for Liberia. The nation is already fending off significant distrust from the Liberian people--the kind of distrust that makes family members kidnap their own relatives out of hospitals to bring them to traditional herbalists for treatment they trust, the kind of distrust that triggers mob attacks on medical facilities run by the WHO and Doctors Without Borders and looting of healthcare buildings.

Running such a column in a climate of extreme distrust is, to say the least, unfathomably irresponsible on the part of the Observer. With such resistance from Africa's communities to finding a cure, the Ebola virus will only continue to spread, and having claimed more than 2,000 lives already, Ebola can only grow as an existential threat to West African governments.

Saturday, September 20, 2014

EBOLA "AID WORKERS" MURDERED IN GUINEA -- ACCUSED OF SPREADING THE DISEASE



Looks like the people in Africa are beginning to fully understand the situation. THEY SEE THE TRUTH ---- THAT THESE SO-CALLED "AID WORKERS" ARE NOT THERE TO PREVENT THE DISEASE BUT TO SPREAD IT!!! Good for them for wiping these vermin out! Hey America -- are you paying attention?

Source Article:
At least 8 Ebola aid workers reportedly killed 'in cold blood' by villagers in Guinea
http://www.foxnews.com/world/2014/09/19/at-least-8-ebola-aid-workers-reportedly-killed-in-cold-blood-by-villagers-in/

At least eight Ebola aid workers and journalists were reportedly murdered and dumped in a latrine in a remote village in Guinea in a frightening example of the growing distrust locals have of foreigners coming to help stem the mushrooming health crisis.

These deaths are believed to be the first resulting from resistance to international efforts to curb the Ebola outbreak in the region, Reuters reported. Other aid teams have been forced to turn back by crowds in several locations, and a treatment center in Monrovia, Liberia was attacked and looted.

Villagers in an area near the city of Nzerekore used machetes and clubs to attack eight members of a team trying to raise awareness about the disease, officials told the BBC.

"The eight bodies were found in the village latrine," Albert Damantang Camara, a spokesman for Guinea's government, told Reuters on Thursday, adding that they had been "killed in cold blood by the villagers."

Prime Minister Fofana reported that the aid mission included "local administrators, two medical officers, a preacher and three accompanying journalists." They were reportedly attacked by a large crowd, throwing stones, from the village of Wome.

The delegation had arrived on Tuesday to do disinfection work and educate people about preventing Ebola, but residents pelted them with rocks and beat them, according to the Los Angeles Times, citing Guinean radio reports. The group fled into the bush. One journalist who escaped said she heard people looking for her while she hid, according to the BBC.

On Thursday, the bodies were found in the septic tank of a village school in the village, according to Camara. Six people have been arrested and the village is now reportedly deserted. Although a motive for the murders has not been confirmed, a BBC report says many villagers have accused the health workers of spreading the disease.

Ebola first surfaced in March in southeastern Guinea, where the attacks took place. Since then, it has spread through the lower continent despite international efforts to combat it.

More than 2,600 people in West Africa have died from the disease.

Complicating efforts is the lack of education in remote areas, where some residents don't believe the virus exists. Last month, in the same area where the aid workers were killed, people rioted out of fear that workers disinfecting a market were contaminating people, according to the BBC.

Security for aid workers, for clinics and hospitals, remains a concern in the region. All of the governments affected and the international agencies fighting the epidemic are trying to reach out to the rural communities where misinformation and fear have prevented effective measures to control the spread of Ebola. Until all of the areas with infections have been reached and controls implemented, a reservoir of Ebola will remain and continue to spread, say experts.

The United Nations Security Council declared the Ebola outbreak in West Africa a "threat to international peace and security" Thursday.

Since March, the virus has infected at least 5,357 people, according to World Health Organization (WHO), mostly in Guinea, neighboring Sierra Leone and Liberia. It has also spread to Senegal and Nigeria.

It is the world's worst outbreak of Ebola, with officials warning that more than 20,000 people could ultimately be infected.

U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said on Thursday he will create a special mission to combat the disease and deployed staff in the worst-affected states.

Neighboring Sierra Leone has begun a controversial three-day curfew to try to stop the spread of the disease.

Friday, September 19, 2014

GENDER AND SEXUALITY IN THE WESTERN WORLD -- WHAT'S LOVE GOT TO DO WITH IT?


Gender and Sexuality In The Western World - What's Love Got to Do With It? Intro Part 1
http://youtu.be/WVrAGWbEV6I



Please enjoy Part 1 of this webinar as we explore gender roles in the United States and around the world and how they influence human sexuality and human love. We discuss the many ways our ideas about “masculine” and “feminine” can undermine the quality of our relationships throughout life and can also inhibit our capacity to attract and recognize authentic human love.


During Part 2, we discuss the keys to breaking free from social norms so that we can reconnect with our innate capacity to create truly fulfilling and enduring love relationships — the type that will last a lifetime (and beyond).


To purchase Part 2 of the webinar, and to have your own personal copy of Parts 1 and 2 for future viewing, please click on the buy now button below. Your copy of both Part 1 and Part 2 will be sent to you via email.





Thursday, September 18, 2014

THE SEXUALIZATION OF CHILDREN AND THE JEWISH INFLUENCE


This video was deleted from youtube. It has been mirrored from Trutube.
Name of original video: Sexualization of children by the International Criminal jewish Mafia
Original link: trutube.tv/video/27072/Sexualization-of-children-by-the-International-Criminal-jewish-Mafia-

The Jewish influence over American society has been severely underestimated. The fact that Jews proudly boast about owning the media and controlling the schools should be a warning to all of us that we have been extremely negligent in our willingness to hand our children over to these very dark forces for socialization.

"At first, by controlling the banking system we were able to control corporation capital. Through this, we acquired total monopoly of the movie industry, the radio networks and the newly developing television media. The printing industry, newspapers, periodicals and technical journals had already fallen into our hands. The richest plum was later to come when we took over the publication of all school materials. Through these vehicles we could mold public opinion to suit our own purposes. The people are only stupid pigs that grunt and squeal the chants we give them, whether they be truth or lies."
-- Influential Jew Howard Wallace Rosenthal, Administrative Assistant to NY Senator Jacob Javits, from a 1976 interview with Walter White, Jr. -- http://www.biblebelievers.org.au/tyranny1.htm


In examining the belief system of the Jews, we need only look to the Talmud to see that HAVING SEX WITH CHILDREN IS NORMALIZED -- indeed, with girls as young as three.

Behold the twisted teachings of the Talmud...

Sanhedrin 55b
R. Joseph said: Come and hear! A maiden aged three years and a day may be acquired in marriage by coition [intercourse], and if her deceased husband's brother cohabits with her, she becomes his. The penalty of adultery may be incurred through her; [if a niddah] she defiles him who has connection with her, so that he in turn defiles that upon which he lies, as a garment which has lain upon [a person afflicted with gonorrhoea].

Sanhedrin 54b
Rab said: Pederasty with a child below nine years of age is not deemed as pederasty with a child above that. Samuel said: Pederasty with a child below three years is not treated as with a child above that. 24 (24) I.e., Rab makes nine years the minimum; but if one committed sodomy with a child of lesser age, no guilt is incurred. Samuel makes three the minimum.

Kethuboth 11b
Raba said. It means this: When a grown-up man has intercourse with a little girl it is nothing, for when the girl is less than this [three years old], it is as if one puts the finger into the eye;


Source Article:
PEDOPHILIA: THE TALMUD'S DIRTY SECRET
http://www.truthtellers.org/alerts/pedophiliasecret.html

Three Year Old Brides

When Christ accused the Pharisees of His day of being Satan’s spiritual children, He fully realized what they were capable of. Second century Rabbi Simeon ben Yohai, one of Judaism’s very greatest rabbis and a creator of Kabbalah, sanctioned pedophilia—permitting molestation of baby girls even younger than three! He proclaimed, “A proselyte who is under the age of three years and a day is permitted to marry a priest.” 1 Subsequent rabbis refer to ben Yohai’s endorsement of pedophilia as "halakah," or binding Jewish law. 2 Has ben Yohai, child rape advocate, been disowned by modern Jews? Hardly. Today, in ben Yohai’s hometown of Meron, Israel, tens of thousands of orthodox and ultra-orthodox Jews gather annually for days and nights of singing and dancing in his memory.

References to pedophilia abound in the Talmud. They occupy considerable sections of Treatises Kethuboth and Yebamoth and are enthusiastically endorsed by the Talmud’s definitive legal work, Treatise Sanhedrin....


Sex at Three Years and One Day

In contrast to Simeon ben Yohai's dictum that sex with a little girl is permitted under the age of three years, the general teaching of the Talmud is that the rabbi must wait until a day after her third birthday. She could be taken in marriage simply by the act of rape.

R. Joseph said: Come and hear! A maiden aged three years and a day may be acquired in marriage by coition and if her deceased husband’s brother cohabits with her, she becomes his. (Sanh. 55b)

A girl who is three years of age and one day may be betrothed by cohabitation. . . .(Yeb. 57b)

A maiden aged three years and a day may be acquired in marriage by coition, and if her deceased husband’s brother cohabited with her she becomes his. (Sanh. 69a, 69b, also discussed in Yeb. 60b)

It was taught: R. Simeon b. Yohai stated: A proselyte who is under the age of three years and one day is permitted to marry a priest, for it is said, But all the women children that have not known man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves, and Phineas (who was priest, the footnote says) surely was with them. (Yeb. 60b)

[The Talmud says such three year and a day old girls are] . . . fit for cohabitation. . . But all women children, that have not known man by lying with him, it must be concluded that Scripture speaks of one who is fit for cohabitation. (Footnote to Yeb. 60b)

The example of Phineas, a priest, himself marrying an underage virgin of three years is considered by the Talmud as proof that such infants are "fit for cohabitation."

The Talmud teaches that an adult woman’s molestation of a nine year old boy is "not a sexual act" and cannot "throw guilt" upon her because the little boy is not truly a "man.” 9 But they use opposite logic to sanction rape of little girls aged three years and one day: Such infants they count as “women," sexually mature and fully responsible to comply with the requirements of marriage.

The Talmud footnotes 3 and 4 to Sanhedrin 55a clearly tell us when the rabbis considered a boy and girl sexually mature and thus ready for marriage. "At nine years a male attains sexual matureness… The sexual matureness of woman is reached at the age of three...



C-SECTION NOT BEST OPTION FOR BREECH BIRTH




Photo By Keith Brofsky(c)







Source Article:
C-section not best option for breech birth
http://m.theglobeandmail.com/life/parenting/pregnancy/delivery/c-section-not-best-option-for-breech-birth/article1186104/?service=mobile

Physicians should no longer automatically opt to perform a cesarean section in the case of a breech birth, according to new guidelines by the Society of Obstetricians and Gynecologists of Canada.

Released yesterday, the guidelines are a response to new evidence that shows many women are safely able to vaginally deliver babies who enter the birth canal with the buttocks or feet first. Normally, the infant descends head first.

"Our primary purpose is to offer choice to women," said André Lalonde, executive vice-president of the SOGC.

"More women are feeling disappointed when there is no one who is trained to assist in breech vaginal delivery," he adds.

Since 2000, C-sections have been the preferred method of delivery in breech births. Studies suggested that breached births were associated with an increased rate of complication when performed vaginally.

As a result, many medical schools have stopped training their physicians in breech vaginal delivery.

The problem now, according to Dr. Lalonde, is that there is a serious shortage of doctors to teach and perform these deliveries.

With the release of the new guidelines, the SOGC will launch a nationwide training program to ensure that doctors will be adequately prepared to offer vaginal breech births .

The new approach was prompted by a reassessment of earlier trials. It now appears that there is no difference in complication rates between vaginal and cesarean section deliveries in the case of breech births.

News of the change is a boon for the Ottawa-based Coalition for Breech Birth.

"We're really, really pleased," said Robin Guy, co-founder of the coalition.

Ms. Guy started the group after the birth of her second child in the fall of 2006. Although she had given birth to her first child at home with a midwife, Ms. Guy delivered her daughter in the hospital because of the baby's breech position.

"I was cornered into an unneeded and unwanted C-section because the obstetrician that I had didn't have the experience to catch her," said Ms. Guy.

The aim of the coalition is to ensure that women know what their options are when it comes to breech birth. Ms. Guy believes that many women don't realize that vaginal breech births are even possible.

"Educating women is our primary goal because it takes more than just a guideline change," she said.

The SOGC stresses that because of complications that may arise, many breech deliveries will still require a cesarean section.

Breech presentations occur in 3-4 per cent of pregnant women who reach term. That translates to approximately 11,000 to 14,500 breech deliveries a year in Canada.

The new decision to offer vaginal breech birth aligns with the SOGC promotion of normal childbirth - spontaneous labour, followed by a delivery that is not assisted by forceps, vacuum or cesarean section. In December of 2008, the society release a policy statement that included its recommendation for a development of national practice guidelines on normal childbirth.

"The safest way to deliver has always been the natural way," said Dr. Lalonde.

"Vaginal birth is the preferred method of having a baby because a C-section in itself has complications."

Cesarean sections, in which incisions are made through a mother's abdomen and uterus to deliver the baby, can lead to increased chance of bleeding and infections and can cause further complications for pregnancies later on.

"There's the idea out there in the public sometimes that having a C-section today with modern anesthesia and modern hospitals is as safe as having a normal childbirth, but we don't think so," said Dr. Lalonde.

"It is the general principle in medicine to not make having a cesarean section trivial."

The SOGC believes that if a woman is well-prepared during pregnancy, she has the innate ability to deliver vaginally.

The national average for babies delivered via cesarean section in Canada is 25 per cent.

HOW MALE CIRCUMCISION HARMS WOMEN



Source Article by Ronald Goldman, Ph.D.
How Male Circumcision Harms Women
http://www.circumcision.org/harmswomen.htm

Learn about the hidden negative psychological and sexual effects of circumcision and how these effects harm women in relationships with men. This article is based on research reports in the medical and psychological literature.

Marilyn Milos didn't know much about circumcision when she consented to have her three sons circumcised. She trusted her doctor who told her it did not hurt and "only took a moment." Several years later she watched a circumcision in nursing school. "We students filed into the newborn nursery to find a baby strapped spread-eagle to a plastic board on a counter top across the room." Then the doctor arrived. "The silence was soon broken by a piercing scream, the baby's reaction to having his foreskin pinched and crushed as the doctor attached the clamp to his penis. The shriek intensified when the doctor inserted an instrument between the foreskin and the glans (head of the penis), tearing the two [normally attached] structures apart. The baby started shaking his head back and forth, the only part of his body free to move, as the doctor used another clamp to crush the foreskin lengthwise. . . . The baby began to gasp and choke, breathless from his shrill continuous screams. . . . During the next stage of the surgery, the doctor crushed the foreskin against the circumcision instrument and then, finally, amputated it. The baby was limp, exhausted, spent."

Now she deeply regrets her sons' circumcisions and works tirelessly to educate others.


Most people still don't know much about circumcision. If you have ever read an article about circumcision, it probably focused on medical issues. Recently The New York Times reported that public health officials were considering promoting infant circumcision because of a controversial claim that it could help prevent disease.

A few relevant facts may surprise you. Circumcision is the only surgery in history ever advocated as a widespread means of preventing disease. When such claims are investigated by national medical organizations, they are found lacking. That's why no such organization in the world recommends circumcision. Over 80% of the world's males are not circumcised. Though many people associate circumcision with Jews, most circumcised males are Muslims. The United States has the highest rate of non-religious circumcisions of male infants in the world (32.5%). (The American rate peaked around 1965 at about 85%.) American circumcision rates vary widely depending on the region of the country.

In the continuous effort of certain American male investigators to seek a medical benefit, the potential adverse effects of circumcision have been ignored. Expanding the circumcision debate beyond medicine is overdue, and women have good reasons to be involved. Critically examining circumcision from psychological and sexual perspectives could show how this cultural practice may affect some mothers of circumcised sons, some women in relationships with men, and society. Before we consider these issues, let's review a few of the effects of circumcision on infants.


HOW PAINFUL IS CIRCUMCISION?

A variety of studies confirm that newborn infant responses to pain are similar to and greater than those in adult subjects. Robert Van Howe, M.D., a Michigan pediatrician who has authored numerous studies about circumcision, describes the infant's response. "Circumcision results in not only severe pain but also an increased risk of choking and difficulty breathing. Medical studies show significant increases in heart rate and level of blood stress hormone. Some infants do not cry because they go into shock from the overwhelming pain of the surgery." According to clinical definitions and researchers' reports, circumcision is traumatic. Even when pain medication is used (local injection, the best option tested), it relieves only some of the pain, the effect is inconsistent, and it wanes before the post-operative pain does. General anesthesia is not considered safe for newborn infants.

Increased awareness of extreme circumcision pain by Jewish mothers has contributed to growing questioning and forgoing of circumcision by some Jews, as reported in dozens of articles appearing in mainstream Jewish publications on the topic in recent years. Five rabbis endorse a book that questions Jewish circumcision.


EFFECTS ON MOTHER-INFANT RELATIONSHIPS

The trauma of circumcision raises questions about effects on mother-infant relationships. Based on more than twenty years of clinical observations using leading-edge techniques, psychiatrist Rima Laibow, M.D., reports,

When a child is subjected to intolerable, overwhelming pain, he conceptualizes mother as both participatory and responsible regardless of mother's intent. . . . The consequences for impaired bonding are significant. . . . Circumcision is an enormous obstacle to the development of basic trust between mother and child.

Even though the physician does the circumcising, and the father may have made the final decision to circumcise, the newborn infant connects the experience to the mother. Because the experience is repressed, the connection between the event and the mother is also repressed. (How this repressed connection affects men's feelings toward women is not known.)

Studies have shown that circumcision can adversely affect mother-infant bonding. Circumcised infants can be more irritable. Since infant irritability at two days has been connected with insecure bonding at fourteen months, the impact of circumcision on bonding may be more than temporary. The effect of circumcision on mother-infant bonding and interaction is evident in this account by Mary Milvich about her experience around the birth of her first child:

I shared a hospital room with a mother whose son was born within hours of my daughter. My roommate and I marveled at the identical personality traits exhibited by our newborn babies. Both were perfectly calm, never cried and gazed unwaveringly at our faces when we held them. We experienced that maternal closeness the mother feels when she realizes her baby knows her and accepts her as caretaker. . . . Delight in our new-found joys of motherhood was shattered the following morning. My roommate's baby had changed. He refused to nurse; he cried; he wouldn't be held. "He doesn't want me," my roommate pitifully told the nurse. "It's just the circumcision," the nurse told her comfortingly.

Investigators have confirmed that the trauma of circumcision may contribute to the failure of an infant to breast-feed. In addition, extended crying connected with circumcision may exceed the mother's tolerance level. She could become more interested in relieving her own distress (from hearing the crying) than that of her infant. If a mother believes she is not able to relieve her infant's distress, she may feel a lack of competence and respond less or not at all. She may also think her infant has a "difficult" temperament and use that belief as a reason not to respond.

Conversely, if an infant withdraws because of the trauma of circumcision, he may not communicate his needs, the mother could assume he is content, and his needs may not be met. Interaction between mother and child could be frustrating and less rewarding for the mother if she receives only a limited response from her child. Like all relationships, the mother-infant relationship is a two-way social relationship that depends on the responsiveness of both. If either the mother or the infant is unresponsive, the relationship may suffer, and emotional disturbances could occur. More research is needed.


MEN'S FEELINGS ABOUT CIRCUMCISION

To understand how circumcision may affect women in relationships with men, we need to know how circumcision can affect men. Current knowledge of male feelings about their circumcision is generally based on surveys published in medical journals, clinical experience, and reports from men who have contacted circumcision information organizations. These reports collectively include thousands of boys and men. Circumcision advocates dismiss these surveys and reports as "anecdotal."

In a medical journal survey of 546 self-selected men between the ages of 20 and 60 who reported circumcision harm, the following effects and feelings were noted.

anger, rage, sense of loss, shame, sense of having been victimized and mutilated
low self-esteem, fear, distrust, and grief
relationship difficulties, sexual anxieties, and depression
reduced emotional expression, avoidance of intimacy

Statements about circumcision from dissatisfied men include the following:

"I have felt a deep rage for a long time about this."

"Circumcision has given my life a much diminished and shameful flavor."

"I feel violated and abused."

Some of these circumcised men wish they had been given a choice at a later time rather than having it forced on them when they were too young to resist. Six medical societies in Australia and New Zealand and the British Medical Association recognize the long-term psychological risks of circumcision.

This survey does not suggest that all circumcised males have such feelings or how common the feelings are, only that they persist in some circumcised males, and more research is needed. There are various possible reasons why we don't hear more from circumcised men about how they truly feel.

lack of awareness and understanding that circumcision could be associated with their symptoms
emotional repression to defend against uncomfortable feelings
fear of disclosure because they may be dismissed or ridiculed

EFFECTS ON MALE-FEMALE INTIMACY

Because research is limited, we can only speculate about how the potential psychological effects of circumcision on men could inhibit their relationships with women. For example, low male self-esteem, shame, fear, distrust, and sexual anxiety can adversely affect communication and limit the degree of intimacy. In addition, sexual intimacy is a major component of male-female bonding, and research has shown that male sexual activity increases when self-esteem is higher. If circumcision lowers both male self-esteem and sexual sensitivity (to be discussed later), it would tend to reduce male sexual activity and consequently weaken the pair bond.

Male-female relationships could also be restricted because some circumcised men may feel a nagging sense that passion, excitement, or sexual fulfillment is missing. If a man believes he cannot experience what he is missing with a woman, he may withhold commitment and continually seek new women to give him hope. In addition, the reduced emotional expression of circumcised men may dampen women's feelings. As a result, both men and women may feel something is missing from their relationships.

From a larger perspective, it would not be surprising if circumcision were found to have a negative effect on interpersonal relationships, since circumcision is a trauma, and trauma commonly impairs a person's relations with others. Harvard psychiatrist, professor, and author Judith Herman writes that after a traumatic event "a sense of alienation, of disconnection, pervades every relationship."

Research has also shown that men have a lower physiological tolerance to emotional stress than women do. Emotional numbing, a response to trauma, would tend to reduce a person's tolerance to emotional stress. This would account for the male tendency to avoid certain situations, such as marital conflict. One method men use to control their exposure to this emotional stress is to respond rationally rather than emotionally. Another tactic is to withdraw or stonewall during a conflict. Both behaviors can weaken the marital relationship by restricting communication and leaving conflicts unresolved. Does circumcision increase America's uniquely high divorce rate?

Emotional numbing also affects our sensitivity to others' pain because it is related to our sensitivity to our own pain. When an infant is subjected to the trauma of circumcision with nobody responding to his cries, he experiences our insensitivity to his pain. If we do not have empathy for infants, they may not have empathy for others. A male acquaintance, after reading about circumcision, remarked, "It hurts, and the baby screams. So what?" Circumcision may be an early experience that reduces male empathy.

It appears that there are a few reasons why circumcision could be a contributing factor to relationship difficulties between men and women. More research is needed.


EFFECTS ON SEXUAL RELATIONSHIPS

To understand how circumcision may impair women's sexual relationships with men, we need to learn about the foreskin. Christopher Cold, M.D., Chairman of Anatomical Pathology at the Marshfield Clinic in Marshfield, Wisconsin, has studied and written about the foreskin. "It has important functions. The foreskin protects the head of the penis throughout life from contamination, friction, drying, and injury. It is an integral, natural part of the penis, not 'extra.' On the average adult male it is about twelve square inches [some circumcised men guess less than one square inch], and it consists of a movable, double-layered sleeve. The foreskin enhances sexual pleasure. Detailed study shows that it is made up of unique zones with several kinds of specialized nerves that are important to natural sexual function and experiencing the full range of sexual sensations."

Loss of the foreskin results in thickening and progressive desensitization of the outer layer of the head of the penis, particularly in older men. Some men circumcised as adults report a significant loss of sensitivity and regret the change. Circumcision may be an unrecognized factor in the high rates of erectile dysfunction in American men, which would involve associated psychological effects. Of course, any sexual and associated psychological effects on men would affect women.

Women who have only had sex with circumcised men may not know what they are missing. According to surveys in the medical literature, women reported that they were significantly more likely to have vaginal dryness during intercourse with circumcised men than genitally intact men. A medical journal survey of women who had comparative sexual experience included 138 responses. Other things being equal, on a scale of ten, they rated genitally intact men 8.03 and circumcised men 1.81. With circumcised partners, women were less likely to have one or multiple vaginal orgasms, and their circumcised partners were more likely to have a premature ejaculation. Circumcision was also connected with vaginal discomfort. Women were less likely to "really get into it" and more likely to "want to get it over with" if their partner was circumcised.


The results can be explained. The foreskin, as previously mentioned, is a movable, double-layered sleeve. During intercourse, it glides up and down the penile shaft, reducing friction and retaining vaginal secretions. Without the foreskin, the skin on the penile shaft rubs against the vaginal wall, resulting in friction and increasing the need for artificial lubrication. The circumcised man has less sensitivity and requires deeper and harder thrusting to try to compensate, further increasing the friction.

With circumcised partners, surveyed women were more likely to feel unappreciated, distanced, disinterested, frustrated, and discontented. When their partners were not circumcised, women were more likely to feel intimate with their partners, relaxed, warmth, mutual satisfaction, and "complete as a woman," and the greater sexual satisfaction benefited the relationship. To be clear, this does not mean that women cannot have a satisfying emotional and sexual relationship with a circumcised man. Other things being equal, it means that such a relationship may be likely to be even more satisfying if the man were not circumcised.


MALE ABUSES TOWARD WOMEN

It is possible to compare circumcision rates by country to prevalence of male abuses toward women that include violence, repression, isolation, murder, rape, and forced marriage. The ten worst countries for women are Afghanistan, Democratic Republic of Congo, Iraq, Nepal, Sudan, Guatemala, Mali, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Somalia. Eight of these countries have a male circumcision rate that exceeds 80%. Two other countries have a rate between 20% and 80%.

In the United States, domestic violence is the single greatest cause of injury to women. Every fifteen seconds a man beats a women. Low self-esteem can contribute to this behavior. Men low in self-esteem are more prone to jealously in their relationships. Jealously is a precipitating factor in violence toward women. Predictably, low male self-esteem, a possible effect of circumcision, correlates with a high risk of domestic violence. It has also been documented that exposure to violence in childhood is linked to later spousal abuse. The child experiences circumcision as violent. Those who have been violated generally have a problem with anger and may direct it at others.

The association between circumcision rates and abuses toward women could be related to the long-term psychological effects of circumcision on men which, in addition to low self-esteem and anger, include disruption in the mother-male child relationship, post-traumatic stress disorder, weakened relationships with women, and low empathy. More research is needed.


UNNECESSARY FEMALE SURGERY

Let's examine if the long-term effects of circumcision could affect the surgical inclinations of circumcised doctors. For example, women are subjected to excessive risk for unnecessary surgery in the United States. Six of the top thirteen most frequently performed surgeries and procedures were performed exclusively on women. An episiotomy is routinely performed on a mother during birth. Some women view this obstetrical practice, which has no demonstrated benefit and only adverse effects, as female genital mutilation. About 569,000 hysterectomies a year lead to over 600 deaths annually. Critics claim that 98% of hysterectomies are unnecessary.

Is there any connection between unnecessary female sexual surgery and male circumcision? Virtually all cultures that widely practice unnecessary female sexual surgery also practice unnecessary male sexual surgery, and men control both practices. Such is the case in the United States. In Europe where circumcision is rare, the rate of unnecessary female sexual surgery is much lower. In addition, it seems that circumcised men who have been denied the full expression of their sexuality may unconsciously seek a way to deny others that pleasure, whether they use social custom, fear, ignorance, or sexual surgery. According to psychological clinical literature, such behavior is connected with the compulsion of those who are traumatized to repeat the trauma on others. As psychiatrist Karl Menninger said, "What's done to children, they will do to society." Finally, a study on the underlying reasons for female genital mutilation concluded that the motivation was psychosexual and included male fear of female sexuality. A potential long-term effect of circumcision is fear of female sexuality.


Addressing male circumcision may help dealing with female genital mutilation and other forms of unnecessary female sexual surgery. Research into this connection is important because these practices adversely affect hundreds of millions of people worldwide.


WHY WOMEN ARE GETTING INVOLVED

There is much more we could investigate. Do potential anger and rage associated with circumcision contribute to uniquely high American rates of female murder victims, rape, and domestic violence? We do not know. Because male motivation and money are steered toward seeking potential benefits for circumcision, we are not likely to know all the effects of circumcision any time soon. However, more than enough is now known (and not known) to question this cultural practice. Women are particularly encouraged to be involved in the circumcision decision for their son.

Women are not subject to the personal psychological motivations of circumcised men to want their son circumcised (e.g., "I want him to look like me").

Some women have experienced long-term regret ("deep wound of guilt" "my gravest parenting mistake") if they consented to circumcision.

Women sign the majority of hospital circumcision consent forms.

Times are changing. More women are thinking about circumcision seriously, seeking independent sources of information, often long before giving birth, and not yielding to men who want it for their son.

Because of male psychological resistance to this issue and the maternal instinct to protect infants from harm, women are more likely to see through the cultural blinders and take action. Women are getting involved in educating others either personally, with the Internet, or through pertinent organizations. One who is speaking out is Melissa Morrison, who chose circumcision for her son because "it was something that was just done." She watched her son's surgery and now deeply regrets her decision. "People need to know what they are doing to their babies. I didn't know. I'm talking to my girlfriends; I'm talking to mothers. If it helps just to save one baby, then it's worth it."

Wednesday, September 17, 2014

ISRAEL'S ATTACK ON AMERICA -- THE TRUTH ABOUT 911



Source Article by Lasha Darkmoon:
9/11: The Shocking Truth Laid Bare
http://www.darkmoon.me/2014/11-shocking-truth-laid-bare/


This article consists of key 9/11 quotations arranged in the form of a 6500-word dramatic collage so as to give the impression of a live “debate” — an imaginary debate in which the shocking Truth is finally laid bare.

WHO DID 9/11?

1. Introduction

LASHA DARKMOON: I’d like to start by saying that every statement you read here is a 100 percent authentic quote. Nothing has been fabricated. You can check out every word and phrase on the internet. The only bits you won’t find already published are my own interconnecting comments. As the editor of the article, I have allowed myself the privilege of taking part in this imaginary “debate”.

If the overall effect is at times surrealistic, this is intentional. The entire 9/11 debate, after all, is an exercise in surrealism replete with the most bizarre Alice in Wonderland logic. The mere fact that the chief suspects of the 9/11 crime have been allowed to investigate themselves makes this only too clear.

The aim of the debate is to pose and answer the question: Who did 9/11? My own conclusion has already been stated elsewhere:

“Israel is the rogue state that is arguably responsible for the greatest mass murder in history: the catastrophe of 9-11. If scientific evidence and forensic logic are anything to go on, Israel has to be suspect number one here, given its unbroken record of terrorism and its endless breaches of international law. Any country that can orchestrate such a spectacular crime and get away with it—while somehow managing to pin the blame on nineteen Arabs with box cutters—is clearly a force to be reckoned with.”

Finally, I wish to apologize in advance for any offense given by this article. No offense is intended. My aim is simply to provide the reader with a wide variety of 9/11 quotes in a dramatic format that will, hopefully, have maximum emotional impact.

"Wildcard. Ruthless and cunning. Has capability to target US forces and make it look like a Palestinian/Arab act.”


— Comment about Mossad in a report issued by the US Army School of Advanced Military Studies, quoted in the Washington Times on September 10, 2001, the day before 9/11.



DR ALAN SABROSKY (former director of studies at the US Army War College): What we need to stand up and say is that not only did they, the Israelis, attack the USS Liberty – they did 9/11 also. They did it!

I have had long conversations over the past two weeks with contacts at the Army War College, at the Headquarters Marine Corps, and I have made it absolutely clear in both cases that it is 100 percent certain that 9/11 was a Mossad operation. Period. The Zionists are playing this as an all-or-nothing exercise. Because if they lose this one, if the American people ever realize what really happened, they’re done!

LASHA DARKMOON: Mr President, I can see you are not very happy with this introduction. Would you like to make the opening statement for the defense?

BARACK OBAMA (lamely) : I’m aware that there’s still some who would question or even justify the events of 9/11. But let us be clear: Al Qaeda killed nearly 3,000 people on that day. The victims were innocent men, women and children from America and many other nations who had done nothing to harm anybody. And yet al-Qaeda chose to ruthlessly murder these people, claimed credit for the attack, and even now states their determination to kill on a massive scale. They have affiliates in many countries and are trying to expand their reach. These are not opinions to be debated; these are facts.

TONY BLAIR: There have been the most terrible, shocking events taking place in the United States of America within the last hour or so, including two hi-jacked planes being flown deliberately into the World Trade Centre. I am afraid we can only imagine the terror and the carnage there and the many, many innocent people who will have lost their lives…. For the moment, let me say this: Saddam Hussein’s regime is despicable, he is developing weapons of mass destruction, and we cannot leave him doing so unchecked….

HUGO CHAVEZ: Don’t be shameless, Mr Blair! Don’t be immoral, Mr. Blair! You are one of those who have no morals. You are an imperialist pawn who attempts to curry favor with Bush-Hitler, the number one mass murderer and assassin there is on the planet! Go straight to hell, Mr. Blair!

FRANCESCO COSSIGA (former Prime Minister of Italy): All the intelligence services of America and Europe know well that the disastrous 9/11 attack was planned and realized by the CIA and Mossad, with the help of the Zionist world, in order to pin the blame on the Arab Countries and persuade the Western powers to intervene in Iraq and Afghanistan.

ABRAHAM FOXMAN (furious) : These hateful conspiracy theories rationalize and fuel global anti-Semitism! . . . Perhaps the most notorious conspiracy theory of modern times suggested that 4,000 Jews were pre-emptively warned to stay away from the World Trade Center the day of the 9/11 terrorist attacks, a myth that quickly morphed into the Big Lie that Israel and Jews were responsible for 9/11.

BRITISH HISTORIAN DAVID IRVING (sarcastically) : We are happy to report that the 4,000 figure dwindled eventually to three (not three thousand, but three), then two, then one: the unfortunate Daniel Lewin!

LASHA DARKMOON
(explaining) : On September 12, the Jerusalem Post reported that the Israeli embassy in America was bombarded on 9/11 with calls from 4,000 worried Israeli families. This was a preemptive move. It was a sly attempt to deceive the public into thinking the Israelis were victims of 9/11 like everyone else. In fact, they were not.

Nearly 500 foreign nationals from over 80 different nations had been killed in the World Trade Center. A large number of Israelis had worked in the buildings and so a proportionately large number of Israelis could be expected to have died there. To give the impression that this was the case, President Bush, primed by his Jewish minders, announced soon after the tragedy that 130 Israelis had died in the towers. To his subsequent embarrassment, 129 of these Israelis were found to be alive and well. The number of Israelis who died in the Twin Towers turned out to be ridiculously small, in defiance of the law of averages — only one man! And he was a chance visitor who happened to be passing by.

It appears that hundreds of Israelis who ordinarily worked in the buildings, or had business there every day, had either been forewarned to stay away, or, by sheer good luck, had been kept away by mysterious forces. In total, three Israelis died in the 9-11 attack: two on the ‘hijacked’ planes and one in the Twin Towers, a casual visitor. The rest had been warned to stay away by the Odigo messaging service.

Coincidentally, Odigo had a branch office only two blocks away from the World Trade Center. Even more coincidentally, Odigo’s headquarters were located in Herzliya, Israel, a town just north of Tel Aviv where — wonder of wonders! — Mossad is also headquartered.

ALEX DIAMANDIS (Odigo’s vice president, admitting Israeli foreknowledge) : The messages said something big was going to happen in a certain amount of time, and it did — almost to the minute!

LASHA DARKMOON: Well, there you have it! A frank admission that Odigo, an Israeli company located a mere stone’s throw away from Mossad in a little town near Tel Aviv , knew that 9/11 was going to happen and warned Jews to stay away! There were many lucky Jews that morning. Consider this. An Israeli government run company called Zim Israel Navigational, the 9th largest shipping company in the world, had 200 employees working in the North tower. One week before 9/11, Zim moved out of its World Trade Center offices with its 200 workers. And they were so keen to get out quickly that they were ready to pay a $50,000 fine for breaking their lease!

Then there was ‘Lucky’ Larry Silverstein, owner of the WTC buildings. He too had a miraculous escape. Every morning, as faithful as clockwork, Lucky Larry would enjoy breakfast at the Windows on the World restaurant atop the North Tower. His daughter Lisa would show up for breakfast too — a regular feature. On the morning of 9/11, both father and daughter (smilingly pictured here) found excuses for staying away. Lucky Larry discovered he had a dermatologist’s appointment. Daughter Lisa was caught up in a convenient traffic jam.

Lucky Larry had a son. He too was expected in the building that morning. Like his sister Lisa, he too had the extraordinary good luck to be caught in a traffic jam — in a different part of the city.

Truly, God was smiling on his Chosen people that morning.


2. They lie about everything

LASHA DARKMOON: How can so many Americans still believe in the outrageous lie that Al Qaeda did 9/11 when there are so many Jewish fingerprints all over this crime?

SEYMOUR HERSH: We lie about everything.

FRANCESCO COSSIGA (former Prime Minister of Italy): I have always said that the intelligence agencies of the leading nations of the world are certainly very well aware that the official version is a fraud. The largest media networks are also aware of the 9-11 hoax, primarily because of their fundamental role in perpetrating this fraud on the public. The people are always the last to know the truth.

ABRAHAM FOXMAN (angrily): It is incumbent upon all good people who reject hateful conspiracy theories and anti-Semitism to stand up and speak out! — so that these unacceptable views remain marginalized and relegated to the far fringes of society and the darkest corners of cyberspace!

KEVIN BARRETT (ignoring Foxman): Recently, Seymour Hersh, America’s top mainstream investigative reporter, broke the news that the US government’s claim to have killed Osama Bin Laden on May 2nd, 2011 was a big lie. “There’s not one word of truth in it,” he said. Hersh went on to harshly criticize his long-time employer, the New York Times, and other big media outlets. He said all big US media outlets should be shut down for lying to the American people.

SEYMOUR HERSH: Lying has become the staple.

KEVIN BARRETT: Other mainstream journalists agree that the US government’s story of Osama Bin Laden and 9/11 is a big lie. Sherwood Ross, an award-winning journalist who has worked for the City News Bureau of Chicago, the Chicago Daily News, and for Reuters and other wire services, told me this in a recent radio interview.

SHERWOOD ROSS: It’s very doubtful that Muslims were behind 9/11. I don’t think 9/11 was an Arab conspiracy. I think it’s an American conspiracy to overthrow the government of the United States and install what is becoming a police state.

KEVIN BARRETT: Ross has explained that American journalists are no longer free to expose even the most outrageous falsehoods.

SHERWOOD ROSS: You don’t see any serious questioning by the mainstream media. I thought one of the tip-offs that it was a put-up job was when a cameraman from a little weekly in Pennsylvania went to the site where this airliner had supposedly crashed on 9/11. And he said, “I didn’t see any airliner. I saw a hole in the ground. I didn’t see any bodies. I didn’t see any luggage.” There was no wreckage! Reporters who worked in the Press Room at the Pentagon went out there on the lawn, and they couldn’t see any airliner!

THIERRY MEYSSAN: (famous French author): How does a plane 125 ft. wide and 155 ft. long fit into a hole which is only 60 ft. across?

KEVIN BARRETT: I asked Ross whether he is allowed to express such views in his [mainstream] articles.

SHERWOOD ROSS: Absolutely not! You won’t see me quoted nowadays by the Associated Press!

KEVIN BARRETT: Another leading American journalist, Paul Craig Roberts, has also been banned from US mainstream media for telling the truth about 9/11.

PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS (grimly) : Now seen universally as a lawless warmonger and a nuisance, Washington’s soft power has been squandered. With its influence on the wane, Washington has become more of a bully. In response, the rest of the world is isolating Washington.

KEVIN BARRETT: Dr. Roberts served as Assistant Secretary of the Treasury, won the French Legion of Honor and other awards for his contributions to economics, and has been a regular columnist for the Wall Street Journal, Business Week, and other mainstream publications. But since he spoke out about the controlled demolitions of the three World Trade Center skyscrapers on 9/11, Paul Craig Roberts has been put on the mainstream media’s no-publish list.

PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS: One of the worst things that ever happened to America was when President Clinton allowed five companies to concentrate [= buy up] the American media. The so-called mainstream media is no longer the media. It doesn’t tell you anything. It’s a propaganda ministry—the Ministry of Propaganda.

KEVIN BARRETT: Rather than writing for the mainstream media, Paul Craig Roberts is now exposing the fake killing of Osama Bin Laden.

PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS: The neoconservatives who advocate America’s hegemony over the world called for “a new Pearl Harbor” that would allow them to launch wars of conquest. No evidence exists that supports the government’s 9/11 story. It is unnecessary for me to report the voluminous evidence that conclusively proves that the official story is a lie! You can read it for yourself. It is available online. You can read what the architects and engineers for 9/11 truth have to say. You can read the scientists’ reports.

LASHA DARKMOON: More than 200 senior military, intelligence, and law enforcement officials, including two generals, have now questioned the 9-11 Commission’s report. They have been joined by over 1500 top architects and engineers, 250 pilots and aviation experts, 400 university professors, and 250 survivors and their families.

KEVIN BARRETT: Don’t bother reading the mainstream media! As Seymour Hersh, Sherwood Ross, Paul Craig Roberts, and a rapidly growing number of ordinary Americans realize, the mainstream media’s motto is now: “We lie about everything.”

OSAMA BIN LADEN: As a Muslim, I do my best to avoid telling a lie. I had no knowledge of these attacks.

PROF. DAVID RAY GRIFFIN (author of eleven books on 9-11): All the proffered evidence that America was attacked by Muslims on 9-11 appears to have been fabricated.

LASHA DARKMOON: It’s hard to see how Muslim hijackers could have been involved, given that no CCTV pictures exist of the hijackers anywhere in the airports. Moreover, there are no Arab names on any flight lists. No boarding staff were prepared to testify to having seen any Arab-looking persons boarding the planes. Above all, there’s not a single post-mortem indicating any Arab dead bodies at the scene of the crime. On the other hand, the passport of one of the alleged terrorists, Satam Al Suqami, apparently came fluttering down to Ground Zero where the FBI found it intact. Amazing, isn’t it?

DAVID RAY GRIFFIN: The FBI claimed that, while searching the streets after the destruction of the World Trade Center, they discovered the passport of Satam al-Suqami, one of the hijackers on American Flight 11. For this to be true, the passport would have had to survive the collapse of the North Tower, which evidently pulverized almost everything in the building into fine particles of dust — except the steel and al-Suqami’s passport. This claim is too absurd to pass the giggle test.
The passport of alleged Al-Qaeda mastermind Mohammed Atta was miraculously found intact among the ashes of the Twin Towers.The passport of alleged Al-Qaeda mastermind Mohammed Atta was miraculously found intact among the ashes of the Twin Towers.

PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS: How could a tiny undamaged passport be found in the rubble of two skyscrapers, each more than 100 stories tall, when bodies, office furniture and computers could not be found?

LASHA DARKMOON: Nothing that could have embarrassed the US government survived the explosions. Even the “indestructible” black boxes containing key flight information had been complete vaporized, contrary to the laws of physics. Even more miraculously and conveniently for the US government, two charred passports of alleged Al Qaeda terrorists, one of them ringleader Mohammed Atta (pictured), had been found intact in the ruins — almost as if someone had placed them there on purpose to be found. (See here)

CHRISTOPHER BOLLYN: What many people don’t understand about 9-11 is that there was no proper criminal investigation into 9/11. Although the World Trade Center was the scene of the greatest mass murder in U.S. history, the evidence from the crime scene, such as the structural steel, was treated like scrap; cut up into small pieces, mixed with other scrap metal, and shipped to China to be melted down. The public was given an utterly false story and incited to wage war in Afghanistan while the crucial evidence was being destroyed in two junkyards in New Jersey.
"I had no knowledge of these attacks!"“I had no knowledge of these attacks!”

OSAMA BIN LADEN (pictured): I had no knowledge of these attacks!

CHRISTOPHER BOLLYN: The FBI investigation of the events of 9-11 was being managed by Michael Chertoff, the Assistant Attorney General who was the US official who was supposed to collect the evidence, find the guilty parties, and prosecute them. Under Chertoff, however, an Israeli-American dual national, there was no 9-11 investigation and no prosecution.

In the end there was not a single trial for any of the families who lost loved ones on 9-11. The US District Judge who oversaw the 9-11 litigation was Alvin K. Hellerstein, a dedicated Zionist in New York whose son lives in an illegal Israeli settlement on the occupied West Bank.

If a crime like 9-11 is not properly investigated and prosecuted, you can be sure there is something to hide.


BIOLOGIST RICHARD DAWKINS (fatuously) : Bin Laden has won! (After a jar of honey belonging to him was confiscated by airport security).

OSAMA BIN LADEN: What is this? Is it not that there exists a government within the government in the United Sates? That secret government must be asked as to who carried out the attacks. I have already said that we are not hostile to the United States. We are against the US Government system, which makes other nations slaves of the United States.

This system is totally in control of the American Jews, whose first priority is Israel, not the United States. It is clear that the American people are themselves the slaves of the Jews and are forced to live according to the principles and laws laid down by the Jews.

3. They kill people to silence them

KEVIN BARRETT: One of the leading scientists challenging the US government’s version of 9/11, Dr. Crockett Grabbe, has gone on record charging 9/11 cover-up forces with a series of murders and attempted murders — including attempts on his own life.

LASHA DARKMOON: They’re now actually killing people to silence them?

KEVIN BARRETT: In a recent interview on my radio show, Dr. Grabbe, a physics professor with a Ph.D. from Cal Tech, described a series of attempts on his life that followed the publication of his 2011 book National Swindle of the World Trade Center.

DR CROCKETT GRABBE: I’m not just referring to the murders that occurred on 9/11, but also the unexplained murders of both 9/11 witnesses and truth-seekers: Michael Doran, David Graham, Bertha Champagne. The interesting thing is, Bertha Champagne and Nancy Hamilton both had unexplained deaths from automobiles running over them.

LASHA DARKMOON: I notice quite a few mysterious automobile accidents taking place nowadays. This seems to be the new way of disposing of government whistleblowers and high profile witnesses. I’m thinking here of the Franklin cover-up and the Gunderson case, both involving high-level witnesses to government involvement in pedophile crimes. These witnesses conveniently meet their deaths in car accidents—bumped off before they can get to court.

DR GRABBE: The thing that made me a believer is that when I published my first book in 2011, there were unexplained, strange attempts to hit me with an automobile. It was just unbelievable! I’m not a 9/11 witness or anything. I’m just a physicist showing that nothing supports the official version of 9/11.

LASHA DARKMOON: How did they try to kill you?

DR GRABBE: There were actually several cases. I’ll mention two from back in 2011. The first one was…one morning I went out for a walk on the street. And there was a pickup that went past me at very high speed…then quickly stopped and started backing up at high speed towards me. I felt he was trying to hit me with the vehicle, but I couldn’t be sure till later, when I was going out to get my mail in the evening.

LASHA DARKMOON: This guy tried to kill you twice on the same day?

DR CROCKETT GRABBE: When I opened my mailbox, I heard an engine start up and saw a car come around the curve very rapidly about a hundred to two hundred feet away from me. My mailbox was full of mail … if I’d gotten the mail out, that pick-up, the way it was traveling close to sixty miles per hour and coming straight at me, it would have hit me!

KEVIN BARRETT: Dr. Grabbe’s book, Anatomy of Mass Murders, discusses the suspicious deaths of nineteen 9/11 witnesses or truth-seekers: Barry Jennings, Beverly Eckart, Kenneth Johanneman, Christopher Landis, Paul Smith, Major General David Wherley, Salvatore Princiotta, Deborah Palfrey, Barbara Olson, Michael H Doran, David Graham, Bertha Champagne, Nancy Hamilton, Suzanne Jovin, Perry and Beth Ann Kucinich (Rep. Dennis Kucinich siblings), David Kelly, Presanna Kalahasthi, and Senator Paul Wellstone.

SENATOR WELLSTONE AND HIS FAMILY

The senator asked too many awkward questions about 9/11. Soon he was dead, along with his wife and daughter, in a mysterious plane crash…







LASHA DARKMOON: Senator Paul Wellstone (pictured), now that’s an interesting case. The Senator was a 9/11 Truther who had said, “There are so many things going on in relation to 9/11 that just don’t make sense.”

Inflammatory comments like that, coming from a US senator, are clearly incompatible with longevity. Soon after he said that the Senator was dead, in a plane crash: along with his wife, his daughter, three staff members and two professionally trained pilots.

The investigation of this mysterious multiple death was a farce, just as the investigation of what really happened on 9/11 was perhaps the ultimate farce — an “investigation” conducted by Israeli American citizen Michael Chertoff (pictured here with his Jewish accomplices) into a crime committed by Mossad in cahoots with American neoconservatives — most of them also Jewish.

The only plausible explanation for Senator Wellstone’s death is that he and his entourage were assassinated.

DR JIM FETZER: Seymour Hirsch disclosed recently that Vice President Cheney was running “an executive assassination ring” from his office in the White House, where Wellstone appears to have been one of his targets.

LASHA DARKMOON: Why has no one investigated Cheney?

KEVIN BARRETT: Despite all the murders, the truth continues to spread. As a huge billboard in Times Square trumpeted the “smoking gun of 9/11” — the collapse of World Trade Center Building 7 – Americans rose up this fall to stop the planned bombing of Syria. Why? They simply did not believe government and media claims about the al-Ghouta chemical attack. Americans have been dragged into wars by false-flag attacks and government lies too many times.

GEORGE W. BUSH (butting in angrily) : Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists!

PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS: America is in the toilet, and the rest of the world knows it. But the neocons who rule in Washington and their Israeli ally are determined that Washington start yet more wars to create lebensraum for Israel.

SENATOR JOHN McCAIN (taking the high moral ground) : Blaming the US government for the events of 9/11 mars the memories of all those lost on that day! It shakes Americans’ faith in their government at a time when that faith is already near an all-time low! It traffics in ugly, unfounded accusations of extraordinary evil against fellow Americans!

IRANIAN EX-PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD (tactlessly) : The majority of the American people believe some segments within the US government orchestrated the 9/11 attack to reverse the declining US economy and its grips on the Middle East in order also to save the Zionist regime.

BARACK OBAMA: For him to make a statement like that is inexcusable!

ANN COULTER: We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them all to Christianity!

AL GOLDSTEIN (Jewish pornographer): Christ sucks!

SARAH SILVERMAN
(Jewish comedienne, passing off hate speech as humor) : I hope the Jews did kill Christ! I’d fucking do it again — in a second!

KEVIN MACDONALD: The Jewish elite fears an America that takes Christianity seriously.

SARAH SILVERMAN (insulting the relatives of 9/11 victims) : 9/11 widows give the best hand jobs!

LASHA DARKMOON: Despicable rat!

T.S. ELIOT (intervening tactlessly): The rats are underneath the piles! The Jew is underneath the lot!

LASHA DARKMOON: Watch out, Mr Eliot, or you’ll ruin your reputation!… Suffice to say it’s quite true that there were lots of Jews lurking around “underneath the piles”, so to speak, both on 9/11 and before. There were many Jews in the Bush administration. They had close ties to the Israeli government.

Every one of the following kingpins of the Bush administration was also an Israeli citizen: Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle, Douglas Feith, Michael Chertoff, George Tenet (real name Cohen), Elliot Abrams, Donald Kagan, Richard Haas, Kenneth Adelman, Edward Luttwak, Robert Satloff, David Frum, David Wurmser, Steve Goldsmith, Marc Grossman, Ari Fleisher.

EHUD BARAK: Let there be no illusions! This attack is an attack on everything that Western civilization holds dear! And we know who the attackers are!

CHRISTOPHER BOLLYN: Ehud Barak certainly knows “who the attackers are”. He sees the chief architect of 9-11 every time he looks in the mirror!

DONALD RUMSFELD: There are things we don’t know we don’t know.

GEORGE W. BUSH (pounding the table with his fist): If you’re not with us, you’re against us!

BENJAMIN NETANYAHU (smirks): We are benefiting from one thing, and that is the attack on the Twin Towers and Pentagon!

“9/11 was good for Israel!”


4. The 9/11 war criminals should be rounded up and executed

LASHA DARKMOON: The chief suspects of the 9/11 crime of the century have often been named. Here are the names of 39 individuals who should be taken into custody at once and closely questioned in a humane and civilized manner, preferably without waterboarding. Those with asterisks after their names are Jewish:

George W. Bush, Tony Blair, Benjamin Netanyahu*, Ehud Barak*, Shimon Peres*, Henry Kissinger*, George HW Bush, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Richard Perle*, Douglas Feith*, Dov Zakheim*, George Tenet (Cohen)*, Robert Mueller, John Ashcroft, Michael Chertoff*, Michael Mukasey*, Colin Powell, Condoleeza Rice, Richard Armitage, Philip Zelikow*, Ari Fleischer*, Karl Rove, Elliott Abrams*, Lewis “Scooter” Libby*, Jack Abramoff*, Rudolph Giuliani, Eliot Spitzer*, Richard Holbrooke, Michael Ledeen*, Larry Silverstein*, Frank Lowy*, David Rockefeller, Rupert Murdoch*, Maurice Greenberg*, Paul Bremer, William Kristol*,James Woolsey, Newt Gingrich.

Of these top 39 suspects, note that 22 (or more than half) are Jews, most of whom are also dual citizens with Israeli passports. If guilty of treason and mass murder, they should all be executed without mercy — like the pathological liar Tony Blair, for example, whose sycophantic services to his Jewish masters have helped to make him a multimillionaire.

TONY BLAIR: Before people crow about the absence of Weapons of Mass Destruction, I suggest they wait a bit…. As I have said throughout, I have no doubt that they will find the clearest possible evidence of Saddam’s weapons of mass destruction.

WILLIAM DALRYMPLE (British historian): Like anyone else who knows anything about the Middle East, you just pray that this man will shut the fuck up.

ZBIGNIEW BRZEZINSKI: Blair is a lightweight. I don’t like his political morals and how he’s been enriching himself since leaving office. He preaches high moral language but … I have a visceral contempt for Blair. Not dislike. Just contempt.

GEORGE W. BUSH: Yeah, Blair, what are you doin’?

TONY BLAIR (groveling at the feet of his Master): Lead me into war…you know I believe in you!

GEORGE W. BUSH (maniacally): We will rid the world of evildoers!



LASHA DARKMOON: Over a hundred co-conspirators have so far been accused of having been deeply implicated in 9-11, but undoubtedly there are many others whose complicity and silence have had to be bought by the only two means available: the carrot and the stick. The stick involves either the threat of blackmail or instant death if they dare to step out of line — as in the case of Senator Wellstone and Dr David Kelly. The carrot involves bribery and sweeteners: astronomical sums of money paid into secret bank accounts for the rest of their lives, guaranteeing total silence in anticipation of those enormous annual deposits.

Where will the money come from to pay out such stupendous sums?

Quite simple. The money was already stolen before 9/11 with the help of Israeli dual citizen, Rabbi Dov Zakheim. He somehow managed to “lose” at least $2.3 trillion, or $3 trillion according to most other accounts. Antiwar activist and CIA whistleblower Susan Lindauer has given evidence that the money actually stolen from the American taxpayer amounts to a staggering $9.1 trillion.

To get through even $1 trillion wouldn’t be easy. A trillion dollars would be enough to keep 1000 conspirators and their families in pig heaven for the rest of their lives. The other trillions have reportedly made their way into secret bank accounts, with the bulk ending up in Tel Aviv and Zurich.

See here for more on the missing trillions

KEVIN BARRETT: So what happened to the Pentagon’s missing 2.3 trillion dollars—or $9.1 trillion if you believe Susan Lindauer? The one thing we know for sure is that it has never been found. At least not officially. Lindauer says insiders know it was embezzled by agents of Israel. Interestingly, the Comptroller of the Pentagon—the man who was running the Pentagon’s finances—was a known Israeli agent, Rabbi Dov Zakheim.


RABBI DOV ZAKHEIM
How did a Jewish rabbi gain control over Pentagon finances and manage to lose $3 trillion in three months?


LASHA DARKMOON: Rabbi Dov Zakheim (pictured), born 1948, dual American-Israeli citizen, was appointed Comptroller of the Pentagon in May 2001. This put him in full charge of Pentagon finances. By September 2001, a mere three months later, he had managed to “lose” or misplace three trillion dollars — at the phenomenal rate of a trillion dollars a month.

That’s $1000 billion (or $1 million million) in 30 days! No one in recorded history has ever managed to “lose” such a colossal sum of money in so short a time.

In spite of this, the woefully incompetent — or shamelessly rapacious — rabbi was allowed to continue in his post of Pentagon Comptroller until March 2004, almost another three years. With complete impunity.

Let me give you a few fascinating statistics now that will allow you to view this vast hemmorhage of wealth in its proper perspective. The richest top ten Jewish American billionnaires in 2012, according to Forbes magazine, owned assets between them amounting to $203 billion. (See here). This is roughly one-fifteenth of the $3 trillion Rabbi Zakheim clawed away from the American taxpayer in three months.

The combined wealth of all the billionaires in the entire world in 2012 amounted to $4.6 trillion. (See here). If Rabbi Zakheim actually stole $9.1 trillion, as alleged by CIA whistleblower Susan Lindauer, he would have gotten away with almost twice the total wealth of all the billionnaires in the world.

The missing trillions have reportedly found their way to Israel, resulting since 2001 in vast real estate acquisitions by Israeli interests in South America, Europe, the United States and other parts of the world. Much of the world’s surface today is probably owned by absentee Jewish landlords, with vast holdings under the stewardship of the Rothschild family.

KEVIN BARRETT: The 9/11 attack on the Pentagon targeted the accountants who were on the trail of the missing trillions.

LASHA DARKMOON: How convenient. The crime can no longer be investigated because the investigators have been killed. And the relevant documents were destroyed. Accidentally.

PRESIDENT JIMMY CARTER (sadly): The post-9/11 USA is no longer a beacon of human rights.

GEORGE W. BUSH: Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists! We will find those who did this! We will smoke them out of their holes! We’ll get them running! We’ll bring them to justice! We will not tire, we will not falter, we will not fail! We will rid the world of evildoers!

SENATOR ORRIN HATCH: We’re going to find out who did this and we’re going after the bastards!

JERRY FALWELL (late televangelist) : I really believe that the pagans and the abortionists and the feminists and the gays and the lesbians—I point the finger in their face and say — ‘You helped this happen!’

BAPTIST PASTOR FRED PHELPS: Thank God for 9/11! Thank God that five years ago the wrath of God was poured out on this evil nation—America, land of the Sodomite damned! The deadly events of 9/11 were direct outpourings of divine retribution, the immediate visitation of God’s wrath and vengeance and punishment for America’s horrendous sodomite sins!

LASHA DARKMOON (aside): Watch out, Obama!

PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS: If Muslims were capable of pulling off 9/11, they are certainly capable of assassinating Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Perle, Libby, Condi Rice, Kristol, Bolton, Goldberg, and scores of others during the same hour of the day. The argument is not believable that a government that was incapable of preventing 9/11 is so all-knowing that it can prevent assassination of unprotected neocons. Try to imagine the propaganda value of terrorists wiping out the neoconservatives in one fell swoop, followed by an announcement that every member of the federal government down to the lowest GS, every member of the House and Senate, and every governor was next in line to be bumped off.

LASHA DARKMOON: Excellent point. If Al Qaeda were so fiendishly clever and formidable that that it could carry out 9/11 so easily, how come it hasn’t assassinated George Bush, Tony Blair, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Perle, and all its other implacable enemies? President Bush, would you like to sum up for the 9/11 orthodoxy?

PRESIDENT GEORGE W BUSH: You can fool some of the people all the time, and those are the ones you want to concentrate on.

LASHA DARKMOON: Perfect! A final question. When you were president, were you ever in control? Or were you just a puppet of the Jews?

ARIEL SHARON (from the Other Side): I want to tell you something very clear. We, the Jewish people, control America, and the Americans know it!

BENJAMIN NETANYAHU (sneering contemptuously) : America is a thing you can move very easily, move it in the right direction…. Once we squeeze all we can out of the United States, it can dry up and blow away.

ADMIRAL THOMAS MOORER (Chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff under Ronald Reagan): I’ve never seen a President stand up to them. It just boggles the mind. They always get what they want. The Israelis know what is going on all the time. If the American people understood what a grip those people have got on our government, they would rise up in arms. Our citizens certainly don’t have any idea what goes on.

LASHA DARKMOON: Monsieur Voltaire, you have remained remarkably silent all this time … almost as if you were the ghost at the banquet. As one of the world’s most distinguished Enlightenment philosophers, perhaps you would like to give us your views on the Jewish Question. Whither Jewry?

VOLTAIRE (choking with rage): Our masters and our enemies!… whom we detest!… the most abominable people in the world!… They are, all of them, born with a raging fanaticism in their hearts, just as the Bretons and the Germans are born with blond hair. I would not be in the least bit surprised if these people would not some day become deadly to the human race.

5. Conclusion

LASHA DARKMOON: Forbes magazine, which supplies us regularly with lists of the richest people in the world, makes a point of excluding the very richest: those whose wealth is either beyond computation or public scrutiny. These include the Queen of the Netherlands (the world’s richest woman), the Queen of England, the Queen of Denmark, the Queen of Spain, the Sultan of Brunei, King Fahd of Saudi Arabia, and the kings of Kuwait, Oman, Qatar and Bahrain.

Though the wealth of these few individuals, all of them non-Jewish, is enough to feed the starving planet, it is a mere fraction of the wealth of the Jews.

Most of the world’s wealth is concentrated in the hands of the House of Rothschild, with lesser but still vast (undisclosed) amounts in the secret vaults of a few elite Jewish families: the Schiffs, the Wallenbergs, the Oppenheimers, the Morgenthaus, the Goldman-Sachs, the Lehmans and the Guggenheims. The entire wealth of the world has been estimated as $990 trillion. Of this, the lion’s share, roughly $500 trillion, is reported to belong to one dynastic family alone: the Rothschilds.

The Rothschilds and the Rockefellers (the latter family rumored to be worth $100 trillion) own between them all the world’s major banks, big corporations, conglomerates and oil companies, apart from huge real estate holdings such as castles, palaces, stately mansions, luxury hotels, race courses, casinos, exotic holiday resorts, and vast tracts of farm land and virgin forest.

Staggering amounts of gold bullion, diamonds, jewelry, rare art, antiquarian books, coins, precious metals and stones clog up their underground vaults. These people have never sight eyes on most of the things they possess. They have never set foot on the land they own. In spite of all their fantastic wealth, they feel desperately poor and insecure; nor can they rest easy in their beds until they own everything — and the rest of mankind is reduced to a condition of abject slavery.

9/11 was a catalyzing event for these emperors of opulence. It ushered in a new world order and precipitated a series of catastrophic new wars that would help to create new starving refugees, new impoverished immigrants, and new opportunities for endless exploitation by an essentially hostile Jewish elite.

KEVIN MACDONALD: A new Jewish elite has seized all of the major choke points of American society: academia, the courts, and politics. It’s a hostile elite — hostile to the traditional people and culture of America.

LASHA DARKMOON: In 2000 the 70-year-old Sir Evelyn de Rothschild married affluent businesswoman Lynn Forrester (pictured here). They spent their wedding night at the White House in Washington DC, with Bill Clinton scuttling around serving them drinks and hors d’oeuvres. A year later, on September 11, 2001, the couple hired out the entire top two floors of a 5-star hotel in Manhattan. The hotel had a majestic view of New York.

At 9 am precisely on that fateful morning, September 11, 2001, the lucky couple stepped out onto their balcony where breakfast was served. They had ringside seats of the World Trade Center. They could see the Twin Towers glittering in the distance. They could see the first plane approaching through an azure blue sky … and then the fireworks … the explosions … the billowing smoke … and then the second plane approaching …. They could see men and women leaping from the towers … spiraling downward to their deaths on the concrete below.

As they sipped their coffees on the sunny balcony, musing on life and death and sex and shopping, they had the best seats in the house.

KEVIN MACDONALD (summing up) : It all boils down to this. Today’s Jewish elite hates the nation it rules.

“I WOULD NOT BE IN THE LEAST BIT SURPRISED IF THESE PEOPLE WOULD NOT SOME DAY BECOME DEADLY TO THE HUMAN RACE.”
— Voltaire, 1771

FEDERAL JUDGE SAYS IT'S OK FOR MEN TO RAPE WOMEN IF THE PLEASURE TO THE MAN EXCEEDS THE PAIN TO THE WOMAN



Behold the face of a federal judge who also happens to be a psychopath. This "moral relativist" (i.e., satanist) actually argues that it is OK for men to rape women, especially if they have a "need" to do so. Also, being a disciple of pedophile, sadomasochist Alfred Kinsey, he no doubt thinks it is OK for adults to rape infants and children.

Sections of the article below have been highlighted for emphasis. Info about Alfred Kinsey's pedophilic "research" is also included below.

Source Article By J. Matt Barber:
Federal Judge Envisions ‘Rape License’ For ‘Right To Rape’
http://rense.com/general96/fedjdgg.html


"Judge Richard Posner, a federal judge with the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals, recently become a hero to the pro-”gay marriage” left when, by way of a “legal analysis” free from the troublesome constraints of logic, case precedent, biology, tradition and reality in general, he managed to somehow divine a long-hidden constitutional “right” for two dudes to get “married.” “How can tradition be a reason for anything?” an incredulous Posner demanded last month of attorneys defending marriage protection amendments in both Wisconsin and Indiana.

It would seem that Posner’s contempt for tradition extends to all things sexual, up to and including the puritanical presupposition that it’s always wrong for a man to rape a woman. This idea, according to Posner in his 2011 book “Economic Analysis of the Law” (8th edition), is evidently an equally archaic tradition that, like the institution of natural marriage, needs a significant overhaul.

Posner’s suggestion? Perhaps it’s time the government begin issuing “rape licenses” (I kid you not) since, and based upon an exclusively utilitarian and morally relative cost-benefit analysis, the “right to rape,” for some men at least, “exceeds the victim’s physical and emotional pain.”

On page 216, Posner, a Reagan appointee considered “conservative” in “progressive” circles, writes, “Rape bypasses the market in sexual relations (marital and otherwise) in the same way that theft bypasses markets in ordinary goods and services, and it should therefore be forbidden.”

OK, while this is an oddly detached and clinical start to a discussion on rape, it is, so far, not entirely unreasonable. Posner would have been well served to stop here. But, and much like those who are the subject of his rape analysis, he does not stop.

“But,” continues Posner ­ I didn’t know there were any “buts” when it comes to rape ­ “But some rapists derive extra pleasure from the fact that the woman has not consented. For these rapists, there is no market substitute … and it could be argued therefore that, for them, rape is not a purely coercive transfer and should not be punished if the pleasure to the rapist (as measured by what he would be willing to pay ­ though not to the victim ­ for the right to rape) exceeds the victim’s physical and emotional pain. There are practical objections [No, really? Practical objections to rape?] … [b]ut the fact that any sort of rape license is even thinkable [what kind of bigoted rape-o-phobe would suggest otherwise?] … is a limitation on the usefulness of that theory.

“What generates the possibility of a rape license,” he persists (hold off, fellas, they’re not available yet), “is the fact that the rapist’s utility is weighted the same as his victim’s utility. If it were given a zero weight in the calculus of costs and benefits, a rape license could not be efficient. The only persuasive basis for such a weighting, however, would be a moral principle different from efficiency.”

And herein lies the rub. We all know what Posner thinks about “moral principles.” He’s a moral relativist. There are no moral principles, most especially “traditional” moral principles. I mean, “How can tradition be a reason for anything?”

But wait, there’s more. You gals trapped in one of those “traditional” marriages needn’t fret. Posner’s got you covered, too. “Marital rape?” C’mon, is there really such a thing?

“In a society that prizes premarital virginity and marital chastity [I know, sheesh, right?], the cardinal harm from rape is the destruction of those goods and is not inflicted by marital rape,” he writes.

“… The nature of the harm to the wife raped by her husband is a little obscure,” he continues. “If she is beaten or threatened, these of course are real harms inflicted by an ordinary assault and battery. Especially since the goods of virginity and of chastity are not endangered, the fact of her having intercourse one more time with a man with whom she has had intercourse many times before seems peripheral to the harm actually inflicted but is critical to making the offense rape.

“Most of the reasons for not making marital rape a crime have lost force with time,” he laments.

Of late a fanciful meme has taken root among the “progressive” left. It’s one that imagines ours as a patriarchal “rape culture,” which fosters an environment wherein women are systematically raped with impunity (especially on our nation’s college campuses).

Apparently, the solution is for chicks to pierce and tattoo themselves, declare “slut pride” and parade nude in “slut walks” across the globe. But that’s an outlier.

I finally get it. Posner is the “rape culture.” I wonder how these mouth-frothing “marriage equality” lefties will react to his permissive approach to rape. In much the same way, I suppose, they reacted to myriad accusations of sexual harassment and assault lodged against Bill “depends-on-what-is-is” Clinton. With total silence and self-serving hypocrisy.

None of this should surprise anyone. Richard Posner is a faithful disciple of Alfred Kinsey, the anti-science, anti-morality left’s sexual messiah. Kinsey was a bug doctor turned “sexologist.” Though married to a woman who took part in his many filmed “scientific” orgies, Kinsey was a promiscuous homosexual and sadomasochist. He managed to completely upend and twist the world’s perception of human sexuality in the 1950s and ’60s with his world famous “Kinsey Reports.”

Even today, most are completely unaware that during his tenure at Indiana University, Kinsey facilitated, with stopwatches and ledgers, the systematic sexual abuse of hundreds, if not thousands, of children and infants ­ all in the name of science. His research also “found” that rape doesn’t really hurt women. In his 1953 volume “Sexual Behavior in the Human Female” at page 122, Kinsey wrote, “Among the 4,441 females [reporting rape] on whom we have data, there was only one clear cut case of injury … and very few instances of vaginal bleeding, which however, did not appear to do any appreciable damage.”

Starting to see what makes Posner click? “His Honor” is a dyed-in-the-wool Kinseyite.

Though Kinsey’s “research” has long since been completely debunked and discredited, the elitist left, to include Judge Posner, even still relies on it to push its own sexual anarchist worldview. Writing in his 1992 book, “Sex and Reason,” for instance, Posner gushed, “The two Kinsey reports remain the high-water mark of descriptive sexology.” He calls Kinsey the “central figure” in the “scholarly science” of sexology.

Raped? Well, suck it up, walk it off and congratulate yourself.

You’ve reached Posner’s “high-water mark.”



Source Video:
ALFRED KINSEY - Kinsey syndrome- Warning Disturbing Adult content
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-foPnSxJjds&feature=share&list=PLsxavmAP26OXo_A36_KsRnsv2z5upMy8I

"Kinsey defined orgasm for pre-adolescent children with the following description... 'A gradual, and sometimes prolonged, build-up to orgasm which involves still more violent convulsions of the whole body.. heavy breathing, groaning, sobbing, or more violent cries, sometimes with an abundance of tears (especially among younger children)...'

[Kinsey] had six categories.... of orgasm.... and included in these categories of what he calls an orgasm were screaming, writhing in pain, hysterics (especially among younger children). He said that the children had convulsions... He said they fainted. He said they struck the partner... this is the man who's raping the child -- they struck the partner and tried to get away... and he said that those were all examples for him of orgasm...

Kinsey made it clear that this data was supplied by adult observers who were defined as pedophiles by Kinsey's own team members... Kinsey wrote '...some males suffer excruciating pain and may scream... The males in the present group -- by which he meant pre-adolescent boys -- become similarly hypersensitive before the arrival of actual orgasm, will fight away from the partner and may make violent attempts to avoid climax... although, he said, they derive definite pleasure from the situation.'...

Kinsey's own sadomasochistic tendencies have been documented by a number of biographers. James Jones revealed that Kinsey once climbed into a bathtub and circumcised himself with a pocket knife without the benefit of anesthesia. Another account of Kinsey's extreme self-abuse came about when his research was under investigation. Jones reports that after the Rockefeller Foundation withdrew his funding, Kinsey went to a basement, tied one end of a rope to an exposed ceiling pipe and the other end around his scrotum... then stood on a chair and jumped off..."



Source Article:
Masters of Porn: The Systematic Promotion of Sexual Deviance
http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2012/06/portraits-of-masters-of-porn-the-systematic-promotion-of-recreational-sex-sexual-callousness-and-sexual-deviancy/

"...Kinsey was far more than just an impudent fraud, he was in fact a criminal: a blackmailer (p. 330 ff), a perverted pornographer, and a pedophile who masturbated little children as part of his so-called “research”.

One four-year-old was “specifically manipulated” for twenty-four hours around the clock. This child achieved twenty-six orgasms in this time period. Another eleven-month-old infant had fourteen “orgasms”, according to the Kinseyan definition, in a period of thirty-eight minutes, or one orgasm every 2.7 minutes. (E. Michael Jones, Degenerate Moderns, p. 106)

It cannot be stressed too strongly that all this criminal activity was supported by generous grants from the Rockefeller Foundation to the Kinsey Institute, still flourishing at Indiana University. Waxing eloquent with indignation, Jones’s devastating conclusion is that Americans have to all intents and purposes been led over the cliff like Gadarene swine by Kinsey and his corrupt supporters:

The Rockefeller family was not above supporting illegal activities to attain their ends. … They were willing to use psychological warfare against their fellow Americans. … Sex was part of the arsenal of psychological warfare, and the Rockefellers’ interest in supporting Professor Kinsey of Indiana University gave every indication that they were planning to use that weapon in dealing with new enemies. (p. 313) …

The Kinsey Institute was now in the pornography business and the Rockefeller Foundation was footing the bill . … the Rockefellers were [now] funding the filming of the molestation of children. (p. 336) …

The Rockefellers were interested in social engineering through the manipulation of sexuality, and the Kinsey Report was the vehicle which would make that possible in the near future, with the collaboration of a supine mass media culture. (p. 341)

If Kinsey is still a national hero today, the ultimate authority on all things sexual, we have to thank the Rockefeller Foundation for this remarkable public relations stunt...."