The Terror that is Upon Us: Afro-Americans Gang-Rape 13-Year-Old, Receive Probation
2014 Deadliest Year for Palestinians Since 1967, UN Report Finds
Rise of the Trollbot
Physicists May Have Discovered a Fifth Force of Nature
Barbarians, Savages, and the Perils of Civilization
Man and Technology
The Media as Judaeo-Distortion Field
Maurice Bardèche on Mussolini
Shocking Differences
Chris Rossetti · 1 December, 2018
by Dr. William L. Pierce
DURING THE PAST couple of weeks we've spoken a bit about the "diversity" being pushed so vigorously by the government and by the Jewish media, and I apparently made some irreverent remarks on this very sensitive topic which greatly offended some of our more Politically Correct listeners, because I've received a number of letters from listeners who were practically in tears.
The general tenor of these letters is: "Why can't we all just learn to get along with each other? We're really all the same. The only difference between us is skin color; why is that so important to you? Why do you hate people just because they're from a different country? By coming here with their different customs they enrich our lives." Et cetera. Some of the letters were more on the weepy, hand-wringing side, and some were more on the belligerent, hateful side, but they were all written by folks who are distressed that I want to stop the flow of non-White immigrants into America, boot out the ones who're already here, and then hunt down and hang the people who arranged to bring them here.
Some folks just can't understand why I want to do that. I must have spoken with a dozen interviewers for the mass media who asked me: "What's wrong with multiculturalism? Why do you think it's bad?" That's exactly what I was asked by a pretty, young woman reporter for a German television news program last week. And I believe that she was sincere. She really didn't understand. That's the lemming factor. The girl wasn't stupid. It's just that her brain is wired in such a way that she is incapable of absorbing any information or reaching any conclusion that is Politically Incorrect.
If multiculturalism and diversity were not promoted by the controlled mass media — if wanting to have a clean, White America were still Politically Correct, the way it was here, say, 50 years ago, and also the way it was in her country until 1945 — then she would be able to understand perfectly well why multiculturalism is socially, culturally, and racially destructive. She would agree completely with me. But because it is unfashionable to understand such things now, she can't. And I don't mean that she doesn't want to understand; I mean that she can't understand. That is the way lemmings function.
I've often thought about how we might rearrange the wiring in a lemming's brain and permit him or her to understand what is blocked out by the overwhelming compulsion to conform, to be fashionable. I've spoken in the past, only half jokingly, about the oak-table-leg method of persuasion: about putting a lemming on a diet of 500 calories a day and beating him half to death with an oak table leg about once a day until he gets his thinking straightened out. That's the method the communists used in their so-called "labor reeducation" camps, and it seems to have worked pretty well. It's also the method the Allies used on the German population after the Second World War to make them realize the error of their ways in supporting Hitler. Eventually they had most of the Germans blaming Hitler for their suffering instead of the people who were raping, beating, looting, and starving them.
Well, of course, I can't use trauma and privation as an educational method, but perhaps it is nevertheless possible to shock a lemming to his senses. I don't know, but it is something you might like to try for yourself. So with that in mind let's talk for a moment about the Chinese. The Chinese are a people with whom we are rapidly becoming more and more closely involved, both through trade and through immigration. And the properly conditioned lemming will tell you that there's absolutely nothing wrong with that. The Chinese, after all, are exactly like us, except that they speak a different language, are a little darker, and have slanted eyes. They add wonderfully to our "diversity" here. They enrich our culture by their presence.
Well, actually they're not quite like us. They have different customs, and those different customs come from a different way of looking at the world, a different attitude toward life, and that different attitude evolved over the course of thousands of generations of living in a different environment from the environment in which our ancestors lived. For example, the Chinese eat babies and see nothing wrong in it. [Editor's note: Many will find Dr. Pierce's assertion hard to believe. But note well that even Establishment "fact-checker" Snopes admitted, in the process of telling us that it was a Chinese "performance artist" who ate the apparent fetus (and they admit that it may have been an actual fetus, too), also admits that the use of aborted babies for human consumption has been reported in mainstream sources for years. See the note at the end of the broadcast text. — Ed.]
And what they do to cats and dogs they get their hands on is too horrible, too sickening, for me to describe here. What they do to cats and dogs is much worse than just eating them. But to get back to babies: I had heard reports from time to time about the Chinese custom of eating babies in the belief that it is an especially healthy thing to do. For a modern nuclear superpower, the Chinese have some strange ideas about health. These ideas have nearly wiped out a number of species of wild animals because of the insatiable Chinese demand for their body parts. Ground rhinoceros horn is in such demand that it has seriously threatened the rhinoceros with extinction. The same sort of demand exists for tiger penises and various bear parts.
Human babies are harder to get for eating, and I imagine that there are laws in China about killing babies for that purpose. But there seems to be no law against eating aborted human fetuses. A number of hospitals in China that perform abortions sell the aborted fetuses for eating. The smaller fetuses are cooked in a soup. The late-term fetuses are eaten more like roast suckling pig. The Chinese government understandably is a little bashful about having Western journalists publicize this sort of thing, just as it is bashful about having Western journalists film what the Chinese do to cats and dogs. Not to worry, though: Western journalists understand that it would be the worst kind of "no, no" to publish such information in the West; it might dampen the public's enthusiasm for more togetherness with the Chinese.
Despite the effort on both sides to keep these peculiar customs of the Chinese from becoming better known in the West, information is available to the diligent seeker. I recently acquired photographs taken in a restaurant in China of a Chinese man eating what is quite plainly recognizable as a late-term human fetus. The photographs are shocking and disgusting to me, and I imagine that they also will be shocking and disgusting to the average American lemming. They won't be shocking to Chinese, of course. Eating fetuses is no stranger to them than, say, the habit of eating snails in garlic sauce is to a Frenchman.
The significance I see in the Chinese habit of eating fetuses, even if only the wealthier Chinese can afford them, is more than simply a difference between us and the Chinese in culinary tastes or in ideas of what's healthy. A society that sees nothing wrong in eating babies, a race that finds this habit acceptable, is profoundly different from ours. The difference is far deeper than language or skin color or facial features.
Now, I don't hate the Chinese because they aren't White. I don't hate them for being different. I don't even hate them because they see nothing wrong in eating aborted babies. That's their business. I do have stronger feelings about what they do to cats and dogs, and if I had the power to do so I would depopulate China in order to put a stop to that. But if they want to eat Chinese fetuses, I don't care — so long as they do it in China, not here. But they will be doing it here if we permit the criminal insanity of multiculturalism to continue. And it won't be just Chinese who'll be doing it. Think how much the customs and the morals of White Americans already have changed under the influence of the multiculturalism we already have here.
I'm not telling you that if more Chinese come to America we'll all be eating babies. I believe that most of us, even our lemmings, will retain an instinctive block against that sort of thing. But the Chinese nevertheless will change our culture. More important, they will change our attitudes, our morals. If we have a lot of Chinese immigrants in America eating fetuses, you can bet your bottom dollar that any White American who publicly expresses his disgust, his disapproval of this habit, will be denounced by our Jewish media as a "hater," a "bigot," a "racist," and so on. Christian preachers will be issuing a call for more tolerance. Politically ambitious prosecutors and police officials will announce to the media that they are looking into the possibility of filing "hate speech" charges against the White person who made the offensive remarks.
You know that's what would happen because it's what already has been happening with other phases of the campaign to multiculturalize America. The lemmings adjust to it the same way frogs in a kettle over a fire adjust to the gradually increasing temperature of the water. But at this time the idea of eating babies probably still will shock most lemmings, just as taking a frog from a kettle of cold water and dropping him into a kettle of boiling water will shock the frog.
I want to emphasize to you again: I don't hate Chinese because some of them in China eat babies, and the rest of them think that's all right. I don't hate Blacks because of some of the things they do in Africa that I find disgusting. That's their business — as long as they stay in China or in Africa, as the case may be. I just don't want them here. I don't want to see them. I don't want to hear them. I don't want to smell them. I don't want to hear liberals or Jews making excuses for them. I don't even want to think about them.
Well, the Chinese are not the only exotic ingredient in America's multicultural stew. The Jews are a much more important exotic element because they wield so much more power in American society through their control of our mass media of news and entertainment. And there are people who will tell you, "So what? What difference does it make if the Jews control Hollywood and television? They're just like us, except that they have a different religion." That is what the lemmings have been taught to believe about the Jews. But in fact, the Jews are as profoundly different from us as the Chinese are, and the difference consists in much more than the Jews' uncanny ability to accumulate money. The Jews, like the Chinese, have a fundamentally different way of looking at the world, and this difference is based in thousands of generations of separate evolution in a different environment.
I'll give you just one example of this difference today. This is something I first noticed when I was a junior high school student in Dallas, Texas. The school I attended was in one of Dallas' wealthier suburbs, and there were a number of Jews in the school. What I and several of my classmates noticed about the Jews was their uniquely Jewish sense of humor. One doesn't expect much delicacy in the jokes told by 14-year-olds, of course, but the thing that made the jokes that appealed especially to the Jews stand out was their scatological content. Nearly every Jewish joke involved excrement in one way or another. As I said, this Jewish tendency was so pronounced that I and my Gentile classmates noticed it and commented on it, even though we didn't understand it. And it wasn't that we had an exceptionally large number of budding Howard Sterns among our Jewish classmates. The inclination toward scatology is a general Jewish characteristic. Jews themselves, including Jewish psychologists, have commented on this Jewish trait often, explaining it in terms of the collective Jewish experience throughout history. It is real, and it is quite noticeable.
The Jews who control America's entertainment media are men who as much as anything else want to make money, and they understand the need to keep their Jewishness from being too obvious in the entertainment they produce for Gentile consumption. At least, they used to understand that, but in the last decade or so they've become a lot cockier, a lot bolder. They believe that they have such a tight grip on the minds and morals of the Gentiles now that they can do and say anything they want on the television screen without danger of a Gentile reaction. They believe that they now can let all of their Jewishness hang out. And I'm not talking just about the Howard Stern types. I'm talking about the ultra-rich and powerful mainstream media moguls, Jews such as Michael Eisner and Gerald Levin and Sumner Redstone. Sumner Redstone's MTV has been described by students of the media as the single most powerful influence on the attitudes and behavior of teenaged White girls.
I don't watch MTV myself, and I suspect that most White parents of teenaged girls, even very liberal and trendy parents, also don't pay attention to what their daughters are being indoctrinated with by Sumner Redstone's MTV. An example of which I recently became aware was brought to my attention by the filing just last week of a lawsuit against MTV in Los Angeles Superior Court. Let me give you the details: three months ago, on January 21, MTV was taping a pilot for a new show called Dude, This Sucks. Some teenaged girls were visiting the studio during the taping. A studio employee instructed them to stand on the stage in a certain place for a part of the show in which a pair of performers known as the "Shower Rangers" were to go through their routine. The girls were not told what the performance would be or how they would be involved in it.
The "Shower Rangers" were two men dressed in Boy Scout uniforms. They came on stage, turned their backs to the camera and to the teenaged spectators on the stage, dropped their trousers, bent over, and let fly with a shower of semi-liquid feces, spattering the unsuspecting girls from head to foot. Apparently they had dosed themselves with a powerful laxative prior to the performance.
To Jews, including billionaire Jewish media moguls like the owner of CBS and MTV, Sumner Redstone, this sort of thing is hilariously funny. It's their idea of humor. Unfortunately for MTV, however, the girls who were sprayed by MTV's "Shower Rangers" weren't amused, nor were their parents. Last week two of the girls sued. One of them told the court:
We were having a good time until the second act of Dude, This Sucks went on. All of a sudden I was smelling something disgusting, and I started to gag. I looked around at my friends. They were covered in something. As I looked down at myself I realized that I was too.
Another of the plaintiffs, 14-year-old Kelly Sloat, spoke of the humiliation the girls felt when they returned to school:
Everyone knew about it, even some of the teachers. Most of the kids were cracking jokes or wouldn't come near us because, even though we washed off the feces, they said we smelled. I will never, ever forget what a horrible experience this was.
The girls' lawsuit charges MTV with "infliction of emotional distress, negligence, and battery."
I would charge MTV and Sumner Redstone with much more than that. I would charge Mr. Redstone and his fellow Jews with a deliberate effort to degrade White culture, White standards, White morality. I would charge them with attempting to destroy all traditional ideas in young people's minds of what is right and just and noble and beautiful and replace those traditional ideas and values with a Jewish concoction of filth and degeneracy designed to make our young people accept a Jew-dominated, multicultural pigsty society. And in my book, that's a hanging offense.
And I assure you that when the time for hanging comes, it will not be just this one incident with the "Shower Rangers" which leaves Sumner Redstone and all of his kosher crew dancing on air. This incident is merely an illustration of a general pattern of behavior over a long period of time. I chose this illustration not just because it is current, but because it is a matter of court record. You can verify all the details for yourself. You certainly won't get those details from the other Jewish media.
I also chose this incident because it cannot be written off as an aberration, like some piece of Howard Stern scatology. Sumner Redstone is a mainstream Jew: one of the wealthiest, most powerful, and most influential Jews in the world. He is a leader of the Jews, a Jew to whom nearly all the other Jews look up. No one can call him an aberration. He is the essence of Jewish influence on our society. He is a Jew who is welcomed with open arms at the White House, regardless of whether a Democrat or a Republican is in residence. And he believes that what teenaged White girls need is more exposure to the "Shower Rangers." That will loosen them up, make them more open-minded, and prepare them for sex with Black boys.
And if you've been paying any attention at all to the trends in entertainment for teens, you'll understand that there's nothing exceptional about the "Shower Rangers." They are just one more step in the direction the Jews have been going all along: not just Sumner Redstone, but all of them, from the time they first began taking over control of our entertainment media.
In the 1930s Gentile leaders, most of them Christians, were able to threaten Jews effectively with boycotts if they violated standards of decency. One of the most effective leaders of this effort was Joseph Breen, who helped establish the Production Code for Hollywood in 1934. Breen knew exactly what he was up against. Of Jewish filmmakers Breen wrote in 1932:
These lousy Jews … are simply a vile bunch of people with no respect for anything but the making of money…. These Jews seem to think of nothing but money-making and sexual indulgence…. [They] are the men and women who decide what the film fare of the nation is to be.
The Production Code constrained the Jews for a couple of decades, but with the advent of television the Jews gained far more influence over public attitudes and behavior than the churches had. The Jews could safely ignore the Code, and in the 1960s they began pushing again in the same direction Sumner Redstone is still pushing with the "Shower Rangers."
So you see, Jews really are different. They're not just like us any more than the Chinese are. And let me tell you something: I and a lot of other White Americans have had just about as much of the Chinese and the Jews and the Blacks and the rest of the multicultural filth here as we will tolerate. We've been pushed about as far as we're willing to let ourselves be pushed. We want our country back, and we intend to take it back, and if a lot of soccer moms and yuppies and Politically Correct journalists who can't understand that get in the way, they're going to be hurt.
Here is the full Daily Telegraph article quoted by Snopes:
Chinese trade in human foetuses for consumption is uncovered
by Yojana Sharma in Hong Kong and Graham Hutchings in Beijing
"Aborted human foetuses intended for human consumption are being sold for as little as 1 pound in the Chinese city of Shenzhen, according to reports in Hong Kong yesterday.
"The Eastern Express newspaper said journalists from its sister publication, Eastweek, had gone to Shenzhen, across the border from Hong Kong, to see if foetuses were being sold. Shenzhen hospitals carried out 7,000 terminations last year, including a number on Hong Kong women seeking cheap abortions.
"At the state-run Shenzhen Health Centre for Women and Children, a female doctor was asked for a foetus. The next day, she handed the reporter a 'fist-sized glass bottle stuffed with thumb-sized foetuses.'
"The doctor was quoted as saying: 'There are 10 foetuses here, all aborted this morning. You can take them. We are a state hospital and don't charge. Normally we doctors take them home to eat – all free. Since you don't look well, you can take them.'
"At private clinics, aborted foetuses could be obtained for between 1 and 1.75 pounds, the newspaper said. There was no evidence, however, that foetuses were being sold in large quantities to middlemen for sale in Hong Kong.
"A doctor said the foetuses were 'nutritious' and claimed to have eaten 100 herself.
"Zou Qin, a doctor working at the Luo Hu Clinic in Shenzhen, said the foetuses were 'nutritious' and claimed to have eaten 100 herself in the past six months.
"She said the 'best' were first-born males from young women. 'We don't carry out abortions just to eat the foetuses,' she said, but added that the foetuses would be 'wasted if not eaten.' The newspaper said the foetuses were eaten as a soup, together with pork and ginger.
"A woman doctor, referred to only as Wang, from the Sin Hua Clinic, Shenzhen, was quoted as saying the foetuses were 'even better than placentae' in nutritional value. 'They can make your skin smoother, your body stronger and are good for kidneys,' she said.
"Dr. Warren Lee, president of the Hong Kong Nutrition Association, said: 'Eating foetuses is a traditional Chinese medicine deeply founded in folklore.' However, he considered the alleged properties of foetuses little more than old-wives' tales. Others said the practice was abhorrent.
"The sale and consumption of placentae is common in China.
"Dr. Cao Shilin, of the Hospital of Chinese medicine in Shenzhen, said aborted embryos were taken to factories where they were used in the production of medicines.
"She did not know if any were sold to private individuals, but said there was little medical value in embryos older than eight weeks when, in Chinese terms, they were classified as foetuses.
"She had not heard of foetuses being sold in Shenzhen, but warned that eating them could be dangerous, given the strong medicines used in abortions.
"A doctor in Beijing, who declined to be named, said parts of foetuses would have medical value, singling out the liver as something that could help to cure anaemia.
"But hospitals in Beijing had ovens for the destruction of aborted foetuses, and she had not heard that they had been sold for individual consumption.
"The sale and consumption of placentae is common in China, though frowned upon by the authorities. Only those with good connections to the medical world can obtain placentae, which cost between 2.50 and 3 pounds each.
"According to traditional Chinese medicine, it is regarded as particularly beneficial for a nursing mother to eat her own placenta because it improves her milk. It is usually drunk in the form of a soup."
The authenticity of the report is accepted by a poster at the China Daily forum, where the writer quotes the Telegraph piece and uses it to defend China's government, saying the article shows us that eating human fetuses is "just" an eccentric cultural practice, not a government policy.
Source: Free Speech magazine, April 2001, Volume VII, Number 4
A Jewish Scholar Refutes the "Holocaust"
People Just Like You . . .
Jewish Scholar: Roots of Christianity Reveal an Ancient Jewish World
Bill and Monica
Against Good Breeding: Understanding Jewish Opposition to Eugenics
Video of the Day: Orwell Alert -- American-Clown World Edition
Jewishness: an Overview
Tags:ChineseDiversityDr. William L. PierceFree Speech magazineJewish behaviorJewsMulticulturalism
His Name is Alexander Mixon: Six Blacks Murder White Male Trying to Deliver Food in Albany, Georgia
The Bible is a "We Wuz Kangz" Fantasy for Jews
Mr. Hilter
1 December, 2018 at 3:14 pm	— Reply
The older I get,the more admiration and respect I have for Dr. Pierce. This so called "extremist" hits the nail on the head about the degeneracy of jewish behavior. I know many lemmings myself and find it harder and harder to relate to them. The lemmings would think I am becoming unhinged,no I am becoming awake from a long brainwashed slumber.Thank you for your many fine articles.
Walt Hampton
I have seen photos of Chinese-baby-eating years
ago. It could have been staged, but most likely
not. If they eat dogs and cats, well….why not?
Gerald Goldberg
11 January, 2019 at 1:03 pm	— Reply
"THE JEWISH TALMUD IS ONE OF THE WONDERS OF THE WORLD"!
The official unabridged Soncino Edition of the Talmud published in 1935 was "Translated into English with Notes, Glossary and Indices" by such eminent Talmudic scholars as Rabbi Dr. I. Epstein, Rabbi Dr. Samuel Daiches, Rabbi Dr. Israel W. Slotki, M.A., Litt.D., The Reverend Dr. A. Cohen, M.A.', Ph.D., Maurice Simon, M.A., and the Very Reverend The Chief Rabbi Dr. J.H. Hertz wrote the "Foreword" for the Soncino Edition of the Talmud. The Very Reverend Rabbi Hertz was at the time the Chief Rabbi of England.
The world's leading authorities on the Talmud confirm that the official unabridged Soncino Edition of the Talmud translated into English follows the original texts with great exactness. It is almost a word-for-word translation of the original texts. In his famous classic "The History of the Talmud," Michael Rodkinson, the leading authority on the Talmud, in collaboration with the celebrated Reverend Dr. Isaac M. Wise states:
"THE TALMUD IS ONE OF THE WONDERS OF THE WORLD. During the twenty centuries of its existence…IT SURVIVED IN ITS ENTIRETY, and not only has the power of its foes FAILED TO DESTROY EVEN A SINGLE LINE, but it has not even been able materially to weaken its influence for any length of time.
IT STILL DOMINATES THE MINDS OF A WHOLE PEOPLE, WHO VENERATE ITS CONTENTS AS DIVINE TRUTH…"
SANHEDRIN, 55b-55a: "What is meant by this? – 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 (2) What is the basis of their dispute? – Rab maintains that only he who is able to engage in sexual intercourse, may, as the passive subject of pederasty throw guilt (upon the actual offender); whilst he who is unable to engage in sexual intercourse cannot be a passive subject of pederasty (in that respect) (3). But Samuel maintains: Scriptures writes, (And thou shalt not lie with mankind) as with the lyings of a woman (4). It has been taught in accordance with Rab: Pederasty at the age of nine years and a day; (55a) (he) who commits bestiality, whether naturally or unnaturally: or a woman who causes herself to be bestiality abused, whether naturally or unnaturally, is liable to punishment (5)."
This "divine truth" which "a whole people venerate" of which "not a single letter of it is missing" and today "is flourishing to such a degree as cannot be found in its history" is illustrated by the additional verbatim quotations which follow:
SANHEDRIN, 69b "Our rabbis taught: If a woman sported lewdly with her young son (a minor), and he committed the first stage of cohabitation with her, -Beth Shammai says, he thereby renders her unfit for the priesthood (1). Beth Hillel declares her fit…All agree that the connection of a boy nine years and a day is a real connection; whilst that of one less than eight years is not (2); their dispute refers only to one who is eight years old.
KETHUBOTH, 11a-11b. "Rabba said, It means (5) this: When a grown up man has intercourse with a little girl it is nothing, for when the girl is less than this (6), it is as if one puts the finger in the eye (7), but when a small boy has intercourse with a grown up woman, he makes her as `a girl who is injured by a piece of wood' ".
(footnotes) "(5). Lit., `says'. (6) Lit., `here', that is, less than three years old. (7) Tears come to the eyes again and again, so does virginity come back to the little girl under three years."
KETHUBOTH, 11a-11b. "Rab Judah said that Rab said: A small boy who has intercourse with a grown up woman makes her (as though she were ) injured by a piece of wood (1). Although the intercourse of a small boy is not regarded as a sexual act, nevertheless the woman is injured by it as by a piece of wood(a dildo)."
(footnotes) "(1) Although the intercourse of a small boy is not regarded as a sexual act, nevertheless the woman is injured by it as by a piece of wood."
ABODAH ZARAH, 36b-37a. "R. Naham b. Isaac said: They decreed in connection with a heathen child that it would cause defilement by seminal emission (2) so that an Israelite child should not become accustomed to commit pederasty with it…From what age does a heathen child cause defilement by seminal emission? From the age of nine years and one day. (37a) for inasmuch as he is then capable of the sexual act he likewise defiles by emission. Rabina said: It is therefore to be concluded that a heathen girl (communicates defilement) from the age of three years and one day, for inasmuch as she is then capable of the sexual act she likewise defiles by a flux.
SOTAH, 26b. "R. Papa said: It excludes an animal, because there is not adultery in connection with an animal (4). Raba of Parazika (5) asked R. Ashi, Whence is the statement which the Rabbis made that there is no adultery in connection with an animal? Because it is written, Thou shalt not bring the hire of a harlot or the wages of a dog etc.; (6) and it has been taught: The hire of a dog (7) and the wages of a harlot (8) are permissible, as it is said, Even both of these (9) – the two (specified texts are abominations) but not four (10)…As lying with mankind. (12) But, said Raba, it excludes the case where he warned her against contact of the bodies (13). Abaye said to him, That is merely an obscene act (and not adultery), and did the All-Merciful prohibit (a wife to her husband) for an obscene act?"
SANHEDRIN, 55b: "A maiden 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. 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 gonorrhea)."
(footnotes) "(2) His wife derives no pleasure from this, and hence there is no cleaving. (3) A variant reading of this passage is: Is there anything permitted to a Jew which is forbidden to a heathen. Unnatural connection is permitted to a Jew. (4) By taking the two in conjunction, the latter as illustrating the former, we learn that the guilt of violating the injunction `to his wife but not to his neighbor's wife' is incurred only for natural but not for unnatural intercourse."
Of the "sacred" Talmudic teachings of the "Sages," preserved since 500 A.D. and taught more widely today than ever before in Talmud-Torah schools in the U.S.A., perhaps nothing better illustrates "fools" with "reprobate minds" than the teaching in the Talmud book of Yebamoth that spittle on the top of the bed curtain proves that a wife has been guilty of adultery, as only lying down face upwards could she have spit up on it. Spitting several feet straight up!
The Talmud states:
"When a peddler leaves a house and the woman within is fastening her sinnar [breech-cloth] … . If spittle is found on the upper part of the curtained bed she must, said Rabbi, go."
Footnote: "Even if there were no witnesses that misconduct took place."
Further footnote: "Only the woman lying face upwards could have spat on the spot. Intercourse may, therefore, be suspected."