Reisman omits Jewish role in porn industry and pedophilia movement

[Timothy_Fitzpatrick]

Part 1 of a 2-part series

http://fitzinformer.blogspot.com/2010/1 ... -porn.html

While I hesitate to call pornography researcher Judith Reisman a hypocrite for going into silence about the Jewish role in the sexual terrorism industry, also known as pornography, her work has laid a framework for combatting the psycho-sexual terrorists that are attacking humanity.

She has taken on all the big players in the porn industry, including successfully fending off a lawsuit by Playboy Magazine. She has pinpointed the frauds and the spooks that have fronted as scientists and sexual liberators and shown them as the sadistic manipulators that they are.

Having said that, Reisman does the world a great disservice by omitting the massive role the Jewish people have played in the porn industry. A recent documentary featuring Reisman, The Kinsey Syndrome, goes into great length exposing the destructive sexual revolution of the '50s, a revolution that was largely started up by a sociopathic pedophile named Alfred Kinsey, who sold the world a handful of lies based on pseudo-science.

The film takes the classic Jewish tactic of "Nazi-linking." That is, to link an already vilified subject to Nazism, in an attempt to further denigrate the person as if being a pedophile weren't enough. The Kinsey Syndrome film goes further, using the term "Judeo-Christian," as if the two religions had anything in common as far as doctrine, much less sexual morality...

Click above link for full article.

[Whaler]

Great job A+.

Yeah, another delusional Jew that lays the blame on Nazis. Nope, Jews have nothing to do with pornography, it's the Nazis.  :roll:

My dream is that once these criminals are exposed and de-clawed, there will be a real commission that exposes all of the Jew lies and manipulation of actual historical events. These commission hearings will be internationally televised and the commission report will be required reading for all High school students.

[Timothy_Fitzpatrick]

[Timothy_Fitzpatrick]

The Pornographic Conspiracy
Destroying The Family - Degrading The Human Spirit
By Philip Jones
7-31-9
 
Introduction.
 
 
Throughout the Western World, the Christian foundations of decency, morality, restraint, and integrity; the very moral anchor which held our civilisation together for centuries, has come under a concerted and simultaneous multi-theatre attack, which in it's ferocity and intensity can only be described as diabolical. Here in Northern Europe, with some rare exceptions, the last bastion of what is true, virtuous and righteous, is to be found paradoxically, only amongst the followers of Islam, and make no mistake about it, even that community of faithful believers, is coming under pernicious attack by the agents of change, in the form of the welfare state; dabbling in the affairs of Muslim families, the education system, gradually breaking down the moral and belief systems of the young, and of course, the sick and twisted `entertainment industry` along with the mass media in general.
 
In my recent article, `Who Rules The World,`[1] I hypothesised that the very source of those afflictions, which have and continue to debase and de-construct our way of life, eroding ever more, all that was once marvellous and righteous, in lands which once formed what was known as `Christendom,` is literally the work of Satan/Lucifer, who with a little help from his legions of `Fallen Angels,` Demon helpers, and his bloodline [3]descendants known as the Illuminati, is establishing his dominion here on earth, just as he set out to do at the very beginning of time.
 
Having outlined in detail in that three part series the basis for my hypothesis, there is no need to elaborate further here. It is sufficient to direct the reader to that article so that he/she may judge for his/herself whether there is any credibility in my assertion.
 
Those elements of social and moral decay that we are witnessing today; the increasingly pornographic culture, high divorce rates; growing numbers of unwed single mothers; the hordes of illegitimate children; homosexuality and lesbianism, sexual perversion and the alarmingly high number of abortions, is not some new phenomenon. It is an ingenious and fiendish plot that has been around for many Millennia (see Sodom and Gomorrah and the cruel and debased cultures prevalent throughout the land of Canaan and further afield during Old Testament times) designed to annihilate what is, the very heart and foundation of all good and decent society; namely, the family!
 
You are about to read written proof of this clandestine conspiracy. You will learn about who and what is behind it, and their fierce unwavering mission to degrade and eradicate the family, separate man from his mate, pervert and `filthify` our God given human spirit, and drag what's left of humanity after their multi faceted depopulation agenda has been taken to it's illogical conclusion, into a Luciferian nightmare, whereby a relatively small and immensely wealthy and powerful `bloodline` elite, hold sway as the `proxy` lords of this planet, for their master, Lucifer.
 
Destroy The Family.
 
In 1956, J. Edgar Hoover, [5] the then Director of the FBI, himself a 33rd Degree Freemason and therefore no stranger to Luciferian machinations and other deviant behaviour, somewhat paradoxically wrote:
 
"The individual is handicapped by coming face-to-face with a conspiracy so monstrous he cannot believe it exists. The American mind simply has not come to a realization of the evil which has been introduced into our midst. It rejects even the assumption that human creatures could espouse a philosophy which must ultimately destroy all that is good and decent." The Elks Magazine (August 1956)
 
Mr. Hoover knew what he was talking about, and it is probably even truer today to comment that few people understand, or even consider the malicious forces now arrayed against the family, the institution of marriage and the very nature of our being. They simply cannot comprehend how hell-bent the forces of evil are on destroying the family. Read into the chilling words of Communist demagogue, Lenin: "Destroy the family and you destroy society," [1]and then get an idea of the dire and perilous nature of the situation.
 
Lenin had a devious plan to carry out his sinister plot and he wasn't alone! We will deal with this in a moment. But firstly, it is necessary to recognise the direct parallels of our current state of affairs to the original Marxist Communist plot to eradicate the family, as was noted in the 1926 July issue of the Atlantic Monthly:
 
When the Bolsheviki came into power in 1917 they regarded the family, like every other "bourgeois" institution, with fierce hatred, and set out with a will to destroy it. "To clear the family out of the accumulated dust of the ages we had to give it a good shake-up, and we did," declared Madame Smidovich, a leading Communist and active participant in the recent discussion. So one of the first decrees of the Soviet Government abolished the term "illegitimate children." This was done simply by equalizing the legal status of all children, whether born in wedlock or out of it, and now the Soviet Government boasts that Russia is the only country where there are no illegitimate children. The father of a child is forced to contribute to its support, usually paying the mother a third of his salary...
 
At the same time, a law was passed which made divorce a matter of a few minutes, to be obtained at the request of either partner in a marriage. Chaos was the result. Men took to changing wives with the same zest which they displayed in the consumption of the recently restored forty-per-cent vodka.
 
"Some men have twenty wives, living a week with one, a month with another," asserted an indignant woman delegate during the sessions of the Tzik. "They have children with all of them, and these children are thrown on the street for lack of support!"
 
(There are three hundred thousand shelter-less children in Russia to-day, who are literally turned out on the streets. They are one of the greatest social dangers of the present time, because they are developing into professional criminals. More than half of them are drug addicts and sex perverts. It is claimed by many Communists that the break-up of the family is responsible for a large percentage of these children.)
 
The peasant villages have perhaps suffered most from this revolution in sex relations. An epidemic of marriages and divorces broke out in the country districts. [Marriage became a game where it] was not unusual for a boy of twenty to have had three or four wives, or for a girl of the same age to have had three or four abortions. The peasants bitterly complained: "Abortions cover our villages with shame. Formerly we did not even hear of them." Many women found marriage and childbearing a profitable occupation. They formed connections ( sexual) with the sons of well-to-do peasants and then blackmailed the father for the support of the children. In some cases peasants have been obliged to sell [everything] in order to settle such claims. The law has created still more confusion because women can claim support for children born many years ago.
 
During the winter of 1924-1925 some of the older Communists accused the younger generation of indulging in loose connections; they blame the girl students for practising frequent abortions Russian women students [noted] that love was almost the only cheap amusement left to them and demanded that they be given free abortions that factory women enjoy Both in the villages and in the cities, the problem of the unmarried mother has become very acute and provides a severe and annoying test of Communist theories.
 
Another new point was that wife and husband would have an equal right to claim support from the other The woman would have the right to demand support for her child even if she lived with several men during the period of conception; but, in contrast to previous practice, she or the court would choose one man who would be held responsible for the support. Commissar Kursky seemed especially proud of this point because it differed so much from the 'bourgeois customs' of Europe and America.
 
Another speaker objected to the proposed law on the ground that some women would take advantage of its liberal provisions to form connections with wealthy men and then blackmail them for alimony.[2]
 
[1] Lenin merely repeated what Socrates had said and what Friedrich Engels and Karl Marx put into words. Lenin set out to do just that, hoping that a new society -- with the State as the ultimate father -- could be constructed. With the collapse of the Soviet Union, we have seen the consequences of the experiment.
 
[2] The Atlantic Monthly; July 1926; The Russian Effort to Abolish Marriage; Volume 138, No. 1; page 108-114. You can read the document in its entirety by <http://www.ejfi.org/Civilization/Civilization-4.htm>clicking here.
 
Here's how the scheme to destroy the family is mapped out:
 
Eliminate the sacredness of the marriage covenant from the minds of the masses. Make them believe marriage is outdated and blasé
 
Inspire hatred against the family unit, manhood and fatherhood
 
Institute no-fault divorce and encourage serial divorces
 
Incite rampant promiscuity, fornication and adultery
 
Make having illegitimate children become a common practice
 
Convince society that a child in the womb is not a human being
 
Provoke women to have abortions without regard to God or their consciences
 
Make true love seem like cheap amusement
 
Stimulate the people to confuse sex with love
 
Create an environment that encourages unwed single motherhood
 
Inspire men to disrespect, dishonour and abuse women
 
Design laws that motivate women to commit paternity fraud
 
Incite homosexuality, lesbianism, sexual immorality and perversion
 
Influence men to effortlessly abandon children they sire
 
Most importantly, provoke a fierce relentless gender war
 
Is there anybody reading this who can't draw parallels with their own society?
 
As you have read above, what happened in the Soviet Union in 1926 was no accident, and it is important to appreciate and easy to see, that the social and moral carnage now occurring throughout the West; the high divorce rate, the huge numbers of unwed mothers, the rage against fatherhood, the gender wars, the overt battle being waged against marriage and the family, and the highly detailed attacks on the bedrock of our civilisation, are equally as well planned, orchestrated and micromanaged by the same evil force which established and funded that rotten regime.
 
We will now witness how certain Americans, like their Communist Russian counterparts, have also been and still are, determined to de-construct, dismantle and exterminate the family.
 
The Conspirators.
 
"The nuclear family must be destroyed , and people must find better ways of living together. ... Whatever it's ultimate meaning, the break-up of families now is an objectively revolutionary process. ... "Families have supported oppression by separating people into small, isolated units, unable to join together to fight for common interests. ..." - Functions of the Family, Linda Gordon, WOMEN: A Journal of Liberation, Fall, 1969.
 
"By the year 2000 we will, I hope, raise our children to believe in human potential, not God" - Gloria Steinem, editor of 'MS' magazine.
 
"We can't destroy the inequities between men and women until we destroy marriage. " -- [Robin Morgan, "Sisterhood Is Powerful," (ed), 1970, p. 537]
 
"The most merciful thing a large family can do to one of its infant members is to kill it" - Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood, in Women and the New Rage, p.67
 
"Marriage has existed for the benefit of men; and has been a legally sanctioned method of control over women... We must work to destroy it. The end of the institution of marriage is a necessary condition for the liberation of women. Therefore it is important for us to encourage women to leave their husbands and not to live individually with men." - The Declaration of Feminism , November 1971
 
"Only when manhood is dead - and it will perish when ravaged femininity no longer sustains it - only then will we know what it is to be free." -- [Andrea Dworkin. "The Root Cause," speech, 26 Sept. 1975, at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge (published in Our Blood, ch. 9, 1976).]
 
"The care of children ...is infinitely better left to the best trained practitioners of both sexes who have chosen it as a vocation...[This] would further undermine family structure while contributing to the freedom of women." - Kate Millet, Sexual Politics 178-179
 
"In order to raise children with equality, we must take them away from families and communally raise them." -- Dr. Mary Jo Bane, feminist and assistant professor of education at Wellesley College and associate director of the school's Centre for Research on Woman
 
"Who cares how men feel or what they do or whether they suffer? They have had over 2000 years to dominate and made a complete hash of it. Now it is our turn. My only comment to men is, if you don't like it, bad luck - and if you get in my way I'll run you down." - Letter to the Editor: Women's Turn to Dominate, Signed: Liberated Women, Boronia; Herald-Sun, Melbourne, Australia, February 9, 1996
 
"Life in this society being, at best, an utter bore and no aspect of society being at all relevant to women, there remains to civic-minded, responsible, thrill-seeking females only to overthrow the government, eliminate the money system, institute complete automation, and destroy the male sex." - Valerie Solana, SCUM Manifesto (Society for Cutting Up Men.)
 
"How will the family unit be destroyed? ... the demand alone will throw the whole ideology of the family into question, so that women can begin establishing a community of work with each other and we can fight collectively. Women will feel freer to leave their husbands and become economically independent, either through a job or welfare."- Female Liberation , by Roxanne Dunbar.
 
"I feel that 'man-hating' is an honourable and viable political act, that the oppressed have a right to class-hatred against the class that is oppressing them." - Robin Morgan, (editor of MS magazine)
 
"It is important for us to encourage women to leave their husbands and not to live individually with men... All of history must be re-written in terms of oppression of women. We must go back to ancient female religions like witchcraft" - The Declaration of Feminism , November 1971.
 
"God is going to change. We women... will change the world so much that He won't fit any-more." - Naomi Goldenberg, Changing of the Gods: Feminism and the End of Traditional Religions (Quoted at beginning of From Father God to Mother Earth)
 
I hope that the reader now understands by the sheer malevolence of the above statements, that the Communist `front group` known as the feminist movement, has nothing whatsoever to do with `women's rights,` and everything to do with the complete and total emasculation of the human male, the enforced collapse of patriarchy and the breakdown of the family, thereby facilitating the depopulation agenda[2] and aiding the implementation of the Satanic New World Order. This attack against the family, against the institution of marriage and against God and country is not a game!
 
These people are serious about abolishing the family unit, and the American nation, along with all other nation states in fact. They are relentless and will stop at nothing to eradicate God, morals, marriage, manhood, womanhood, fatherhood, motherhood, husband-hood and love of nation from our hearts and minds. Their mission is to persuade the masses to engage in a cloaked form of Satan Worship, disguised among other things as humanistic atheism, pantheism, `earth` worship, along with accompanying social aberrations such as misogyny, domestic violence, child abandonment, child support schemes and traps, paternity fraud, serial divorces, serial abortions, pornography, sexual perversion, homosexuality and lesbianism.
 
Pornography : Debasing Human Nature.
 
It cannot be argued that one of the most insidious weapons being used in this war against God's most honoured institution, is Pornography, and it is this aspect of the vengeful battle being directed against the hearts, souls and consciences of men and women, not only here in the west, but increasingly due to internet access, on a global scale, which I will now deal with in some detail.
 
Sexual material of all kinds is now all too easily accessible through television, movies, music videos, and particularly the Internet. Many will have us believe that this relentless intrusion of pornographic, sexualised imagery is harmless, but it is anything but. It is a debased aberrant form of human sexuality, encouraged by the agents of those doing the work of Lucifer, which is highly addictive, destructive, demoralising, corrupting and eventually fatal to any chance of a moral and decent way of life. Despite what its apologists and defenders say, pornography has a profoundly negative effect on how people view sex and sexual behaviour. Researchers at the National Foundation for Family Research and Education concluded not surprisingly that "exposure to pornography puts viewers at increased risk for developing sexually deviant tendencies." According to the report, "the rape myth (belief that women cause and enjoy rape, and that rapists are normal) is very widespread in habitual male users of pornography."
 
There is also evidence that the repeated use of pornography can interfere with the ability to enjoy and participate in normal marital intimacy. Dr.Victor Cline, a specialist in treating sex addiction, has documented a recurring progression in the use of pornography. If left unchecked, what starts as casual viewing of pornography can eventually lead to an escalation to more hard-core, aberrant material. This, he claims, can lead to deviant sexual acts. Behavioural scientists agree. Dr. Cline reports that "any type of sexual deviation can be acquired in this way, and that it cannot be eliminated even by massive feelings of guilt." Eventually, the viewer may try to act out the pornography-based, immoral fantasies, often with devastating results.
 
The course of this problem may be gradual and undetected, concluded Cline. He states: "Like a cancer, it keeps growing and spreading. It rarely ever reverses itself, and it is also very difficult to treat and heal. Denial on the part of the male addict and refusal to confront the problem are typical and predictable, and this almost always leads to marital or couple disharmony, sometimes divorce, and sometimes the breaking up of other intimate relationships."
 
The Damage To Young People.
 
Some researchers say that exposure to pornography can affect the natural development of a child's brain. Of course it can! Statistics show that the primary consumers of pornography are boys between the ages of 12 and 17 years. In fact, for many, pornography is their primary source of sexual education. This has very disturbing ramifications. "Teen pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases," notes one report, "are completely non-existent in porn, giving a false belief that there are no adverse consequences to behaviours depicted in pornography." Young males are being targeted by this industry of filth for a very definite reason: to warp and pervert their ability to interact normally with girls, by portraying the human female as little more than a collection of body orifices to be filled.
 
Dr.Judith Reisman, [6] president of the Institute for Media Education, and one of the most exceptional human beings currently inhabiting this planet, concludes: "Health-based neurological observations about the instinctual brain-imprinted response to pornographic sights and sounds indicates that viewing pornography is a biologically significant event that overrides informed consent-and that is harmful to children's [moldable] 'plastic' brains because it compromises their grasp of reality and thus their mental and physical health, their well-being and their pursuit of happiness."
 
Pornography shapes attitudes and influences behaviour. Its messages are enticing primarily because they are fantasy and thus presented as more exciting than the real thing. "Individuals using pornography set themselves up for unrealistic expectations leading to damaged relationships," notes one report. Pornography not only can, but is of course intended, to destroy trust and openness, two highly essential qualities in a marriage. Because it is primarily viewed in secret, pornography use often leads to deception and lying. Mates feel betrayed. They do not understand why their marriage partner no longer finds them desirable, and what's more nor does he..
 
Remember, as we have discussed above, the object of the exercise is the destruction of the family. How many marriage breakups and broken homes can be blamed on pornographic addiction?
 
At a 2003 meeting of the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers, two thirds of the 350 divorce lawyers who attended, said the Internet played a significant role in the divorces in the past year, with excessive interest in on-line porn contributing to more than half such cases. Pornography had an almost non-existent role in divorce just seven or eight years ago[7]
 
The insistence on selfish instant gratification at all costs is inbuilt and inherent in pornography use. Hence, viewing pornography is unloving. It undercuts a true believer's fight to maintain chastity and a clean moral standing before God. Pornography exploits men, women and children. It demeans them and robs them of their dignity and rights.
 
The Main-Streaming Of Perversion.
 
Many people today are ambivalent toward pornography, because like all those other vices now prevalent in the West, it has entered the mainstream and become to a large degree, accepted practice. Modern attitudes toward pornography may be reflected by the 'prostitute-chic' fashions many celebrities sport, the music videos that increasingly flaunt sexual imagery, and the advertising media's adoption of a "porno aesthetic."
 
Doctors now claim that pornography can spark an addiction that is far more difficult to overcome than drug addiction. Treatment for drug addicts usually starts with detoxification to remove the substance from the body. But addiction to pornography, explains Dr. Mary Anne Layden of the University of Pennsylvania, "produces mental imagery which is permanently implanted in the mind of the user and is scaled in by brain chemistry." That is why individuals can vividly recall pornographic images from years past. She concludes: "This is the first addictive substance for which there is no hope for detoxification." But does that mean it is impossible to break free from pornography's influence? And what specific harm does pornography cause?
 
Internet Pornography Facts:
 
About 75 percent of Internet pornography originates in the United States. Close to 15 percent originates in Europe.
 
It is estimated that some 70 million people a week visit pornographic Web sites. About 20 million of these users are in Canada and the United States.
 
A study revealed that during a recent one-month period, Germany had the largest audience for on-line pornography in Europe, followed by Great Britain, France, Italy, and Spain.
 
In Germany, Internet pornography users spend an average of 70 minutes each month viewing pornographic sites.
 
Among European viewers of Internet pornography, those above 50 years of age spend the most time connected to adult Web sites.
 
According to one source, 70 percent of Internet pornography traffic occurs during the day.
 
It is estimated by some that 100,000 Internet sites include material on child pornography.
 
About 80 percent of the Internet's commercial child pornography originates in Japan.
 
There is a proven connection between pornography and rape, as well as other forms of violence against women and children. Infamous serial killer Ted Bundy admits that he had a "strong appetite for violent pornography." He says: "This condition is not immediately seen by the individual or identified as a serious problem. But this interest becomes geared towards matters of a sexual nature that involve violence. I cannot emphasize enough the gradual development of this. It is not short-term."
 
Rather than portraying sexual relations as a beautiful and intimate expression of love between a man and a woman in honourable marriage, pornography demeans and distorts the sexual act. Casual and perverted sex is portrayed as being exciting and desirable. Personal gratification with little or no regard for the other person is highlighted. Women, men, and children are portrayed as objects that exist only for sexual gratification. "Beauty is measured by proportion of body parts, shaping unrealistic expectations," says one report. "Depicting women as anonymous, ever-wanting/waiting, empty sex toys for men, stripping and exposing their bodies for monetary gain and entertainment cannot possibly translate into a message that can exist in harmony with equality, dignity and humanity," concludes another report.
 
Soon, like any other improper stimulation, what initially arouses becomes mundane and routine. "Over time," says one writer, "[the users of pornography] require more explicit and deviant material. They may push their partners into increasingly bizarre sexual activities, diminishing their [own] capacity to express real affection." Does that sound like a harmless diversion?
 
Instead of love, pornography cultivates self-centred, selfish desire, and fractures and stains every person it contaminates. It destroys all decency and is a major threat to our traditional way of life, and particularly, marriage and family.
 
Pornography - A Vicious Assault On The Family.
 
It is a sad reality that many Internet porn viewers are children. Youngsters who though prohibited by law from purchasing pornographic literature or from renting pornographic videos, can gain access to these in their own home with a few clicks of the mouse. The choices are endless. Many children regularly visit Internet sites without their parents' knowledge. In fact, The Detroit News states that "more than two in five children have subscribed to a web site or other service online even though nearly 85 percent of parents have rules against them doing so."
 
Many think that a casual brush with pornography is harmless. However, the facts show otherwise. Consider the case of a couple who seemed to have an ideal marriage. They were financially secure, and they loved to travel. Their friends thought of them as close, affectionate, and devoted, and in many ways they were. However, problems arose when the husband started looking at pornography. Writing to a popular advice columnist, his anxious wife described her concerns: "When [my husband] first started to spend a lot of time on the computer in the middle of the night and early morning, he told me it was 'research.' I walked in on him one morning and caught him looking at [pornography]. He said it was only a matter of curiosity. When I took a closer look at what he was watching, it made me sick. He was embarrassed and promised to stop, and I believed he meant it. He has always been honourable-a man of his word."
 
This man's perverse habit has cost him his self respect, his honour, his integrity, and the respect and admiration of his wife. It has destroyed something intrinsic and wholesome within him. He has become weakened and his resolve degraded. Many men are now being lured into a similar trap; anxious to avoid discovery, they log on late at night or early in the morning. If they are caught, they often try to cover up what they are doing by lying, as this man did. Can anyone reasonably claim that a "hobby" that causes "a man of his word" to sneak around in the middle of the night and to lie to loved ones is harmless?
 
Pornography makes a profit out of the suffering of others, and is designed in the main to degrade and subvert the innate goodness in people, causing serious personal and family problems, to isolate, corrupt and demoralise. Many people caught up in this evil `racket,` have admitted that watching pornography has prevented them from developing close relationships with others. They don't want people around while they indulge their passion for pornography. People tend to fantasize when they watch pornography, and fantasy does not equip a person to cultivate strong relationships or to deal with life in the real world. Increasingly, we are hearing of cases where people who look at or read pornographic material even have trouble enjoying normal sexual relations with their mate. Is that conducive to good family relations? Of course not. Nor is it intended to be. Can a pastime that alienates people from those who care the most about them be truly innocuous?
 
We must consider God's original purpose for married people. He lovingly endowed husbands and wives with the ability to give joyous expression of their love for each other, through honourable sexual relations. Proverbs 5:18, 19 shows that these were meant to be pleasurable: "Rejoice with the wife of your youth. Let her own breasts intoxicate you at all times. With her love may you be in ecstasy constantly."
 
Note that love, not depraved animal like lust, was to be the basis for sexual relations. The person who looks at pornography is gratifying his own sexual desires-and alone, in most cases. A married man who looks at pornography may begin to view his mate as a mere object-someone who exists solely for his pleasure, or conversely, he simply loses interest in her altogether. This is far from the dignity and honour that the Creator intended men to accord women. (see 1 Peter 3:7) Such a practice that interferes with the most intimate aspects of marriage can never be viewed as desirable? Moreover, the pornographic industry, owned and controlled as it is by the Illuminati, understands only too well that what begins as a casual indulgence inevitably leads to a damaging long-term addiction. One writer observed: "Just as drug addicts require more potent drugs to receive a 'high,' consumers of pornography must have a more intense experience to achieve the same euphoric feelings as before."
 
That is apparently what happened to the husband mentioned earlier in this article. One evening several months after he promised to stop watching pornography, his wife returned home and found him at the computer. From his demeanour she could see that something was wrong. "[He] appeared quite nervous and upset," she wrote; "I looked at the computer, and sure enough, he had been looking at some unbelievably raunchy stuff. He said he was sincere when he promised to give it up, but he just couldn't stay away from it."
 
Just like narcotics, gambling, alcohol and the plethora of other vices tearing down the Christian moral fabric of our societies, pornography has been created and designed to create an immoral dependency, which destroys not only the trust and respect of loved ones, but a person's self respect and trust in himself. It is a tool of those who will dethrone all righteousness and goodness and replace it with the purest of evil.
 
Lucifer's Indulgence: Humankind's Scourge.
 
Sarah Evelyn Isobel Payne [4]was murdered by Roy William Whiting in July 2000. The subsequent investigation became a high profile murder case in the United Kingdom. Following his conviction, Whiting was imprisoned for life and is currently being held in the maximum security Wakefield prison, in West Yorkshire.
 
There is one fact in the disturbing history of Roy Whiting, convicted of the murder of eight year-old Sarah Payne, which has not received much attention. He had kept large quantities of pornography in his garage workshop. Indeed, there is scarcely a sex offender who has not had an acute pornography habit. In America, the FBI has reported that 81 percent of sex killers have said their biggest sexual interest lay in viewing pornography, and in compulsive masturbation. Now, no-one would suggest that pornography alone causes such men to go and commit these terrible offences; and many men who use porn lead otherwise blameless lives.
 
But equally, as the British sex crimes expert, Ray Wyre has observed, pornography creates a climate of thought and belief which influences attitudes towards women and children. What's more, Wyre says, the more men masturbate to pornographic fantasies, the more likely they are to put those fantasies into practice. In other words, porn has an effect on the behaviour of those who use it. Yet many think instead it acts as a safety valve. Unlike fantasies involving violence, sexual pornography is widely thought to be harmless. More than that, `Tatler` magazine now reports that porno-chic is the new fashion statement. After all, our society now runs on sex like a car runs on petrol. TV, films, ads for everything from perfume to ice cream, are all sold on more and more explicit sex. So since sex is no longer taboo, isn't it ridiculous to behave like Mrs Grundy over pornography?
 
After all, the argument goes, English culture has always been bawdy and debauched. Just think of Chaucer's Miller's Tale; or Shakespeare's prostitute Doll Tearsheet; or, indeed, the pornography produced by the Victorians. Who now would ban the works of DH Lawrence, Radclyffe Hall, James Joyce or Henry Miller, all of whom were once considered obscene? Tastes change all the time, along with standards of acceptability. Pornography is a legitimate form of expression which may even do some good, say it's apologists .
 
Such an ostensibly sophisticated view is surely naive and self-deluding. It was fashionable in the sixties and seventies to believe that if people were freed from rules and constraints, they could be trusted to place limits on their own behaviour. But as the feminist Germaine Greer has observed, porn is nothing to do with freedom of expression. It is a ruthless industry which abuses not only those who furnish its imagery but also the men who pay for its product.
 
The Graphic Detail.
 
Today's pornography is no longer a bit of full-frontal nudity and some explicit bumping and grinding. What was illegal merely eighteen months ago - and could only be obtained by means of a package slipped out from the back of some tacky premises - is now legally on open display in licensed sex shops and available through the internet. The spread of computers has hugely increased the availability of pornography, which can be downloaded so easily from the web. What was considered illegal material, amounted to cruelty, degradation and humiliation of women through close-ups of penetration, ejaculation and masturbation. Now such images are all legal.
 
The details are sordid, and will shock many. But it is surely essential that people are aware of what is being tolerated in the name of freedom of expression and of personal choice. For these legal videos do not merely show loveless, sad encounters. They dehumanise sex altogether. There is very little view of faces or indeed any part of the anatomy apart from the genital region. Women and men are reduced to pieces of hydraulic machinery. The action consists mainly of close-ups of anal and vaginal penetration, sometimes simultaneous. Sometimes the girl undergoes double penetration while practising oral sex on a third man, or with more than one man at the same time. The female genital region is always shaved to produce a disturbing simulation of a child; worse still, it is often pulled back so the camera peers right inside it. The impression that fills the screen is of a carcass being rammed in every orifice.
 
What's even more revolting is that in many of these videos the men ejaculate over the girl's face. In one, as the eight or so men she is servicing do this to her, the girl's expression is fixed in a ghastly simulation of pleasure - but for one brief moment when she thinks the camera isn't looking, the mask slips and you see her utter disgust and despair before she resumes her pose. We are told that such girls are consenting adults. But so what? Has our society really arrived at such a pass that if a girl is so damaged that she allows herself to be treated worse than any animal - in effect, as a thing - this is considered acceptable because she is not doing it at knife-point?
 
Do we not care about the terrible degradation not only of the girl, but of the men buying this material, and of our whole society? Are we all now so de-sensitised that we have somehow persuaded ourselves that tolerating such monstrousness is in our interests?
 
The answer is despairingly `YES.` Our societies, hearts and minds are truly in the grip of the `Wicked One.`
 
An Expanding Industry.
 
Thanks to the internet, the sheer volume of pornography has exploded. Tapping in the word 'porn' to one server alone brings up 24,522 sites. These legal websites feature a huge amount of anal sex. This is all about pain and contempt. 'Watch young teens bite their lips as they get it in the ass for the first time!' invites one site. 'Amazing anal - the world's nastiest site', boasts another. Yet another promises: 'It's hurting time: home to extreme pain hardcore'. This displays hot wax poured onto and even pins stuck through women's genitals, and asserts: 'These wenches do it because they love it', fuelling the murderous fantasy that women want to be hurt.
 
There's also heavy emphasis on 'teen sluts'. These are almost certainly older girls pretending to be children, but even so this shades into paedophilia since the pitch is the stomach-heaving fantasy that these are children who will be 'split' open. And all this is legal. You look at these vile images and you wonder what kind of a man could possibly find pleasure or release in them. For it's no longer just the denizens of sleazy Soho who are consumers of hard-core. It's the banker or the teacher or the advertising executive sitting in front of his computer in his neat suburban house or up-market apartment, downloading this viciousness from the web and then going out for a nice meal with his wife or girlfriend.
 
These websites, however, are immensely repetitive and tedious. They invite a credit card subscription on the promise of more extreme material, but then deny access to it unless yet more money is paid. In this way they lead the man on in the hope of finding the ultimate forbidden thrill. So when this doesn't materialise, what could be more inevitable or easy for him than to get into an internet 'chat room' and download illegal paedophile pictures of penetration or oral sex with a child?
 
The illegal stuff on video and on the web is now confined to things like paedophilia, bestiality, torture or coprophilia, which involves bodily waste products. Yet such is the slide in norms of behaviour, the police expect that in due course these taboos too will disappear. So how is all this being allowed to happen? In the UK, the law controlling pornography is the 1959 Obscene Publications Act, which outlaws any material likely to deprave or corrupt. The first problem is the subjective nature of this definition and the absence of any firm evidence of the harm such images can do.
 
Legal Aid.
 
In May 2000, a decision by the UK courts dramatically undermined the restraint the law did offer. Mr Justice Hooper turned down a legal challenge by the British Board of Film Classification, to a decision by its own appeal panel that the Board had been wrong to insist on cuts of explicit sequences before it would license a group of porn videos. As result, the BBFC had to rewrite its own guidelines, which until then had outlawed explicit penetration or ejaculation from the videos it licensed. When board members asked the public for their views, they were told - to their horror - that the public wanted to make their own decision whether or not to view such material.
 
The outcome was that the Board had no option but to issue revised guidelines which they feared would open the floodgates. Just as they predicted, they found themselves licensing the kind of highly disturbing pornography that had previously been illegal. Moreover, these new guidelines rapidly became a benchmark for everyone else. So porn sites on the web started to circulate equally explicit material; top shelf magazines stocked by corner newsagents, started to include equivalent pictures; and TV stations such as Channel Four and Five are now also pushing to take advantage of this shift in practice.
 
A Harmless Diversion?
 
The argument is that pornographic images don't harm anyone as they are merely fantasies. But fantasies of what? Of hurting women? Of humiliating them? Of treating them as dehumanised objects?As the philosopher Roger Scruton argues in his book `Sexual Desire,` fantasy has a tendency to remake the world in its own image. So the 'harmless' porn voyeur can turn into a rapist with a gun. For his fantasy is governed by monstrous myths and illusions - that women wish to be raped, that children are waiting to be awakened to sexual pleasure, or that violence is a natural right.
 
Pornography objectifies women and reduces them to a commodity. Such dehumanisation affects the man's behaviour, ranging from withdrawal of intimacy through to harsh treatment of women, to outright abuse. Dr Trevor Stammers, a GP who has often written about sexual problems, says most women he counsels whose husbands are into porn claim this has destroyed their marriages. The husband prefers to find sexual release from a computer because this doesn't require any personal engagement by him. So he chooses physical sensation without love. 'There is no doubt', says Dr Stammers, 'that as a result of using pornography such men become far more callous towards women. What they are seeking from porn is the illusion of power and control over them'.
 
Research studies back up the suggestion that using pornography badly affects behaviour and relationships. American academics Dolf Zillmann and Jennings Bryant have shown that pornography can diminish a person's sexual happiness, that it damages beliefs about sexuality and attitudes towards women, and that it desensitises people to rape as a criminal offence. An American survey last year showed that more than 200,000 people were effectively addicted to porn through websites and associated chat-rooms. Victor Cline of the University of Utah has documented how men who become addicted to pornography, begin to want more explicit or deviant material, and end up acting out what they have seen.
 
Isn't that to 'deprave and corrupt' by any reasonable understanding of those terms? Yet far from being outlawed, porn is becoming mainstream behaviour. Sado-masochism has its own fashionable clubs. In Britain, Sodomy was made legal for women when the age of homosexual consent was reduced to 16yrs; what was once considered an intolerable assault on women, from which the law should protect them, has now become their 'right.' And urination during sex - the 'golden shower'  is even discussed enthusiastically in teen magazines.
 
Conclusion.
 
What we once believed righteous has been dethroned by that which we once knew to be evil. A world turned on it's head. The very mention that Christianity, or Islam, are the last bastions of virtue and morality causes the majority of people here in the West to `short circuit, ` and close down. The family unit is an endangered species. How many young men and women today even consider that a life of devotion and duty to each other, as man and wife, and to their would be offspring, as parents, is an end in itself? The whole concept of what was not so long ago taken for granted, has become somehow irrelevant and even to a degree redundant.
 
By gratuitously portraying immoral and lewd acts, pornography undercuts or sabotages a persons efforts to discern between what is good and what is not. It is nothing less than a loss of God! There is nothing harmless about pornography. It is exploitive and corrupting. It can and increasingly does destroy relationships, perverting the natural expression of sexual intimacy into a voyeuristic activity. It poisons the mind and spirituality of the voyeur. It promotes selfish, greedy attitudes and teaches people to view others as objects fit only to satisfy their lust. It undermines all efforts to do good and maintain a clean conscience.
 
Truly, pornography is Satan's scourge against mankind, and a major `siege gun` in the Illuminati's plan to dehumanise and depopulate. How far away they are from the setting up of their New World Order with it's `New Feudal` social model and reduced serf class it is hard to say. What is for certain though is that our best hope and defence against this evil scheme is our faith in God and a renewed commitment to the institutions of marriage and family.
 
For it is surely in these we can begin to build the `fortress` of our resistance.
 
Comments to : http://righteousalliance.blogspot.com/2 ... oying.html
 
 
Reference:
 
1] http://righteousalliance.blogspot.com/2 ... -evil.html
 
2] http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/esp_s ... depopu.htm
 
3] http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/bloodlines/index.htm
 
4] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roy_Whiting
 
5] http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/J._Edgar_Hoover
 
6] http://www.google.com/search?q=Dr+Judit ... osoft:en-g
b:IE-SearchBox&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&sourceid=ie7&rlz=1I7GPEA_enDK310
 
7] http://www.divorcewizards.com/Divorce-S ... raphy.html

[brandon dean]

Yeah, another delusional Jew that lays the blame on Nazis. Nope, Jews have nothing to do with pornography, it's the Nazis.  :roll:

delusional, or corrupt?  the way I see it, there are two things US jews want to hide at all costs: their role in the african slave trade, and their role in the media in general, but especially in pornography.  when I was younger, I actually worked as an editor in the movie industry, and the hype is real: they are everywhere.  it is like being in the belly of the beast.  they welcomed military advisers into their sessions with open arms: sessions where these military reps would tell them things like "if you include that scene, we won't let you film our equipment or use our stock footage."  things like that.  in other words, it was openly corrupt--there were few delusions.  at the same time they would have piles of cocaine for these military reps just laid out on tables in the edit bays.

now talking about the belly of the beast: when the post production house I worked at in hollywood was swallowed by Ascent Media, the largest post production corp in the world, I got shuffled to another building they owned, and lasted six months before my supervisor fucked me out of my job to hire his son with no experience.  I was so soured on the industry that I vowed not to work in it anymore.  but one day I was offered a job in the actual porn industry editing and creating the DVDs, or "dvd authoring."  it paid very well, and I'm not proud to say it, but I took the job.  then I really learned what it was like to be in the belly of the beast.  

I became the "art" director for the company I was working for.  the owners were jews.   they promised me all kinds of things that never came to be, and eventually I got sick of it.  I met so many directors and the rest that I know for a FACT that the porn industry is run by jews.  they started it, and they still run it.

that lasted almost two years before I couldn't take any more.  let me tell you, I've seen some fucked up things.  for example, I've seen contracts signed by "actresses" to work in films where the payment was ZERO dollars.  no pressure there, right?  I've seen girls turn around a ball tears as soon as "cut" is called--endless times.  no pressure there, right?

like I said, those two years aren't among the periods of my life I'm proud of, but I can say that eventually it was this moral dilemma which made me decide to quite both industries, and I haven't looked back after almost ten years.

point being: I know from very personal experience the truth behind this article.  it is a terror industry...

whaler, that's a great point about the nazis - hitler actually did away with the moral corruption and decay of the weimar years.  and jewish businessmen were the cause of it.  the exact opposite of what they'd like us to believe.

[Timothy_Fitzpatrick]

That's pretty interesting, Brandon. I think maybe you should write part 2 of this series.

[brandon dean]

That's pretty interesting, Brandon. I think maybe you should write part 2 of this series.

it would be a painful thing to do, but it's worth considering...

[MonkeySeeMonkeyDo]

but one day I was offered a job in the actual porn industry editing and creating the DVDs, or "dvd authoring." it paid very well, and I'm not proud to say it, but I took the job. then I really learned what it was like to be in the belly of the beast.

I became the "art" director for the company I was working for. the owners were jews.

So you're a Jewish ex-smut peddler. How degenerate of you. :sick:

Pray tell, do Jew pornographers just hand over cushy jobs creating their smut films to "Goyim"? :think: I don't think so.

   

[MonkeySeeMonkeyDo]

That's pretty interesting, Brandon. I think maybe you should write part 2 of this series.

it would be a painful thing to do.

I'm sure it would be, having to relive all of those painful experiences you endured getting butt-fucked by your fellow Jew pornographers.  

[Whaler]

Yeah, another delusional Jew that lays the blame on Nazis. Nope, Jews have nothing to do with pornography, it's the Nazis.  :roll:

delusional, or corrupt?  the way I see it, there are two things US jews want to hide at all costs: their role in the african slave trade, and their role in the media in general, but especially in pornography.  when I was younger, I actually worked as an editor in the movie industry, and the hype is real: they are everywhere.  it is like being in the belly of the beast.  they welcomed military advisers into their sessions with open arms: sessions where these military reps would tell them things like "if you include that scene, we won't let you film our equipment or use our stock footage."  things like that.  in other words, it was openly corrupt--there were few delusions.  at the same time they would have piles of cocaine for these military reps just laid out on tables in the edit bays.

now talking about the belly of the beast: when the post production house I worked at in hollywood was swallowed by Ascent Media, the largest post production corp in the world, I got shuffled to another building they owned, and lasted six months before my supervisor fucked me out of my job to hire his son with no experience.  I was so soured on the industry that I vowed not to work in it anymore.  but one day I was offered a job in the actual porn industry editing and creating the DVDs, or "dvd authoring."  it paid very well, and I'm not proud to say it, but I took the job.  then I really learned what it was like to be in the belly of the beast.  

I became the "art" director for the company I was working for.  the owners were jews.   they promised me all kinds of things that never came to be, and eventually I got sick of it.  I met so many directors and the rest that I know for a FACT that the porn industry is run by jews.  they started it, and they still run it.

that lasted almost two years before I couldn't take any more.  let me tell you, I've seen some fucked up things.  for example, I've seen contracts signed by "actresses" to work in films where the payment was ZERO dollars.  no pressure there, right?  I've seen girls turn around a ball tears as soon as "cut" is called--endless times.  no pressure there, right?

like I said, those two years aren't among the periods of my life I'm proud of, but I can say that eventually it was this moral dilemma which made me decide to quite both industries, and I haven't looked back after almost ten years.

point being: I know from very personal experience the truth behind this article.  it is a terror industry...

whaler, that's a great point about the nazis - hitler actually did away with the moral corruption and decay of the weimar years.  and jewish businessmen were the cause of it.  the exact opposite of what they'd like us to believe.

delusional, or corrupt?  the way I see it, there are two things US jews want to hide at all costs: their role in the african slave trade, and their role in the media in general, but especially in pornography.

Yeah,Jews role in Black slavery is a big issue that they want to desperately eradicate from history. The Jews/slavery issue even makes the little Jews rabid because it contradicts their self image. Jews think of themselves as worldly egalitarians fighting for the minorities against the cruel white barbarians...The role of Jews in colonial slavery really throws them for a loop and they short circuit. That's why they went bananas over this Duke video and had youtube remove Duke's channel.

[youtube:32n2pc7v]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vdn5_E-_u_Y[/youtube]32n2pc7v]



Yeah, I've worked for Jews before. They own tons of stuff so it's pretty unavoidable.

[Father Brown]

Well, obviously, Judith Reisman is a Jew.

Look, these people are anarchists. And they don't want to destroy or abolish governments. They live off them being the parasites they are.

They wish to abolish God. They wish to make Vice and Virtue meaningless. They need to abolish Right and Wrong. This gives them more control over people by making them slaves to their so-called "sexual liberation". St. Augustine said, "a man has as many masters as he has vices". Enough said.

But, you need to go back much further than Kinsey. He was the natural evolution of the first modern degenerates within his class. Names like Fraud, I mean Freud, Bernays, Wilhelm Reich, all the freaks from the Frankfurt School, etc. They laid the groundwork for Kinsey, Playboy, and all the other smut that makes men drool and feel guilty once they sober up. These type of men are of no use in battling evil or for standing up for what is right. Because they have been compromised by their own vices.

[Timothy_Fitzpatrick]

Reisman is probably in a constant state of cognitive dissonance herself, demonstrating an obvious concern of the Jewish social-engineering construct while being Jewish herself. Reisman has obviously convinced herself that she can still expose this construct without implicating her own people. While Reisman should be applauded for her battle with Big Pornography, she should also be rebuked for her failure to attack the root cause of this—the international Jew.

Brandon, I think you would do a lot of people a great service by putting your past into the light of day—that is, if you could handle the obvious ridicule that would come from some. But you would be helping people, IMO. Did you get to see the film The Kinsey Syndrome? Check it out. There is a former Penthouse worker who defected and exposed the racket.

FatherBrown said:

They need to abolish Right and Wrong. This gives them more control over people by making them slaves to their so-called "sexual liberation". St. Augustine said, "a man has as many masters as he has vices". Enough said.

Yep, and atheists like MSMD and Yo_Mama also wish to abolish right and wrong. They would have us believe that concepts such as these are repressive. Straight out of the Protocols of Zion! Jews and Atheists have the same ambitions.

But, you need to go back much further than Kinsey. He was the natural evolution of the first modern degenerates within his class. Names like Fraud, I mean Freud, Bernays, Wilhelm Reich, all the freaks from the Frankfurt School, etc. They laid the groundwork for Kinsey, Playboy, and all the other smut that makes men drool and feel guilty once they sober up. These type of men are of no use in battling evil or for standing up for what is right. Because they have been compromised by their own vices.

Yep, just reading about these clowns now in Kevin MacDonald's most excellent book Culture of Critique.

[SPECTEC]

Jews excel because they control both sides when they create these dialectical schemes...its how they capture their goyim for exploitation...Reisman's work is solid...I often refer to it...but I pick up where she leaves off and that is...look for the Jew in the wood pile...nice work TF...interesting story as well, Brandon...so these woman cry after being filmed? Speaks volumes of what's really going on when the camera isn't rolling.

[Timothy_Fitzpatrick]

Jews excel because they control both sides when they create these dialectical schemes...its how they capture their goyim for exploitation...Reisman's work is solid...I often refer to it...but I pick up where she leaves off and that is...look for the Jew in the wood pile...nice work TF...interesting story as well, Brandon...so these woman cry after being filmed? Speaks volumes of what's really going on when the camera isn't rolling.

Thanks.

I don't know about when Brandon was working in the industry, but it's no surprise that the actresses would cry. Do you see what they are forced to do? Jews are telling men that shoving your penis in a woman's mouth so hard that she pukes, is erotic and cool. They tell us that ejaculating on her face and doing her up the ass is cool. These are just a few examples. It gets far, far worse. Our current generation is beyond doomed if they are buying this nonsense.

They set the 'standard' — they make the trends. To hell with them!

[SPECTEC]

You can find pornography in just about any one of these categories...

Sigmund Freud: "Sexual morality is contemptible. I advocate an incomparably freer sexual life....If only Americans knew, we are bringing them the plague!"   

The plague itself...

A paraphilia is a sexual problems where the sexual arousal is in response to objects or stimuli not associated with normal sexual behavior patterns and that may interfere with the establishment of normal sexual relationships.

Diagnostic and Statistical Manual List of Paraphilias
The American Psychiatric Association's Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, the prevailing resource for diagnostic criteria of paraphilias, describes the essential feature of paraphilias as recurrent, intense, sexual urges and sexually arousing fantasies generally involving nonhuman objects, the suffering or humiliation of oneself or partner, or children or other non consenting persons. The DSM-IV-TR describes the more commonly observed paraphilias and makes reference to several other examples. People who experience one paraphilia may also experience other paraphilias. Commonly, people who manifest paraphilias also exhibit personality disorders, drug abuse, alcohol abuse, and other substance abuse problems, or affective disorders.

The DSM-IV-TR lists the following paraphilias:

Exhibitionism: the recurrent urge or behavior to expose one's genitals to an unsuspecting person.

Fetishism: the use of non-sexual or nonliving objects or part of a person's body to gain sexual excitement. Partialism refers to fetishes specifically involving non-sexual parts of the body.

Frotteurism: the recurrent urges or behavior of touching or rubbing against a non-consenting person.

Masochism: the recurrent urge or behavior of wanting to be humiliated, beaten, bound, or otherwise made to suffer.

Sadism: the recurrent urge or behavior involving acts in which the pain or humiliation of the victim is sexually exciting.

Voyeurism: the recurrent urge or behavior to observe an unsuspecting person who is naked, disrobing or engaging in sexual activities, or may not be sexual in nature at all.

Transvestite fetishism: a sexual attraction towards the clothing of the opposite gender.

Chronophilias such as Infantophilia: the sexual attraction to infants; Pedophilia: the sexual attraction to prepubescent children; Gerontophilia: the sexual attraction to the elderly; and sadism: the recurrent urge or behavior involving acts in which the pain or humiliation of the victim is sexually exciting.

Other paraphilias: this is a grouping of rarer paraphilias including such problems as telephone scatalogia (obscene phone calls), necrophilia (corpses), partualism (exclusive focus on one part of the body), zoophilia (animals), coprophilia (feces), klismaphilia (enemas), urophilia (urine).

Special Note: Homosexuality (gay and lesbianism) was previously listed as a paraphilia in the DSM-I and DSM-II, but this was declassified from both DSM-III and DSM-IV, consistent with the change of attitude among psychiatrists and psychologists.  Homosexuality is no longer considered a paraphilia.

List of Paraphilias
The following list represents combinations of greek words, but does not necessarily represent real paraphilias. Some of the sexual interests are well-known such as pedophilia (sexual attraction to children) and sadism and masochism. Other items on this list are rare, if they exist at all, and are not documented in any reliable source.

Abasiophilia: love of (or sexual attraction to) people who use leg braces or other orthopaedic appliances
Acousticophilia: sexual arousal from certain sounds
Acrotomophilia: love of (or sexual attraction to) amputees
Agalmatophilia: sexual attraction to statues or mannequins or immobility
Algolagnia: sexual pleasure from pain
Amaurophilia: sexual arousal by a partner whom one is unable to see due to artificial means, such as being blindfolded or having sex in total darkness. (See: sensory deprivation)
Andromimetophilia: love of women dressed as men
Apodysophilia: desire to undress, see also nudism
Apotemnophilia: desire to have (or sexual arousal from having) a healthy appendage (limb, digit, or male genitals) amputated
Aquaphilia: arousal from water and/or in watery environments, including bathtubs or swimming pools
Aretifism: sexual attraction to people who are without footwear, in contrast to retifism
Asphyxiophilia: sexual attraction to asphyxia; also called breath control play; including autoerotic asphyxiation; see medical warnings
Autogynephilia: love of oneself as a woman (also see Blanchard, Bailey, and Lawrence theory for discussion on controversy)
Biastophilia: sexual pleasure from committing rape
Celebriphilia: pathological desire to have sex with a celebrity.
Coprophilia: sexual attraction to (or pleasure from) feces
Crush fetish: sexual arousal from seeing small creatures being crushed by members of the opposite sex, or being crushed oneself
Dacryphilia: sexual pleasure in eliciting tears from others or oneself
Dendrophilia: sexual attraction to trees and other large plants, popularized by the movie "Superstar" with Molly Shannon
Diaper fetishism: sexual arousal from diapers
Emetophilia (a.k.a. vomerophilia): sexual attraction to vomit
Ephebophilia (a.k.a. hebephilia): sexual attraction towards adolescents
Eproctophilia: sexual attraction to flatulence
Exhibitionism: sexual arousal through sexual behavior in view of third parties (also includes the recurrent urge or behavior to expose one's genitals to an unsuspecting person, known as indecent exposure)
Faunoiphilia: sexual arousal from watching animals mate
Fetishism: is the use of non-sexual or nonliving objects or part of a person's body to gain sexual excitement. Examples include:
Balloon fetishism -- breast fetishism -- foot fetishism (podophilia) -- fur fetishism -- leather fetishism -- lipstick fetishism -- medical fetishism -- panty fetishism -- robot fetishism -- rubber fetishism -- shoe fetishism -- smoking fetishism -- spandex fetishism -- dental braces fetishism -- transvestic fetishism (see below)
Frotteurism: sexual arousal from the recurrent urge or behavior of touching or rubbing against a nonconsenting person
Galactophilia: sexual attraction to human milk or lactating women (incorrect term)
Gerontophilia: sexual attraction towards the elderly
Haematophilia: sexual attraction involving blood (either on a sex partner/attractive person or the liquid itself; not to be confused with haemophilia, a genetic disorder of the blood)
Harpaxophilia: sexual arousal from being the victim of a robbery or burglary
Hematolagnia: sexual attraction to blood
Hybristophilia: sexual arousal to people who have committed crimes, in particular cruel or outrageous crimes
Infantilism: sexual pleasure from dressing, acting, or being treated as a baby
Katoptronophilia: sexual arousal from having sex in front of mirrors.
Klismaphilia: sexual pleasure from enemas
Lust murder: sexual arousal through committing murder
Macrophilia: sexual attraction to larger people and large things (including larger body organs such as breasts and genitalia)
Maiesiophilia: sexual attraction to childbirth or pregnant women
Masochism: is the recurrent urge or behavior of wanting to be humiliated, beaten, bound, or otherwise made to suffer
Microphilia: sexual attraction to smaller people and things of smaller size
Mysophilia: sexual attraction to soiled, dirty, foul or decaying material
Necrophilia: sexual attraction to corpses
Necrozoophilia: sexual attraction to the corpses or killings of animals (also known as necrobestiality)
Nepiophilia: the same as infantophilia sexual attraction to children between the age of 0 - 3 yrs.
Pedophilia: sexual attraction to prepubescent children (British spelling: paedophilia)
Phalloorchoalgolagnia: sexual arousal by the experiencing of painful stimuli being administered to the male genitals.
Pictophilia: sexual attraction to pictorial pornography/erotic art
Plushophilia: sexual attraction to stuffed toys or people in animal costume, such as theme park characters
Pyrophilia: sexual arousal through watching, setting, hearing/talking/fantasizing about fire
Retifism: sexual arousal from shoes
Sadism: sexual arousal from giving pain
Schediaphilia (aka Toonophilia): love (or sexual arousal) to cartoon characters/situations
Sitophilia: sexual arousal from food
Somnophilia: sexual arousal from sleeping or unconscious people
Spectrophilia: sexual attraction to ghosts
Telephone scatologia: being sexually aroused by making obscene telephone calls
Teratophilia: sexual attraction to deformed or monstrous people
Transformation fetish: sexual arousal from depictions of transformations of people into objects or other beings
Transvestic fetishism: is a sexual attraction towards the clothing of the opposite gender (also known as transvestitism)
Trichophilia: love (or sexual arousal) from hair
Urolagnia: sexual attraction to urine
Vorarephilia: sexual attraction to being eaten by, and/or eating, another person or creature
Voyeurism: sexual arousal through watching others having sex (also includes the recurrent urge or behavior to observe an unsuspecting person who is naked, disrobing or engaging in sexual activities, see peeping tom)
Xenophilia: sexual attraction to foreigners (in science fiction, can also mean sexual attraction to aliens)
Zoophilia: emotional or sexual attraction to animals
Zoosadism: the sexual enjoyment of causing pain and suffering to animals
Note: Sadism and masochism are often grouped together, under sadomasochism, or (as a lifestyle interest) BDSM. See also " bondage and discipline" and algolagnia.

[Timothy_Fitzpatrick]

Boy, Freud was one sick piece of shit. Obviously Kinsey was recruited merely to create a gentile front to the Jewish-created sexual revolution. Boas did the same thing in the Jewish-dominated fields of anthropology in the U.S.

The Jew triple threat: Freud, Bernays, and Boas. Ironically, quite a few on this forum subscribe to the theories of Boas.

[brandon dean]

but one day I was offered a job in the actual porn industry editing and creating the DVDs, or "dvd authoring." it paid very well, and I'm not proud to say it, but I took the job. then I really learned what it was like to be in the belly of the beast.

I became the "art" director for the company I was working for. the owners were jews.

So you're a Jewish ex-smut peddler. How degenerate of you. :sick:

Pray tell, do Jew pornographers just hand over cushy jobs creating their smut films to "Goyim"? :think: I don't think so.

   

dude, a box of rocks ain't got nothing on your jew ass.

[brandon dean]

Yeah,Jews role in Black slavery is a big issue that they want to desperately eradicate from history. The Jews/slavery issue even makes the little Jews rabid because it contradicts their self image. Jews think of themselves as worldly egalitarians fighting for the minorities against the cruel white barbarians...The role of Jews in colonial slavery really throws them for a loop and they short circuit. That's why they went bananas over this Duke video and had youtube remove Duke's channel.

exactly.

Yeah, I've worked for Jews before. They own tons of stuff so it's pretty unavoidable.

it's the truth.  especially where I grew up and live.  los angeles has a large jewish population, and, well, they own tons of shit, like you said...

[brandon dean]

St. Augustine said, "a man has as many masters as he has vices". Enough said.

agreed.

[brandon dean]

Brandon, I think you would do a lot of people a great service by putting your past into the light of day—that is, if you could handle the obvious ridicule that would come from some. But you would be helping people, IMO. Did you get to see the film The Kinsey Syndrome? Check it out. There is a former Penthouse worker who defected and exposed the racket.

haha handle the ridicule?  that's not ridicule--it's just the rantings of immature/compromised minds.  monkeyjew has about as much affect on my perspective as an ant-hill.  

Yep, and atheists like MSMD and Yo_Mama also wish to abolish right and wrong. They would have us believe that concepts such as these are repressive. Straight out of the Protocols of Zion! Jews and Atheists have the same ambitions.

...and it's the atheists and anarchists who will be the first thrown under the bus when the "new religion" (according to the protocols) is put into place.

[sirbadman]

I found this thread really interesting - cheers for your insights BD. Another give-away to Jewish involvement in porn is actually stuff like set design. They will use black&white (hypno designs) for dresses, bed spreads, carpets etc, slap crucifixes on the pornstars etc etc.

The Weimar Republic was infected with a lot of sleaze---years of it before WW2 kicked off. Another side show to keep everyone distracted.

[Timothy_Fitzpatrick]

Look what our Zionist-denying researcher Judith Reisman says about Nazis and the Holohoax:

THE PINK SWASTIKA AND HOLOCAUST REVISIONIST HISTORY

by Judith A. Reisman, Ph.D.

The Institute For Media Education

 http://www.drjudithreisman.com/archives/pinkswa.doc

            The greatest sacrilege to the millions of innocent infant and aged Nazi victims, would be allow these dead to be exploited as political fodder to re-arm the same ideologues who ushered in Germany's "final solution".  The Pink Swastika challenges the historical meaning of The Pink Triangle and in doing so, brings light to one of the darkest pages of human history.
 
            Under the banner of The Pink Triangle (a Nazi symbol for incarcerated homosexuals), a mass media campaign by the major broadcasters and press, has been awarding Nazi victim status to homosexuals.  Claiming to have been victimized by the Nazis just like the Jews, pink triangles are sweeping the land, embossed on fancy stationary, upscale check books, flags, posters, stickers, shirts, pins, and the like.  After losing nearly all of my (Jewish) family in the gas chambers during World War II, I was deeply disconcerted when Holocaust museums world wide advertised new exhibits alleging the Nazi mass murder of homosexuals.  One of the complaints of those curating these exhibits has been the dearth of evidence with which to document museum assertions of a Nazi aminus toward homosexuals.  Now, here come the authors of The Pink Swastika: Homosexuality in the Nazi Party, Scott Lively and Kevin Abrams, to document why evidence of a fatal form of Nazi "homophobia" has been uniformly lacking.
 
            Instead of evidence finding Nazism in conflict with homosexuality, Lively and Abrams report the strategies of the German homosexual movement to ensconce National Socialism (the Nazi party) and Adolf Hitler, triggering a holocaust which engulfed all of Europe.  Writing of those days in The Mass Psychology of Fascism, radical German sexologist and Hitler contemporary, Wilhelm Reich, warned that Nazi leadership was both ideologically and actually homosexual.  Almost as an aside, Reich noted Nazi leaders such as "Bluher, Roehm.... Rosenberg" represented Hitler's fascism, which was, Reich said, "a male state organized on a homosexual basis."[1]
 
But, the primary confirmation of The Pink Swastika and Reich, are the formal writings of Adolf Hitler himself, in the bible of the Nazi movement, Mein Kampf[2] [My Struggle].  Here the reader meets up with page after page of Hitler's outspoken hatred of Jews, Marxists, Negroes, Chinese, Arabs, women, and all Eastern Europeans along with his overwhelming worship of power and disdain for Judeo-Christian morality alongside his strategy for world domination.  In his introduction to Mein Kampf,[3] Konrad Heiden reconfirms Hitler's hatred for Christianity, as he viewed the "belief in human equality" to be a Jewish plot, made popular due to "Christian churches".
 
Hitler is documented as classifying who he and Germany should hate.  He hid nothing.  Jews and the like were subhuman, they were "parasites" "vampires," "liars" "cowards," "traitors," among other adjectives.  But, search the Nazi manifesto for any animosity, contempt, much less hatred of homosexuals. To do so is to search in vain.  In point of fact, as Reich knew personally, Hitler eulogized and venerated the archetypal super macho Aryan male, for whom women were seen to serve the role of breeders for the race of supermen.  The Furher's contempt for women is made vivid by the abnormal way in which he used his niece and the few other women close to him, including Eva Braun.
 
Hitler outlined in Mein Kampf who would live and who would die:  He stated who would be slave and who would be master. The Pink Swastika opens his fascist bible to the prototypical Nazi macho homosexual male best expressed today in the widely popular "Tom of Finland" fantasy drawings sold in all homosexual book stores, magazines, as well as in general advertisements for "gay" films and phone sex.  Common are the blond, square jawed muscle men wearing Luftwaffe caps, skin tight black pants, high black polished boots, sporting a black leather strap going from the shoulder diagonally across a hairless, bare, Aryan chest, a whip swishing alongside the hero's slim hips.
 
The authors recall the 1920s post WW1 Weimar Republic, the near starvation and wild currency fluctuations in Germany against the backdrop of the sex and drug "Cabaret" scene of Europe and Gay Berlin.  They point to Berlin's world famous coterie of Bohemian artists, sadosexual transvestites, lesbians and homosexual nightclubs and baths, as well as the rampant control of Berlin by pornographers, organized crime and drug dealers.  In this milieu, reports Elson in Time-Life Books, Prelude to War,[4] thousands of prostitutes walked Berlin's city streets half nude, dressed as "dominatrixes" and school girls, while transvestites and "powered and rouged young men" everywhere sold their wares to financiers and military men alike.
 
The famous German Jewish homosexual sex "scientist," Magnus Hirshfeld, reported that roughly 20,000 boys and youths[5] were prostituted to Germany's flourishing "gay" population. (The British, qua-American homosexual icon, Christopher Isherwood blissfully said of Berlin's 1920's boy brothels, "Berlin is for boys...The German Boy....the Blond").[6]
 
In the midst of such pansexual revelry it could be argued that were Hitler a shy, retiring sort of bookworm, he might not notice the dominating homosexual sensibility and the erotic mix of sexes.  However, Lively and Abrams conclude that as a young aspiring Viennese artist, Hitler would be especially familiar with the artistic homosexual fraternity for Vienna was the hub of Bohemian culture.  Hitler claims to have been destitute, and in the midst of the Cabaret era, he was reduced to living in a men's hostel for down-and outers.  Both male and female prostitution were rife, the younger the better.  Such a poor young artist would have met many "different" and adventurous people whose celebrity, like today, was gilded by an intimacy with homosexuality.  The authors present a reasonable body of evidence to the jury of public opinion, including the possibility that Hitler earned extra cash as a youthful Viennese prostitute, serving a male clientele.
 
In a fascinating read of 204 well documented pages, the authors of The Pink Swastika track down the facts behind the homosexual movement's current claims for Nazi-victim status.  Divided into seven parts, the story opens as the new Nazi party is founded in the smoky din of the Bratwurstglockl, "a tavern frequented by homosexual roughnecks and bully-boys....a gay bar," favored by Hitler's closest comrade, Captain Ernst Rohm.  Almost every biography of Hitler reports that Rohm was a flagrant homosexual and the only man Hitler called by the familiar "du."
 
Hitler's beloved Storm Trooper Chief and founder of the Brown Shirts, the authors note, had a "taste for young boys."  Almost as close to Hitler as Rohm was Rudolph Hess, known for his dress-up attire as "'Black Bertha'" in the gay bars of pre-war Berlin"[7]  In fact, Mein Kampf was dedicated to Hess while Hitler was in prison.  The Pink Swastika reports that Hitler was given power by a homosexual gang, a gang says Dr. Carroll Quigley, President bill Clinton's college teacher and mentor, that subverted Germany's free elections by underhanded and brutal strategies.
 
According to Quigley in Tragedy and Hope (1966) Hitler's intimate friend, Captain Rohm and his trusted homosexual cadre of Storm Troopers staged the famed burning of the Reichstag, along with other bully-boy tactics, to frighten people into supporting the Nazi party and Hitler.  For our purposes here it is useful to see what Quigley says about homosexual Nazi Storm Troopers:
Accordingly....a plot was worked out to burn the Reichstag building and blame the Communists.  Most of the plotters were homosexuals and were able to persuade a degenerate moron from Holland named Van der Lubbe to go with them.  After the building was set on fire, Van der Lubbe was left wandering about in it and was arrested.[8]
This is especially interesting.  The Pink Swastika addresses the many myths surrounding "The Night of the Long Knives" or the "blood purge" when supposedly only homosexuals such as Rohm were murdered by Hitler.  Quigley offers another interesting insight, saying that  "Most of the plotters were homosexual".  He adds that many of those who knew the truth were murdered in March and April while "Most of the Nazis who were in on the plot were murdered by Goring during the "blood purge" of June 30, 1934" (emphasis added).[9]
 
Also, as Lively and Abrams report, it was under Rohm and his Storm Troopers that the records and books of  "the Sex Research Institute," were burned.  The authors reveal that Dr. Magnus Hirschfeld, the Jewish "feminine" homosexual director of the Institute, maintained detailed records of his many court-referred sex offenders, including important Nazi rapists, and homosexual child offenders, pederasts.  Quigley confirmed that Rohm and other key Nazis who knew too much about Hitler's criminal activities were killed for allegedly plotting against Hitler.
 
Lively and Abrams track the role of Rohm in recruiting and training a total of roughly 2.5 to 4.5 million Storm Troopers (SA) and Gestapo (SS) compared to about 100,000 men in the regular German army.  Once the SA was disbanded after the June 1934 blood purge, most of these experienced SA homosexual leaders moved into other power positions in the German military.
 
The authors raise many questions in The Pink Swastika.  If he feared homosexual influence on boys, why did Hitler chose known homosexuals to serve as key youth leaders?  Karl Fischer, a homosexual teacher, began the Wandervogel (a German version of the boy Scouts), which became "The Hitler Youth" in 1933, under a well known pederast, Hans Blueher, who wrote of man-boy "love."  Gerhard Rossbach, homosexual Nazi leader of the Freikorps gave over leadership of the Schill Youth to Edmund Heines, a convicted Nazi pederast, and murder, all under the watchful eye of Adolf Hitler.
 
The Pink Swastika reports that while Hitler and his Gestapo chief, Heinrich Himmler methodologically annihilated all German and European Jews via mass deportations to death camps, beyond political homophobic rhetoric after the Rohm murders, and a demand that men produce children for the Aryan race, Hitler refused to attack "homosexuals."
 
Adolf Brand, a pederast-child pornographer was one of many prominent "butch" advocate homosexuals who continued to live, write and entertain in Germany, untouched by the Nazis.  Other homosexual and bisexual leaders cited by these and other authors included Bladur von Schirach, Hitler Youth Leader; Hans Frank, Hitler's Minister of Justice; Wilhelm Bruckner, Hitler's adjutant; Walther Funk, Hitler's Minister of Economics; friend and advisor Hermann Goering, Hitler's second in command (who dressed "in drag and wore camp make-up"), Hans Kahnert, who founded Germany's largest "Gay rights organization (Society for Human Rights) which counted "SA Chief Ernst Rohm among its members," Edmund Heines, a pederast sadist, Dr. Karl Gunther Heimsoth, a homosexual Nazi who coined the term "homophile," and Julius Streicher, an infamous pornographer and pederast who was very close to Hitler.
 
Most interesting was Emil Maurice, Hitler's close personal secretary and chauffeur.  One of the Rohm purge assassins, apparently Maurice had secured a blackmail strategy that preserved his life until the war's end.  For Lively and Abrams cite Maurice as homosexual, while Mollo, in his history of the SS, portrays Maurice also as Jewish described in a famous photograph:
Hitler and four of his first SS men (a fifth has been erased). L to R: Schaubk, Schreck, Hitler, Maurer and Schneider.  The fifth man was Emil Maurice who was thrown out of the SS in 1935 when found to be a Jew, but later allowed to retain his appointment and privileges, and wear [sic] SS uniform.[10]
A look at another photograph of Hitler finds him voluntarily posing enthusiastically before a massive statue of two nude, muscular men holding hands.  This suggests we ask if Hitler had a sexual relationship with his handsome young chauffeur (a not uncommon arrangement as identified in reports of the time), .  Maurice is identified as the man erased in the SS photograph, his two shoes still quite visible in the picture.  Elsewhere, pictures of Maurice reveal a dark-haired, rather Semitic looking young man.  Could Maurice have been Hitler's Jewish, SS lover?  What a fascinating research question.  The captions read:
[Picture #1] "Hitler in prison with Maurice, Kriebel, Hess and Dr. Fredrich." [Picture #2]  "Common room of Nazi prisoners at Landsberg.  Behind Hitler, Emil Maurice, early companion and chauffeur."[11]
Most histories of World War II (see especially Shirer's The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich) report Hitler's ties to the "notorious" homosexual, Ernst Rohm and other males within his coterie.  The Pink Swastika notes, if anything, that sex laws under Hitler's Reich Minister of the Interior Henrich Himmler were largely tolerant toward the "2 million" Germans Himmler said were registered in homosexual organizations in 1933, for "only repeat offenders can be incarcerated."  "Repeat offenders" meant a fourth public sex offense, or someone who had already served six months in jail for repeated offenses.  In 1940, Himmler reiterated that only "multiple offenders" (largely engaged in sex in a public forum) might be jailed.  However, wrote Himmler, "artists and actors" might escape any penalty, despite how often they were found in compromising situations.[12]
 
During the Hitler era, of roughly 70 million Germans[13], "less than 1%" "hardly one hundredth of all the country's inhabitants" were Jewish, said Hitler.[14]  Morris Ernst, in his book on Kinsey, discussed Hirschfeld's findings:
Germany....with a population of 62,000,000, there were nearly a million and a half men and women [said Hirschfeld]  "whose constitutional predisposition is largely or completely homosexual" Just how big a proportion of his estimated million and a half German homosexuals found their way into Nazi uniforms is not known, of course.  But a good many of them were attracted by the Nazi principles and the society of their fellows in a bond which excluded all women (p. 169-170).
Historical records suggest Germany had perhaps 700,000 Jews[15] versus 2-3 million "registered" homosexuals, according to Himmler.  Whether there were 1 and a half million (Hirschfeld) or 2 to 3 million (Himmler), at most 10,000 German homosexuals were sent to work camps, 6,000 died and 4,000 were released.  The 6,000 homosexual deaths are a minimum of Germans who would have been "fems," despised by the homosexual powered elite as well as collections of homosexuals who were also Jewish, Italian, Asian, Black, Communist, Marxist and the like.  This still leaves estimates of 20,000 male prostitutes unaccounted for with the under 1% of homosexuals largely interned in "work camps," not, the authors note, the "death" camps for Jews and other outcasts.  Lively and Abrams point to the nearly 100% extermination effort by the Nazis toward all captured Jews of all nationalities, gassed or interned in death camps.  The especial concern of Hitler that all good Germans reproduce in order to create an Aryan nation must not be forgotten.  Aryan Germans were expected to breed and it is well known that German breeding farms were established for that purpose.  Non-German homosexuals appear to have been of no interest to the Nazis, for there is no record of any attempts to hunt, arrest or harm foreign homosexuals, for any reason.
 
The evidence strongly suggests these selected German homosexuals were killed for political reasons, versus 566,000 of roughly 700,000 German Jews (85%), 23.5% of all gypsies, 10% of Poles, 12% of Ukrainians, 13.5% of Belorussians.[16].  The German military plot to kill Hitler resulted in the murder of the few men responsible, as well as 7,000 of their family members.  The authors raise some interesting questions, such as where is the record of retaliation for those who hid, hired, nursed and fed persecuted homosexuals? The author's discussions of the "butch" versus "fems" battle raging between German homosexuals and the effect of this internal war on alleged "book burning: and the like, answer many critical questions.
 
In the Rise and Fall of the Third Reich, Shirer said Hitler welcomed "Murderers, pimps homosexual perverts, drug addicts or just plain rowdies."[17]  In fact, even Shirer sidestepped the brazenly homosexual nature of Nazi party pioneers--a critical body of knowledge for any society contending for a civil existence.  The authors cite several million "Butch" type Rohm homosexual Nazis who worked as guards and directors of women's and men's death camps and work camps.  Elie Weisel, the world famous Holocaust survivor, reported witnessing homosexual guards and administrators who "kept" and raped young Jewish boys at will, "there was a considerable traffic in children among homosexuals here, I learned later."[18]
 
Lively and Abrams report that basic mathematics refute the idea that homosexuals were killed for being homosexual.  For were homosexuals treated like Jews, 2-3 million out of 2-3 million German homosexuals should have lost their businesses, their jobs, their property, their possessions and most should have lost their lives.  Homosexuals would have been forced to wear pink triangles on their clothing in the streets, they would have had their passports stamped with an "H," barred from travel, work, shopping, public appearances without their armbands, and we would have thousands of pictures of pink triangle graffiti saying "kill the faggots," and the like.  If German homosexuals were not Nazis, these 2-3 million men would have been homeless, walled into ghettos, worked as a mass labor pool, then gassed and their abuse recorded in graphic detail, as were millions of Jews.  And, if Germany's several million "gays" were not Nazi victims, they were Nazi soldiers, collaborators or murderers.
 
Interviewing SS General Jurgen Stroop and a German policeman, Moczarski, Kazimiers[19] reports on the continued presence of homosexuals in the Nazi hierarchy.
A policeman well acquainted "with Germany's homosexual element [spoke up and said they] kept files on all known and potential pederasts.  He remarked that very few homosexuals in the NSDAP were as "indelicately" treated as was Rohm..."So maybe a few of the fags in the party did get knocked off.  There were plenty of others who made out just fine.  They remained active party members.....got promotions.....[and were] protected by the top NSDAP brass."
The Storm Troopers and the Gestapo were schooled in what the authors call the "Hellenistic" Greek ideal of man-youth-pedagogy.  Concerned about the man-boy aspect of homosexuality, The Pink Swastika connects-the-dots for readers from the homosexual power structure in Germany to the current social debate in the United States.  The naked, copulatory San Francisco "gay rights" parades, the violent homosexual burning of buildings when Governor Pete Wilson originally refused gay minority rights, the bullying attacks on Cardinal O'Conner and former HHS Secretary Louis Sullivan and scores of others, note the authors, are a replay of the homoerotic Nazis.
 
Our own research on Heterosexual v. Homosexual Partner Solicitation Language (The Advocate v. The Washingtonian), as noted earlier, regularly finds men and boys pictured in naked Fascist chic, strutting the black Luftwaffe cap, boots, whips and black leather--Fascist sadism.. While Lively and Abrams cite at least 160 ex-gay organizations nationwide which identify sex abuse, neglect and authoritarian trauma as triggering homosexual conduct, on the evidence, a post-World War II Fascist model is afoot in American schools under the protective cover of "AIDS Prevention" and "gay youth" protection, controlled largely by adult homosexual activists.
 
Parallel with these subversive activities is the effort to divorce children from their parents, by painting the fatal and lonely life of homosexuality with a patina of heroism and martyrdom, via mass media, institutional education and law (the privilege of marriage being a recent assault) undermining America's survival as the international standard barer of a Judeo-Christian moral order.  Lively and Abrams are concerned, and I would conceded properly so, that idealistic "gay youth" groups are being formed and staffed in classrooms nationwide by recruiters too similar to those who formed the original "Hitler youth". The Pink Swastika authors draw our attention to the need to forcefully reverse the flood of "gay rights" legislation or face a massive increase in children dedicated to the exploitive and heartbreaking "gay life" with all that implies for the child and society.
 
The Pink Swastika finds that serious "Judeo-Christians" are the likely targets of this resurgent homosexual movement.  In 1934, all German school children were receiving textual, verbal and cinematic classroom indoctrination into Fascism.  By 1936, sexuality advocate, Wilheim Reich warned that the wide availability and juvenile use of pornography was creating heterophobic German children--boys and girls who feared and distrusted the opposite sex[20].  The homosexual fight for Nazi victim status comes directly on the heels of our exposé of forty years of corrupt and cynical manipulation of the fraudulent "10%" of homosexuality data established by Dr. Alfred Kinsey and Co. (Kinsey, Sex and Fraud, Reisman and Eichel).  Recently, Newsweek challenged the fraudulent Kinsey data, asking, "How Many Gays Are There?" while the Wall Street Journal faced up to "Homosexuals and the 10% Fallacy."
 
Recent admissions by Dr. John Bancroft, the new Kinsey Institute Director[21] of Kinsey's reliance and use of a homosexual pederast to obtain Kinsey's child sex data raises the specter that a homosexual/pederast biased male research base has become the foundation of current sexual attitudes, education, conduct, law and public policy.  As no other sex researcher has ever reported his or her laboratory experiments on children to determine their sexual capacity, Kinsey remains the citation for all such scientific claims.  To that end, H.R. 2749, "The Child Protection and Ethics in Education Act of 1995" was introduced by Congressman Steve Stockman, December 1995, to begin to investigate that possibility.  The price we now are paying for decades of Kinsey's claims of infant and child sexuality and his 10% homosexuality data, can never be calculated.
 
Now the homosexual press regularly reports that scores of "closet" lesbians and homosexuals are in place to resurrect homosexuality, reshaping the nation's ideals of child, marriage, justice, research, law, health, sexuality, crime and public policy from the old bi/homosexual sensibility.  If it is true that institutional Judaism capitulated to homosexual pressure in Holocaust museums worldwide, awarding Nazi victim status to the macho male ideology which launched the Holocaust,[22] what does growing homosexual power mean to their memory, and to the way homosexual power will exert itself in the future?
 
The Pink Swastika is both an excellent course in Nazi history, and an excellent warning for the future of our nation.  Historical research like this should be pouring out from our institutions of higher learning.  That universities are captured by "politically correct" homosexual/feminism only proves how dangerous fraud in science has been and continues to be for our nation.  Lively and Abrams have done a yeoman's job in bringing this controversial and important information to the public forum.  The book should be purchased in quantity and distributed as widely as possible, for woe unto our nation should we ignore the warning of James Madison in 1832: "A popular Government, without popular information, or the means of acquiring it, is but a Prologue to a Farce or a Tragedy; or perhaps both."[23] The Pink Swastika is critically needed popular information in the current Culture War, lest America become a Farce or a Tragedy or perhaps both.

Source: http://www.whale.to/b/reisman.html

[Timothy_Fitzpatrick]

"Interestingly, although recent scholarship is unanimous that Freud had an intense Jewish identity, Freud took pains to conceal this identity from others because of a concern that his psychoanalytic movement would be viewed as a specifically Jewish movement and thus be the focus of anti-Semitism. Whereas his private correspondence is filled with a strong sense of Jewish ethnic identity, his public statements and writings exhibited a "generally guarded, distanced tone" (Yerushalmi 1991, 42), indicating an effort at deception. Freud also attempted to downplay in public the extent to which Judaism pervaded his family"

"Deception is also indicated by the evidence that Freud felt that one reason psychoanalysis needed highly visible gentiles was because he viewed psychoanalysis as subverting gentile culture. After publishing Little Hans in 1908, he wrote to Karl Abraham that the book would create an uproar: "German ideals threatened again! Our Aryan comrades are really completely indispensable to us, otherwise psychoanalysis would succumb to anti-Semitism" (in Yerushalmi 1991, 43).

"Many early proponents viewed psychoanalysis as a redemptive messianic movement that would end anti-Semitism by freeing the world of neuroses produced by sexually repressive Western civilization. Klein shows that some of Freud's closest associates had a very clearly articulated conception of psychoanalysis as a Jewish mission to the gentiles—what one might view as a uniquely modern version of the ancient "light of the nations" theme of Jewish religious thought very common among intellectual apologists of Reform Judaism during the same period."

"Thus for Otto Rank, who developed a close father-son relationship with Freud, Jews were uniquely qualified to cure neurosis and act as the healers of humanity (Klein 1981, 129). Developing a variant of the perspective Freud used in Totem and Taboo and Civilization and Its Discontents, Rank argued that whereas other human cultures had repressed their primitive sexuality in the ascent to civilization, "Jews possessed special creative powers since they had been able to maintain a direct relation to 'nature,' to primitive sexuality" (Klein 1981, 129).97 Within this perspective, anti-Semitism results from the denial of sexuality, and the role of the Jewish mission of psychoanalysis was to end anti- Semitism by freeing humanity of its sexual repressions. A theoretical basis for this perspective was provided by Freud's Three Essays on the Theory of Sexuality, in which aggression was linked with the frustration of drives.

Excerpts from Kevin MacDonald - Culture of Critique, pages 110-111

[Timothy_Fitzpatrick]

So, from the above passages from MacDonald, it seems quite obvious to me that Alfred Kinsey was the gentile front that Freud used to sell his sexual revolution. Am I off base here?

[Timothy_Fitzpatrick]

As in the case of several Jewish movements and political activities reviewed in Chapters 2 and 3 (see also SAID, Ch. 6), Freud took great pains to ensure that a gentile, Jung, would be the head of his psychoanalytic movement—a move that infuriated his Jewish colleagues in Vienna, but one that was clearly intended to deemphasize the very large overrepresentation of Jews in the movement during this period. To persuade his Jewish colleagues of the need for Jung to head the society, he argued, "Most of you are Jews, and therefore you are incompetent to win friends for the new teaching. Jews must be content with the modest role of preparing the ground. It is absolutely essential that I should form ties in the world of science" (in Gay 1988, 218). As Yerushalmi (1991, 41) notes, "To put it very crudely, Freud needed a goy, and not just any goy but one of genuine intellectual stature and influence." Later, when the movement was reconstituted after World War I, another gentile, the sycophantic and submissive Ernest Jones, became president of the International Psychoanalytic Association.

Page 110, Culture of Critique —Kevin MacDonald

The cure for the aggression characteristic of anti-Semitism was therefore believed to lie in freeing gentiles from their sexual repressions. Although Freud himself eventually developed the idea of a death instinct to explain aggression, a consistent theme of the Freudian critique of Western culture, as exemplified for example by Norman O. Brown, Herbert Marcuse, and Wilhelm Reich, has been that the liberation of sexual repressions would lead to lowered aggression and usher in an era of universal love.
It is therefore of interest that when Jung and Alfred Adler were expelled from the movement for heresy, the issue that appears to have been most important to Freud was their rejection of the interrelated ideas of the sexual etiology of neurosis, the Oedipal complex, and childhood sexuality.

This belief in the curative powers of sexual freedom coincided with a leftist political agenda common to the vast majority of Jewish intellectuals of the period and reviewed throughout this book. This leftist political agenda proved to be a recurrent theme throughout the history of psychoanalysis. Support of radical and Marxist ideals was common among Freud's early followers, and leftist attitudes were common in later years among psychoanalysts (Hale 1995, 31; Kurzweil 1989, 36, 46-47, 284; Torrey 1992, 33, 93ff, 122-123), as well as in Freudian inspired offshoots such as Erich Fromm, Wilhelm Reich (see below) and Alfred Adler. (Kurzweil [1989, 287] terms Adler the leader of "far left" psychoanalysis, noting that Adler wanted to immediately politicize teachers as radicals rather than wait for the perfection of psychoanalysis to do so.) The apex of the association between Marxism and psychoanalysis came in the 1920s in the Soviet Union, where all the top psychoanalysts were Bolsheviks, Trotsky supporters, and among the most powerful political figures in the country (see Chamberlain 1995). (Trotsky himself was an ardent enthusiast of psychoanalysis.) This group organized a government-sponsored State Psychoanalytical Institute and developed a program of "pedology" aimed at producing the "new Soviet man" on the basis of psychoanalytic principles applied to the education of children. The program, which encouraged sexual precocity in children, was put into practice in state-run schools.

page 113-114, Culture of Critique —Kevin MacDonald

[Timothy_Fitzpatrick]

The  Oedipal complex as scientific fraud

The theory of the Oedipal complex, childhood sexuality, and the sexual etiology of the neuroses—the three central doctrines that underlie Freud's radical critique of gentile culture—play absolutely no role in contemporary mainstream developmental psychology. From the standpoint of evolutionary theory, the idea that children would have a specifically sexual attraction to their opposite sex parent is highly implausible, since such an incestuous relationship would result in inbreeding depression and be more likely to result in disorders caused by recessive genes (see MacDonald 1986). The proposal that boys desire to kill their fathers conflicts with the general importance of paternal provisioning of resources in understanding the evolution of the family (MacDonald 1988a; 1992): Boys who had succeeded in killing their fathers and having sex with their mothers would not only be left with genetically inferior offspring, but also be deprived of paternal support and protection. Modern developmental studies indicate that many fathers and sons have very close, reciprocated affectional relationships beginning in infancy, and the normative pattern is for mothers and sons to have very intimate and affectionate, but decidedly nonsexual, relationships.

The continued life of these concepts in psychoanalytic circles is testimony to the continuing unscientific nature of the entire enterprise. Indeed, Kurzweil (1989, 89) notes "In the beginning, the Freudians tried to 'prove' the universality of the Oedipus complex; later on, they took it for granted. Ultimately, they no longer spelled out the reasons for the pervasiveness of childhood sexuality and its consequences in the cultural monographs: they all accepted it."103 What started out as a speculation in need of empirical support ended up as a fundamental a priori assumption.

Research inspired by these basic Freudian tenets ceased long ago and in a sense never started: Fundamentally, psychoanalysis has not inspired any significant research on these three basic Freudian constructs. Interestingly, there is evidence that Freud fraudulently portrayed the data underlying these concepts. Esterson (1992, 25ff; see also Crews 1994) convincingly argues that Freud's patients did not volunteer any information on seduction or primal scenes at all.

The seduction stories that provide the empirical basis of the Oedipal complex were a construction by Freud, who then interpreted his patients' distress on hearing his constructions as proof of the theory. Freud then engaged in deception to obscure the fact that his patients' stories were reconstructions and interpretations based on an a priori theory. Freud also retroactively changed the identity of the fancied seducers from nonfamily members (such as servants) because the Oedipal story required fathers. Esterson provides numerous other examples of deception (and self-deception) and notes that they were typically couched in Freud's brilliant and highly convincing rhetorical style. Both Esterson (1992) and Lakoff and Coyne (1993, 83-86) show that Freud's famous analysis of the teenage Dora (in which her rejection of the pedophilic sexual advances of an older married man is attributed to hysteria and sexual repression) was based entirely on preconceived ideas and circular reasoning in which the patient's negative emotional response to the psychoanalytic hypothesis is construed as evidence for the hypothesis. Freud engaged in similar deceptive reconstructions in an earlier phase of his theory construction when he believed that seductions had actually occurred (Powell & Boer 1994). It was a methodology that could produce any desired result.

A particularly egregious tendency is to interpret patient resistance and distress as an indication of the truth of psychoanalytic claims. Of course, patients were not the only ones who resisted psychoanalysis, and all other forms of resistance were similarly an indication of the truth of psychoanalysis. As Freud himself noted, "I am met with hostility and live in such isolation that one must suppose I had discovered the greatest truths" (in Bonaparte, Freud & Kris 1957, 163). As we shall see, resistance to psychoanalytic "truth" on the part of patients, deviating psychoanalysts, and even entire cultures was viewed as a sure sign of the truth of psychoanalysis and the pathology of those who resisted.

Because of this reconstructive, interpretive manner of theory construction, the authority of the psychoanalyst became the only criterion of the truth of psychoanalytic claims—a situation that leads quite naturally to the expectation that the movement, in order to be successful, would necessarily be highly authoritarian. As indicated below, the movement was authoritarian from the beginning and has remained so throughout its history.

Notice that the interpretive, hermeneutic basis of theory construction in psychoanalysis is formally identical to the procedures of Talmudic and Midrashic commentaries on scripture (Hartung 1995; see PTSDA, Ch. 7). Psychoanalysts have tended to suppose that consistency with observable facts is an adequate criterion for a scientifically acceptable causal explanation. Psychoanalysts "inhabit a kind of scientific preschool in which no one divulges the grown-up secret that successful causal explanation must be differential, establishing the superiority of a given hypothesis to all of its extant rivals" (Crews 1994, 40; italics in text). As indicated in Chapter 6, the development of consensual theories consistent with observable reality but without any scientific content is a hallmark of twentieth-century Jewish intellectual movements.

Any theorist on the contemporary scientific scene who proposed that children are normally sexually attracted to their opposite sex parent would be ostracized for providing a psychological basis for supposing that children would seek such contact. A glaring mistake that persists throughout Freud's writings is the systematic conflation of sexual desire and love (see MacDonald 1986): "From the very first, in psychoanalysis, it has seemed better to speak of these love impulses as sexual impulses" (in Wittels 1924, 141)—a comment that suggests the self-conscious nature of this conflation as well as indicates the casual manner in which psychoanalysts have framed their hypotheses. Indeed, Freud conflated all types of pleasure as fundamentally different manifestations of an underlying and unitary but infinitely transformable sexual pleasure, including the oral gratification resulting from breast feeding, anal gratification resulting from defecation, sexual gratification, and love. Contemporary researchers have often proposed that affectional ties between parents and children are developmentally important and that children actively seek these ties. However, modern theory and data, and certainly an evolutionary approach, provide absolutely no support for identifying affectional ties with sexual desire or with supposing that affectional ties are sublimated or redirected sexual desire. Modern approaches support instead a discrete systems perspective in which sexual desire and affection (and other sources of pleasure) involve quite separate, independent systems. From an evolutionary perspective, the powerful affectional (love) relationships between spouses and between parents and children function as a source of social cohesiveness whose ultimate purpose is to provide a high level of support for children (see MacDonald 1992).

This conflation between sexual desire and love is also apparent in many of Freud's psychoanalytic successors, including Norman O. Brown, Wilhelm Reich, and Herbert Marcuse, whose works are reviewed below. The common thread of these writings is that if society could somehow rid itself of sexual repressions, human relations could be based on love and affection. This is an extremely naive and socially destructive viewpoint, given the current research in the field. Psychoanalytic assertions to the contrary were never any more than speculations in the service of waging a war on gentile culture.

Kevin MacDonald, Culture of Critique, pages 121-123.

[Timothy_Fitzpatrick]

And Judith Reisman doesn't even so much as whisper Sigmund Freud's name in her "expose" of the sexual revolution. All of her focus is on the alleged Pink Nazis and the gentile frontman for psychoanalysis, Alfred Kinsey.

Freud (Jewry) popularizes sexual perversion, Reisman takes it an lays the blame of it on the doorstep of gentile culture. Brilliant!

[CrackSmokeRepublican]

The amount of time wasted and lives destroyed with this  J-crap is immeasurable... thanks for posting Tim. Shows the "Blame the Gentiles" coverup is always ongoing by them as well...

[Timothy_Fitzpatrick]

Interestingly, you don't see TIU's Marxist-Nihilist crew commenting on threads like this. I guess the Jewish connections to their religion are too overt on this one.

[Timothy_Fitzpatrick]

Reisman's latest, as featured on Jeff Rense today. I am going to write part two of this series on my blog shortly. Notice Reisman's continuous use of the oxymoronic "Judeo-Christian."

Sexual anarchy: The Kinsey legacy

BY JUDITH A. REISMAN, PH.D. AND MARY E. MCALISTER, ESQ.

August 24, 2011 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Our children are under attack by an insidious and virulent enemy.

On August 17, 2011, more than 50 activists attended a conference for "minor-attracted adults," i.e., pedophiles, which sought to eliminate the "stigma" attached to pedophilia and to redefine pedophilia as a normal "sexual orientation." The United States Department of Justice has determined that 64 percent of forcible sodomy victims are boys under the age of 12 and that 58,200 children were kidnapped by non-family members in 1999.

So-called "experts" in the field of human sexuality claim that children are sexual not only from birth, but even in the womb and are willing participants in sexual acts with adults.

Children are encouraged to experiment with sex early and often and to engage in sex with members of the same-sex as well as the opposite sex. Sexually transmitted diseases among teenagers are at epidemic proportions, and new and sometimes fatal strands of diseases are being reported. More than 50,000 teens have contracted HIV which has advanced to full blown AIDS and by 1992 more than 7,000 boys and 1,500 girls have died from HIV/AIDS.

How did we get here? How do we stop the madness before we lose an entire generation?

The question of how we got here can be answered by two words: Alfred Kinsey. Even 55 years after his death, Dr. Alfred C. Kinsey continues to profoundly affect American culture. Two of his most ardent supporters, Dr. Carol Vance, Columbia University anthropologist and lesbian activist, and Dr. John Money, an "out" pedophile advocate and pioneer of transgender surgery at Johns Hopkins, have cogently summed up Dr. Kinsey's legacy – a legacy they consider sexual "progress" but is in reality sexual anarchy.

Speaking at a 1998 Kinsey symposium of fellow sexologists at San Francisco State University, Dr. Vance said, "Biography is the battleground."[1] Should Kinsey be discredited, she warned, "200 years of sexual progress can be undone."

Dr. Vance's statements echo comments made in 1981 by Dr. Money at the 5th World Congress of Sexology in Israel. They also agreed that the information contained in Table 34, below, and the other data chronicling Kinsey's and his team's widespread child abuse, described in detail in Kinsey's 1948 study on male sexuality, would be the undoing of the "Pre and Post Kinsey eras" globally and in the USA.

In fact, Dr. John Bancroft, director of the Kinsey Institute said at the 1998 conference, which commemorated the 50th anniversary of Kinsey's studies, that he "prayed" that a British television program, "Secret History: Kinsey Paedophiles," would never be shown in the United States because the public would not understand the "science" involved in Kinsey's publication of tables 30-34. He understood that should those tables be widely publicized in the United States, then the whole field of human sexuality and human sex education would be destroyed.

This field of human sexuality and human sex education and 200 years of "sexual progress" that these elite "scientists" were so worried would be destroyed is better described as sexual anarchy. This sexual anarchy that has given these scientists and their followers prestige, money, credibility and control over the deconstruction of the Judeo-Christian civil society was crafted by Dr. Kinsey.

A gall-wasp zoologist at Indiana University from 1920 to his death in 1956, Dr. Kinsey is most famous for his earth-shaking books, Sexual Behavior in the Human Male (1948)[2] and Sexual Behavior in the Human Female (1953),[3] funded by Indiana University and the Rockefeller Foundation. Dr. Kinsey said that his mission was to eliminate the sexually "repressive" legal and behavioral legacy of Judeo Christianity. He claimed that this "repressive" sexual legacy was responsible for socio-sexual ills like divorce, rape, illegitimacy, venereal disease, juvenile delinquency, promiscuity, homosexuality, adultery, and child sexual abuse.

Furthermore, he argued that if we Americans would admit that we really were engaged in widespread licentious conduct, instead of hypocritically denying it, then these socio-sexual ills would be dramatically reduced.

In large measure, Dr. Kinsey's mission has been accomplished, mostly posthumously, by his legion of true believers–elitists who have systematically brainwashed their fellow intellectual elites to adopt Kinsey's pan-sexual secular worldview and jettison the Judeo Christian worldview upon which this country was founded and flourished.

The result of Dr. Kinsey's mission has been totally antithetical to the utopia he predicted. Instead of reducing the socio-sexual ills that he claimed were rampant in pre-Kinsey America, the implementation of the Kinsey worldview has increased extant global sexual trauma while ushering in a host of new ills that are objectively defined as sexual anarchy. Like a cancer spreading throughout the body, sexual anarchy has spread throughout the fabric of society, affecting every aspect of American life and every man, woman and child.

According to the Rockefeller-funded Kinsey "study," his "science" proved that humans had all along been copulating like insects or monkeys but systematically and hypocritically lying about their conduct. Adults claimed they were virgins, or maritally faithful, but, according to Kinsey, the truth was that most people were promiscuous and the widespread promiscuity had done no harm to the civil society.

Therefore, Kinsey said, all of the laws restraining sexual behavior–the laws that had favored and protected women, children and the family for generations –were simply old-fashioned leftovers from an uninformed and hypocritical era. Such sex laws were no longer valid in a "sexually enlightened and honest era."

Enter "Kinsey's pamphleteer," Hugh Hefner and his Playboy magazine. At Kinsey's urging, the country's laws were gutted to resemble the free love, free life style Kinsey alleged Americans were living all along, and could finally live out with a free and open spirit–no more lies or pretense. Thus the 1955 American Law Institute Model Penal Code jettisoned the "common law" sexual standards that were based upon Biblical authority/precedent for "scientific law" based on Kinsey's allegedly "objective data."

The ALI recommended laws trivializing rape and allowing fornication, cohabitation, sodomy and adultery. Shortly thereafter, fornication, cohabitation and adultery were decriminalized so that they would become common, normal, and harmless, as Kinsey said they had been all along. In 1957, the United States Department of Defense used Kinsey and his team to conclude that homosexuals do not pose a security risk.

The ALI also recommended changing the definition of obscenity, which the Supreme Court did in 1960. That same year Kinsey's claim that 10% to 37% of the male population is at least sometimes homosexual was used to promote "gay rights" in elite professions, e.g., medicine, psychiatry, social work, education, etc.

In 1961, Illinois became the first state to legalize heterosexual sodomy. In 1962 Ralph Slovenko wrote in the Vanderbilt Law Review that four or five year olds are provocateurs: "Even at the age of four or five, this seductiveness may be so powerful as to overwhelm the adult into committing the offense."

That same year, the United States Supreme Court declared prayer in public schools unconstitutional[4] and the following year declared that Bible reading in public schools was unconstitutional.[5] The Judeo-Christian worldview was expunged from the classroom. Schools could no longer teach that fornication, adultery or cohabitation were illegal, nor could the health teachers imply that sex should be confined to marriage because that would reflect a "religious," thus allegedly a non-scientific, worldview.

The only avenue remaining for the teaching of human reproduction was the "scientific," i.e., Kinseyan, secular worldview.

By 1968 over 51,000 sex professionals had been trained by the unaccredited IASHS (Institute for the Advanced Study of Human Sexuality) to teach Kinseyan sexuality in schools and medical schools and to design school sex education curricula. In 1975, the IASHS began to accredit sex educators in "safe sex" through the Ph.D. level.

Contraception became a necessity in the face of the radical changes in the sexual landscape, and so it was legalized in 1965.[6]


As evidence of lack of "consent" became the only criteria for sex crimes, alleged rape victims were commonly challenged as "liking" the rough sex and as consenting to the sexual activity. Prostitution and rape were increasingly referred to as "victimless crimes" in the courts and in the media.

Thus, the right to have sex for 'fun' and profit became the justification for a sex industry, inaugurated by Kinsey's publicist, Hugh Hefner, that includes child and adult pornography, exhibitionism, prostitution and strip clubs, to name a few. That industry has grown to a multi-billion dollar market, giving its purveyors the resources and clout to negotiate grants to sexology research groups and organizations that create the sex education curricula for the nation's schools, as well as access to lobbyists and, arguably, to state and federal legislators to continue to change the law to favor the sex industry's interests.

Playboy, et. al also have funded Planned Parenthood, Sex Information & Education Council of the United States (SIECUS), the Kinsey Institute, and other "sexology" institutions. In 1967, Playboy provided the first of many grants to the ACLU to support drug use, pornography, abortion, homosexuality, school sex [mis]education and the elimination or reduction of sex offender penalties. Beginning in 1970, Playboy officially granted funds to NORML, the National Organization for the Repeal of Marijuana Laws.

The year 1969 brought about significant events related to the systematic effort to normalize homosexuality as championed by Kinsey 21 years earlier. The Gay Liberation Front was formed at the New York Alternative University. The American Sociological Association officially stated that homosexuality is normal, citing Kinsey's "research." The National Institutes of Mental Health Task Force on Homosexuality recommended legalizing private consensual homosexual acts (sodomy) citing to Kinsey's "data."[7] In 1972, the NIMH Task Force, led by Kinseyan disciples, urged that homosexuality be taught as a normal sexual variation in the nation's schools.

"No fault" divorce was ushered in by California in 1970. By 1985, no fault divorce was the law in 49 states. This triggered a massive increase in the divorce rate and the impovertization of women and children, increasing the need for welfare and abortion, with the latter legalized in 1973.[8]

The absence of fathers in the home decreased the economic, social, emotional and spiritual home life, which triggered epidemic child sexual abuse, increased promiscuity, increased criminality–including rape and prostitution–increased venereal diseases and sterility in young women. With no father in the home, children were significantly more vulnerable to molestation by older children, which was redefined as "harmless" peer sex play by Kinsey. This "harmless" sex play led to increased rates of venereal disease, promiscuity, homosexual acting out and suicide.

These disorders then opened the door to additional, more virulent forms of mandated sex [mis]education couched as "pride" in one's sexual "orientation," anti-bullying, AIDS prevention and more instruction in "safe sex," including mutual masturbation, oral and anal sodomy and viewing pornography.

By 1981 Dr. Mary Calderone, SIECUS president and past medical director of Planned Parenthood, took Kinsey one step further, asserting that children are sexual in the womb (Kinsey said children were sexual from birth).

Calderone announced that awareness of childhood sexuality was a primary goal of her organization. This set the "scientific" standard for distributing condoms to children nationwide. Therapeutic interventions were instituted to aid the now increasingly traumatized youth. Pharmocological intervention also increased, including mandated Hepatitis B vaccines for infants and HPV vaccines for elementary age children as STD "protections," both of which were advocated in a 1977 "Child Rights" pedophile manifesto.

Hundreds of pages could be written on these issues and the additional fallout from Kinsey's successful promiscuity propaganda that plummeted Reagan's shining City on a Hill into a state of sexual anarchy.

We must focus now on how we stop the madness – not by ignoring the problem or by giving up in despair. God is on our side, just as He was on the side of those who founded this country. God used 56 God-fearing men to stand up to the largest imperial force in the free world and birth this great nation. He can use us to stand up against the current state of sexual anarchy, return this nation to our Judeo-Christian roots and rescue our children from the enemy who seeks to steal, kill and dstroy. As beneficiaries of God's miraculous creation of these United States we cannot do anything less. Kinsey and his disciples at the Kinsey Institute have had more than 60 years to re-shape American culture. With Dr. Reisman's decades of research we have the weapons to gain the upper hand, and we must band together to create the Judeo-Christian answer to the Kinsey Institute. We have the backing of the God of the universe. We can and must win this battle.

Notes:

1
"Biography has become a battleground as moral conservatives like Dr. Judith Reisman strive to discredit
Alfred Kinsey in order to revisit another America era" warned Professor Carole Vance. Another infamous sexologist stated, "I have some problems, and I'm sure several of us do, with the use of the word "normal." If you look at sexual abuse in children, the problem with defining it is, to what extent are we talking about aspects of behavior that we would call wrong....we don't know really how harmful those experiences are...." (November 6, 1998, San Francisco State University seminar, "Kinsey At 50: Reflections On Changes In American Attitudes About Sexuality Half A Century After The Alfred Kinsey Studies," lionizing Kinsey and addressing anarchist strategies for a new global sexual future).

2
In the same year, Carnegie Foundation funds the ABA/ALI Legal Education Committee. Other pro-Kinsey
books are published calling for sex law reforms and leniency for perpetrators.

3
In that year, the Reece congressional committee was prohibited from investigating Kinsey's data. Also, Planned Parenthood is founded in Washington, D.C.

4
Engel v. Vitale, 370 U.S. 421 (1962).

5
Abington School District v. Schempp, 372 U.S. 203 (1963).

6
Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479 (1965) (married couples), Eisenstadt v. Baird, 405 U.S. 438 (1972)
(unmarried couples).

7
The Supreme Court upheld the criminalization of sodomy in Bowers v. Hardwick, 478 U.S. 186 (1986), but
then overturned Bowers and found that homosexual sodomy could no longer be criminalized in Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. 558 (2003). Lawrence was based largely on the 1955 ALI Model Penal Code, which has been widely referred to as a Kinsey document.

8
Roe v. Wade, 410 US 113 (1973). As Justice Kennedy noted in the Lawrence opinion, Griswold and
Eisenstadt were part of the background for the opinion in Roe. Lawrence, 539 U.S. at 565. This illustrates how Kinsey's legacy has permeated every aspect of society.

Source: http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/sexual ... legacy/%CA