Daily Archives: 12 October 2019

Some notes on Circumcision

12th century physician and Rabbi Moses Maimonides who advocated for circumcision stated that the purpose of circumcision is to reduce the sexual pleasure and desire of men without preventing the funcions necessary for reproductions. Maimonides stated that the removal of the foreskin reduced a mans lustful thoughts and made sex less pleasurable. He also stated that it was very hard for a woman to give up a lover who was uncircumcised.

quote from Maimonides;

“The bodily injury caused to that organ is exactly that which is desired; it does not interrupt any vital function, nor does it destroy the power of generation. Circumcision simply counteracts excessive lust; for there is no doubt that circumcision weakens the power of sexual excitement, and sometimes lessens the natural enjoyment: the organ necessarily becomes weak when it loses blood and is deprived of its covering from the beginning. Our Sages (Beresh. Rabba, c. 80) say distinctly: It is hard for a woman, with whom an uncircumcised had sexual intercourse, to separate from him. This is, as I believe, the best reason for the commandment concerning circumcision”.

This is backed up by modern studies, A study by K.O’Hara and J.O ‘Hara (1999) showed that women felt more intimate with men who were uncircumcised and also that women felt more sexual pleasure with men who were uncircumcised.

According to the Danish study, Morten Frisch et al. (2011) circumcised men were more likely to have >10 sexual partners compared to uncircumcised men. This means circumcised men have more issues maintaining a monogamous relationship.

This goes perfectly along with the jewish agenda of destroying the natural relationship between men and women and to brake down the family.

A study by Laumann et al. (1997) observed that circumcised men are more likely to engage in homosexual acts and other degenerate sexual acts such as anal compared to uncircumcised men, circumcised men also masturbate more frequently compared to uncircumcised which can also cause issues to a man such as decreased sexual sensitivity and this could also mean that circumcised men are more prone to become addicted to porn if they masturbate more than uncircumcised men.

The British National Survey of Sexual Attitudes and Lifestyles (2000) reported that circumcised males were more likely to report having a homosexual partner and more likely to have partners from abroad as compared with normal intact males.

“For the generations to come every male among you who is eight days old must be circumcised, including those born in your household or bought with money from a foreigner–those who are not your offspring” Genesis 17:12

Jews forcibly circumcised all their gentile slaves to signfy that their bodies belonged to their jewish masters.

According Steven Weitzman in his aricle ”Forced Circumcision and the Shifting Role of Gentiles in Hasmonean Ideology”(1999) in the time of antiquity, circumcision on gentiles could’ve been a way to show jewish power and domination over gentile bodies.

Examples of jews forcing Gentiles to circumcise after beating them in battle; From the historian Ptolemy (1st century BCE) starting with Hasmonean King Hyrcanus I and with his successor continuing the practice:

Maccabees 2:46-47;

”They forcibly circumcised all the uncircumcised boys that they found within the borders of Israel”

After the victory of the Maccabees over the Seleucid Empire in which the jews managed to gain sovereignty over Judea. Mattathias forcibly circumcised both jews and non-jews found within the borders of Israel. Prior to this during the rule of Antiochus IV of the Seleucid Empire, circumcision was forbidden and punishable by death which was one of the reasons for the Maccabean Revolt. Hellenes at this time were known for criticizing circumcision viewing it and rightfully so, as genital mutilation..

In Pagan Rome, Judaism was considered a cold religion viewing circumcision as barbarous.

Emperor Hadrian of the Roman Empire viewed circumcision as evil as castration and had made circumcision illegal and punishable by death but under his uccessor Antoninus Pius, it was allowed again but only for jews and not gentiles.

Source: ”The Jewish Quarterly Review, Vol. 59, No. 2 (Oct., 1968), pp. 93-117”

Romans had also made circumcision illegal in the territories they took over in the 3rd century;

Source: ”The beginnings of Islamic Law: Late Antique Islamicate Legal Traditions p 109”- Lena Salaymeh

According to Visigothic canon, the jews were not allowed to hold any public office or have any authority over Christians and one of the main reasons for this was the pure malice jews had over Christians (or just gentiles). They were seen as a greater threat than pagans and heretics.

Visigoths knew this by seeing how jews barbarically treated their gentile slaves, one of the barbaric acts cited by Visigothic canons was; forced circumcision.

In the Visigothic kingdom, Circumcision was considered a great threat and since the Third Council of Toledo (589) to year 624 had been included as a reason for every anti-jewish provision implemented by the Visigoths.

https://i.imgtc.ws/bl0Luun.png

Source: ”Jews in Early Christian Law: Byzantium and the Latin West, 6th-11th centuries”- John Tolan et al. Oct 2011

Visigoths detested circumcision so much that they forbade circumcision to all jews. During the reign of Recceswinth he forbade circumcision to all jews, no matter if they were baptized or not, and if they did not comply they would recieve the death penalty by being stoned to death or burned at the stake, however if circumcised man was a gentile slave, her would recieve his freedom but if the slave was jewish he would recieve the death penalty anyway. During the rule king Erwig discouraged the evil practiced through confiscation of possessions and the amputation of the male organ. Other kings of the Visigoths had taken similar actions to stop circumcision.

Source; The Visigoths: Studies in Culture and Society p.132 by Alberto Ferreiro.

Saddam Possibly Tied to Oklahoma City

Published October 23, 2002 By | Fox News

Amid speculation that President Bush is reconsidering what will constitute “regime change in Iraq,” one thing should be clear: Saddam Hussein’s willingness to “change” his attitude towards permitting the resumption of intrusive on-site U.N. weapons inspections will not, in fact, eliminate the danger posed by him and his ruling clique.

Indeed, what would be, at best, an ephemeral attitudinal adjustment on Saddam’s part would probably not even diminish meaningfully the threat from Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction programs. After all, were Saddam — against all odds and past practice — actually to cooperate with the U.N. inspectors and assist in the complete elimination of his chemical and biological arsenals, he could resume covertly stockpiling them again in as little as six-months time.

That period could be still shorter if he were to be rewarded for his “cooperation” by the elimination of international economic and trade sanctions against Iraq.

A news item published in the London Evening Standard last Monday provides, however, an important reminder of why the United States cannot safely accept any substitute for the toppling of Saddam’s regime.

Specifically, it summarizes evidence implicating Saddam Hussein in one or more deadly acts of terror against the United States, specifically the Oklahoma City bombing.

The Standard article draws on investigative reporting and forensic analysis into the Oklahoma City bombing performed over the past seven years by an intrepid and tenacious former TV journalist, Jayna Davis. She offers compelling, if circumstantial, indications that Iraqi operatives helped to plot, prepare and execute murderous attacks in Oklahoma City (and perhaps against other targets in the United States).

For example, Ms. Davis has identified a man whose photo matches that of a “John Doe #2” sought immediately after the Murrah Building attack. He appears to be a Palestinian by the name of Hussain Hashem Al Hussaini, who sported a tatoo suggesting he had served in Saddam’s elite Republican Guard.

According to Davis’ evidence, witnesses put Al Hussaini in the company of confessed bomber Timothy McVeigh a few days before the attack and near the site immediately beforehand. Ms. Davis has also found witnesses who say McVeigh and his convicted co-conspirator, Terry Nichols, had consorted with former Iraqi soldiers. Some of these former soldiers worked for a Palestinian who owned a truck very like one sought after the attack. These soldiers reportedly were absent from work on the day of the bombing and were seen celebrating after it occurred. It strains credulity that all of these dots are not connected.

What is more, Ms. Davis’ evidence appears consistent with findings by another investigator, Dr. Laurie Mylroie, who has devoted years of effort to the pursuit of Iraqi connections to the earlier World Trade Center bombing. Like Ms. Davis, Dr. Mylroie concludes that Saddam’s modus operandi is to employ cut-outs to cover his tracks.

https://www.foxnews.com/story/saddam-possibly-tied-to-oklahoma-city