Could the nation do without the Jewish industry of Filmed Prostitution (Pornography)?
Jewish Professor Says Porn Industry is a Weapon used by Jews Against Gentiles 'Pornography': To film prostitution. Over 90% of pornographers and porn actors are jewish.
In a respected and scholarly magazine of Jewish intellectuals, (The Jewish Quarterly, winter 2004) Jewish professor Nathan Abrams in an article titled, "Triple Exthnics," proudly documents the leading role of Gentile-hating Jews in pornography.
"A story little told is that of Jews in Hollywood's seedier cousin, the adult film industry. Perhaps we'd prefer that the 'triple exthnics' didn't exist, but there's no getting away from the fact that secular Jews played (and still continue to play) a disproportionate role throughout the adult film industry in America. Jewish involvement in pornography has a long history in the United States, as Jews have helped transform a fringe subculture into what has become a primary constituent of Americana. These are the 'true blue' Jews. Jewish activity in the porn industry divides into two (sometimes overlapping) groups: pornographers and performers. Though Jews make up only two per cent of the American population, they have been prominent in pornography. In the postwar era, America's most notorious pornographer was Reuben Sturman, the 'Walt Disney of Porn'. According to the US Department of Justice, throughout the 1970s Sturman controlled most of the pornography circulating in the country. . It was said that Sturman did not simply control the adult-entertainment industry; he was the industry. Many are entirely secular, Jews in name only. Sturman, however, identified as a Jew - he was a generous donator to Jewish charities."
Abrams shows how the corruption and debasement of Gentiles and Christian morality is a primary part of their motivation for intentionally infecting the Gentile community with pornography.
" Is there a deeper reason, beyond the mere financial, as to why Jews in particular have become involved in porn? Al Goldstein, the publisher of Screw, said "The only reason that Jews are in pornography is that we think that Christ sucks. Catholicism sucks. We don't believe in authoritarianism." Pornography thus becomes a way of defiling Christian culture and, as it penetrates to the very heart of the American mainstream (and is no doubt consumed by those very same WASPs), its subversive character becomes more charged. Extending the subversive thesis, Jewish involvement in the X-rated industry can be seen as a proverbial two fingers to the entire WASP establishment in America."
Opposition to Jewish extremist subversion of Gentile, Christian or Muslim morality is frequently defined as anti-Semitic "hatred" in the Jewish dominated media. Abrams writing in a Jewish journal for a presumably Jewish audience writes matter-of-factly about the "atavistic hatred" against us by Jewish pornographers and their motivation to "weaken the dominant culture in America by moral subversion."
"Jewish involvement in porn, by this argument, is the result of an atavistic hatred of Christian authority: they are trying to weaken the dominant culture in America by moral subversion. Astyr remembers having "to run or fight for it in grammar school because I was a Jew. It could very well be that part of my porn career is an 'up yours' to these people."
Obviously, there are no articles in the mainstream media exposing Jewish "atavistic hatred" against Gentiles by the promoters of pornographic depravity. Abrams even goes on to talk about the roots of this revolutionary Jewish attack on European values.
" Jews were also at the vanguard of the sexual revolution of the 1960s. Wilhelm Reich, Herbert Marcuse and Paul Goodman replaced Marx, Trotsky and Lenin as required revolutionary reading. Pacheco was one Jewish porn star who read Reich's intellectual marriage of Freud and Marx. In light of the relatively tolerant Jewish view of sex, why are we ashamed of the Jewish role in the porn industry? We might not like it, but the Jewish role in this field has been significant and it is about time it was written about seriously."
Notice that all those mentioned: Reich, Marcuse, Goodman, Marx, Trotsky, Lenin and Freud are Jews. From Freud to Goodman, all represent a Jewish revolution against traditional European values and morality.
When sick Jewish pornographers are part of the brutality of Jewish organized crime, the results can obviously be horrifically tragic for our people. In 2000, a Jewish "Russian" organized crime ring was uncovered that specialized in kidnapping Russian children, some as young as two years old, from parks and orphanages and then subjecting them to rape, torture and murder, all on video tape. These tapes were sold to thousands of Jewish and Gentile perverts all over the world. When police in Italy were frustrated by lack of action by the authorities they released some of the video footage to an Italian network which then showed some of the graphic images hoping to cause public outrage. Instead of outrage against the Jewish murderers the TV producers suffered outrage for showing the disturbing images.
In spite of the horror and obvious newsworthiness of this international Jewish child porn/murder operation, it received little coverage in the media in the United States. When Seth Bekenstein, the ring's American distributor was arrested, there was little publicity, and in spite of being a part of one of the most horrific criminal activities imaginable, he was sentenced to only 18 months on guilty plea.
Porn is no longer 1950s pictures of voluptuous nude women on a deserted beach. It has become permeated with sadism, masochism, scatology, even sexual molestation, rape and murder of young children. I am no prude. I love the beauty of the human body. But, I do think that this kind of sick criminal activity, in which there is so much exploitation, so much degradation, so much catering to the depths of human depravity, should be fought with constitutional law.
Ironically, with Jewish influence over media, societal mores, and government today, it is legal, even chic to make and sell the sickest pornography showing the sick defilement of women. But, if you have unacceptable political opinions about Jewish supremacism, you may find yourself a political and social pariah, or at worst in prison.
We live in a Zionist world where often the sickest porn is legal while political incorrect opinions will land you in prison.
The first ever porno mag - Playboy Hugh Heffner (Jewish) Famous pornographer who was honored by the ADL with its ridiculous "Torch of Freedom" award. Sexcetera is made by Playboy TV.
The second ever porno mag – Hustler Larry Flint (Jew). Paralyzed by a white nationalists riflr bullet in protest at puting together negros and white women in porn scenes.
‘Page Three’3 Breasts were introduced under the front flap of British newspapers (turning us all into scuttling perverts like them) in 1970 in half-Jew Rupert Murdoch's The Sun newspaper, the idea of Murdoch's Jewish editor Larry Lamb. The first page 3 girl was Jewish "German" model Stephenie Rahn.
Ann Summers Owned by the jewish Gold brothers, Ralph and David. They also own 50% of Jew David Sullivan's Sunday/Daily Sport Newspapers. The managing director of Ann Summers is David Gold's daughter, Jacqueline. She is "the astute businesswoman who created the Ann Summers parties based on the Tupperware parties."
Telephone Sex Lines These are those late night adverts where women are paraded like sex slaves and beckon you to talk to them via a premium rate phone number. The inventor of telephone sex lines is Gloria Leonard. Miss Leonard often refers to herself as "A nice Jewish girl from the Bronx."
Lap dancing Peter Stringfellow (Jew) Introduced lap dancing to Britain.
Spearmint Rhino The Starbucks of brothels, Owned by convicted jewish frauster john gray. The chain's flagship London club was the first in the UK to offer fully nude dancing, prompting a "dirty war" with its main rival Stringfellow's, which at the time was topless-only. The ubiquitous Hollywood ‘Sex Scene’ You know the feeling, you are watching a film, it could be a drama, an action movie, a thriller, a comedy, a horror or anything, you are with your friends, parents, girlfriend, boyfriend, boyfriend’s parents etc when an uneasy silence falls over the room as the writhing and gasping of a soft porn scene suddenly and inexplicably appears in the middle of the film. Jews control Hollywood as they control porn and that is something you should Google. Check out the name list at the bottom of this post and then see the credits of any movie. http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-stein19-2008dec1...
Arther Miller Author of depraved novels
"Dr" Ruth. so-called sex-therapist (Jew).
They Live: Who are the Jews?
While this list may never be complete, it will cover most of the Jewish names one is likely to encounter in everyday Western life. Unlike many gentile names, there is such a thing as a 'Jewish name.' Many Jewish persons can be recognized as being Jewish by their surname [last name], although not always--some Jews are adopted, or their forebears changed the family surname, or their surname simply does not appear Jewish.
Here are the most common Jewish names likely to be encountered:
-Names ending in "-berg" (Goldberg, Weinberg, etc.)
On Nov 8, 11:09 am, "Love Europe, Hate the EU" <eu...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> Could the nation do without the Jewish industry of Filmed Prostitution > (Pornography)?
That's odd: I'm reasonably certain that Carrie Prejean isn't Jewish, and that before her home-made masturbation video surfaced she was in fact acting as a far-right-wing propagandist much like yourself.
Always remember folks: you can't spell "propagandist" without "pagan".
On Sun, 8 Nov 2009 12:28:47 -0800 (PST), Twibil <nowayjo...@gmail.com> spewed their ignorance thusly:
>Always remember folks: you can't spell "propagandist" without "pagan".
Except that "Pagan" in the strictest sense only means non-christian, non-jewish, non-muslim today. All other belief systems in the world are Pagan. Even Atheists in the strictest sense are Pagan. That leaves all non-Pagans in the minority, if it is numbers you seek as proof to which imaginary one-true-god to choose for your psychotic worship.
(OED = Oxford English Dictionary. The highly acclaimed reference source to the English Language)
Pagan Definition - OED v2: [ad. L. pagan-us, orig. 'villager, rustic; civilian, non-militant', opposed to m_les 'soldier, one of the army', in christian L. (Tertullian, Augustine) 'heathen' as opposed to christian or jewish. The christians called themselves m_lites 'enrolled soldiers' of christ, members of his militant church, and applied to non-christians the term applied by soldiers to all who were 'not enrolled in the army'.
1. One of a nation or community which does not hold to the non-nature-based (unnatural) christian religion, or does not worship a christian god; a heathen (i.e. 'dweller on the heath'). In earlier use practically = non-christian, and so including muslims and, sometimes, jews.
Yes, even muslims and jews can be considered "Pagan".
The definition in OED v3 has since been edited to just say, "Anyone who does not worship the One True God." Or something almost exactly the same as that, I can't quote it verbatim since I deleted v3 from all my computers.
Even biased christian hypocrites have their hand in editing authoritative reference books today to leave out important information and twist the remaining information to what they wish it might mean or say. We know they've reinterpreted their bible from its fictional beginnings many times, but now they are even editing classic reference books on the english language itself to present their misguided and biased ignorance -- pure propagandists in the strictest sense. Oxymoronic in that they are the very ones who invented the term Pagan to try to belittle anyone not like them. Much like "hick" and "hillbilly" is used today by the insecure and frightened wealthy who are afraid of anyone that reminds them of being poor.
OED v3 having since been deleted from my HDDs, I'll still refer to v2 that has some facts and truth still left in it, until ignorant and insecure christian bigot editors got hold of it and destroyed any of its credibility whatsoever in v3.
On Sun, 08 Nov 2009 16:04:42 -0800, John McWilliams <jp...@comcast.net> wrote:
>The Correction Police wrote: >> On Sun, 8 Nov 2009 12:28:47 -0800 (PST), Twibil <nowayjo...@gmail.com> >> spewed their ignorance thusly:
>That'd be "his".......
>>> Always remember folks: you can't spell "propagandist" without "pagan".
>> Except that "Pagan" in the strictest sense only means non-christian, >> non-jewish, non-muslim today.
>Huh. It's customary to capitalize major religions, but I'd expect you to >not conform to that.
>For many, 'pagan' means anything they don't embrace.
When you display the common-courtesy, consideration, and respect that all Pagans deserve by capitalizing their title, then I might start to capitalize the titles of the belittling and insecure religions that show nothing but disrespect to all others. You are nothing but a contemptible and reprehensible humans until then. Not deserving of having your beliefs capitalized in print nor even recognized as a valid belief system. You get back exactly what you give to all others. It's only fair.
On Sun, 08 Nov 2009 16:04:42 -0800, John McWilliams <jp...@comcast.net> wrote:
>The Correction Police wrote: >> On Sun, 8 Nov 2009 12:28:47 -0800 (PST), Twibil <nowayjo...@gmail.com> >> spewed their ignorance thusly:
>That'd be "his".......
That'd be "his" if you were sure of their gender. There is no indication nor guarantee of "Twibil"'s gender in their written words, nor anyone else's online, therefore you cannot use "his" nor "her" with certainty. The plural possessive pronoun "their" has been adopted in contemporary English as the neuter form which never existed in English before but was always needed. One of the few languages which has always been lacking in this regard compared to most all other languages.
On Sun, 08 Nov 2009 16:04:42 -0800, John McWilliams <jp...@comcast.net> wrote:
>The Correction Police wrote: >> On Sun, 8 Nov 2009 12:28:47 -0800 (PST), Twibil <nowayjo...@gmail.com> >> spewed their ignorance thusly:
>That'd be "his".......
>>> Always remember folks: you can't spell "propagandist" without "pagan".
>> Except that "Pagan" in the strictest sense only means non-christian, >> non-jewish, non-muslim today.
>Huh. It's customary to capitalize major religions, but I'd expect you to >not conform to that.
>For many, 'pagan' means anything they don't embrace.
When you display the common-courtesy, consideration, and respect that all Pagans deserve by capitalizing their title, then I might start to capitalize the titles of the belittling and insecure religions that show nothing but disrespect to all others. You are nothing but a contemptible and reprehensible human until then. Not deserving of having your beliefs capitalized in print nor even recognized as a valid belief system. You get back exactly what you give to all others. It's only fair.
The Correction Police wrote: > On Sun, 08 Nov 2009 16:04:42 -0800, John McWilliams <jp...@comcast.net> > wrote:
>> The Correction Police wrote: >>> On Sun, 8 Nov 2009 12:28:47 -0800 (PST), Twibil <nowayjo...@gmail.com> >>> spewed their ignorance thusly: >> That'd be "his".......
> That'd be "his" if you were sure of their gender.
That'd be "his" regardless of gender.
> There is no indication > nor guarantee of "Twibil"'s gender in their written words, nor anyone > else's online, therefore you cannot use "his" nor "her" with certainty. The > plural possessive pronoun "their" has been adopted in contemporary English > as the neuter form which never existed in English before but was always > needed. One of the few languages which has always been lacking in this > regard compared to most all other languages.
Neuters aside, "his" has long been recognized as both the singular masuline and the non-gender singular possessive. "Their" is more common on usenet today, and I wouldn't have noted it but for your show of erudition.
>The Correction Police wrote: >> On Sun, 08 Nov 2009 16:04:42 -0800, John McWilliams <jp...@comcast.net> >> wrote:
>>> The Correction Police wrote: >>>> On Sun, 8 Nov 2009 12:28:47 -0800 (PST), Twibil <nowayjo...@gmail.com> >>>> spewed their ignorance thusly: >>> That'd be "his".......
>> That'd be "his" if you were sure of their gender.
>That'd be "his" regardless of gender.
>> There is no indication >> nor guarantee of "Twibil"'s gender in their written words, nor anyone >> else's online, therefore you cannot use "his" nor "her" with certainty. The >> plural possessive pronoun "their" has been adopted in contemporary English >> as the neuter form which never existed in English before but was always >> needed. One of the few languages which has always been lacking in this >> regard compared to most all other languages.
>Neuters aside, "his" has long been recognized as both the singular >masuline and the non-gender singular possessive. >"Their" is more common on usenet today, and I wouldn't have noted it but >for your show of erudition.
The use of "his" when the person being referenced is female, shows nothing but disrespect to the female, if that is the case. This is why "their" is commonly adopted today, rather than the more archaic, more disrespectful, more error-prone, and wholly chauvinistic "his" when you are uncertain of their gender.
Not unlike those who think their "god" is always masculine. Showing total disrespect to all those that favor a female God.
Not true, because he's the one who started to nitpick troll about my having used "their" as the proper singular non-gender possessive pronoun in common and more correct use today. I was only correcting his nitpick trolls' stupidity. As I am now doing for you, for both of you useless trolls.
The Correction Police wrote: > The use of "his" when the person being referenced is female, shows nothing > but disrespect to the female, if that is the case.
Some females will take offense, yes, but usually those with limited education. Similarly, men I know who care about proper language are not in the least disrespectful towards women when they use proper grammar.
> This is why "their" is > commonly adopted today, rather than the more archaic, more disrespectful, > more error-prone, and wholly chauvinistic "his" when you are uncertain of > their gender.
You really are soooo PC! Such a gentleman for defending the female sex from chauvinism!
> Not unlike those who think their "god" is always masculine. Showing total > disrespect to all those that favor a female God.
The Correction Police wrote: > On Sun, 08 Nov 2009 21:05:58 -0800, John McWilliams <jp...@comcast.net> > wrote:
>> The Correction Police wrote:
>>> The use of "his" when the person being referenced is female, shows nothing >>> but disrespect to the female, if that is the case. >> Some females will take offense, yes, but usually those with limited >> education.
> LOL!
> Holy fuck, are you EVER a chauvinistic and disrespectful PIG.
I knew you were an unhappy gal , so do go and fly a kite!
>The Correction Police wrote: >> On Sun, 08 Nov 2009 21:05:58 -0800, John McWilliams <jp...@comcast.net> >> wrote:
>>> The Correction Police wrote:
>>>> The use of "his" when the person being referenced is female, shows nothing >>>> but disrespect to the female, if that is the case. >>> Some females will take offense, yes, but usually those with limited >>> education.
>> LOL!
>> Holy fuck, are you EVER a chauvinistic and disrespectful PIG.
>I knew you were an unhappy gal , so do go and fly a kite!
Wrongo Piggo Bukco! I'm one of the more masculine and secure men on this planet. Regularly making venison roasts for dinner. In fact there's a venison roast in the oven as I type. Freshly dressed just a day ago.
LOL
You fuckingly useless and insecure male PIG. You're a disgrace to anything that's male.
The Correction Police wrote: > On Sun, 08 Nov 2009 21:38:08 -0800, John McWilliams <jp...@comcast.net> > wrote:
>> The Correction Police wrote: >>> On Sun, 08 Nov 2009 21:05:58 -0800, John McWilliams <jp...@comcast.net> >>> wrote:
>>>> The Correction Police wrote:
>>>>> The use of "his" when the person being referenced is female, shows nothing >>>>> but disrespect to the female, if that is the case. >>>> Some females will take offense, yes, but usually those with limited >>>> education. >>> LOL!
>>> Holy fuck, are you EVER a chauvinistic and disrespectful PIG. >> I knew you were an unhappy gal , so do go and fly a kite!
> Wrongo Pi
Sorry, but you're a pompous and cowardly nym-shifting twit.
>The Correction Police wrote: >> On Sun, 08 Nov 2009 21:38:08 -0800, John McWilliams <jp...@comcast.net> >> wrote:
>>> The Correction Police wrote: >>>> On Sun, 08 Nov 2009 21:05:58 -0800, John McWilliams <jp...@comcast.net> >>>> wrote:
>>>>> The Correction Police wrote:
>>>>>> The use of "his" when the person being referenced is female, shows nothing >>>>>> but disrespect to the female, if that is the case. >>>>> Some females will take offense, yes, but usually those with limited >>>>> education. >>>> LOL!
>>>> Holy fuck, are you EVER a chauvinistic and disrespectful PIG.
>>> I knew you were an unhappy gal , so do go and fly a kite!
>> Wrongo Pi
>Sorry, but you're a pompous and cowardly nym-shifting twit.
That's going to be your only excuse for being an insecure PIG?
On Nov 8, 7:41 pm, The Correction Police <t...@facts.org> wrote:
> Not true, because he's the one who started to nitpick troll about my having > used "their" as the proper singular non-gender possessive pronoun in common > and more correct use today. I was only correcting his nitpick trolls' > stupidity. As I am now doing for you, for both of you useless trolls.
Bullshit, pussylips.
You're simply another sad little anti-semite who's trying to distract attention from the fact that (A) Jews don't run the porn industry, that (B) the Nazi-wanna-be OP (probably you) made a fool of himself by claiming that they do, and that (C) I helped him along in that direction by pointing out that "good Christian girls" are just as likely to be found in porn as anyone else.
Now go have a nice Zyklon B shower and try to pretend that you fooled someone and that your life is somehow worthwhile.
>The Correction Police wrote: >> On Sun, 08 Nov 2009 21:05:58 -0800, John McWilliams <jp...@comcast.net> >> wrote:
>>> The Correction Police wrote:
>>>> The use of "his" when the person being referenced is female, shows nothing >>>> but disrespect to the female, if that is the case. >>> Some females will take offense, yes, but usually those with limited >>> education.
>> LOL!
>> Holy fuck, are you EVER a chauvinistic and disrespectful PIG.
>I knew you were an unhappy gal , so do go and fly a kite!
Wrongo Piggo Bucko! I'm one of the more masculine and secure men on this planet. Regularly making venison roasts for dinner. In fact there's a venison roast in the oven as I type. Freshly dressed just a day ago.
LOL
You fuckingly useless and insecure male PIG. You're a disgrace to anything that's male.
>On Nov 8, 7:41 pm, The Correction Police <t...@facts.org> wrote:
>> Not true, because he's the one who started to nitpick troll about my having >> used "their" as the proper singular non-gender possessive pronoun in common >> and more correct use today. I was only correcting his nitpick trolls' >> stupidity. As I am now doing for you, for both of you useless trolls.
>Bullshit, pussylips.
>You're simply another sad little anti-semite who's trying to distract >attention from the fact that (A) Jews don't run the porn industry, >that (B) the Nazi-wanna-be OP (probably you) made a fool of himself by >claiming that they do, and that (C) I helped him along in that >direction by pointing out that "good Christian girls" are just as >likely to be found in porn as anyone else.
>Now go have a nice Zyklon B shower and try to pretend that you fooled >someone and that your life is somehow worthwhile.
Wow, are you ever demented. Lost on your conspiracy theories. Better check the seams in you aluminum cap. Apparently some aren't sealed too tightly. Try the "Alcoa" brand of aluminum. I hear (reported by other psychotics like you) that it works the best.
Damn, I guess this is what happens after you've disproved all their other DLSLR-Trolls' nonsense.
On Nov 8, 10:20 pm, The Correction Police <t...@facts.org> wrote:
> Wow, are you ever demented. Lost on your conspiracy theories. Better check > the seams in you aluminum cap. Apparently some aren't sealed too tightly. > Try the "Alcoa" brand of aluminum. I hear (reported by other psychotics > like you) that it works the best.
Heh! So you just randomly jumped into a rabidly anti-semitic thread to start a flame war over nothing......and then claim that it's the other posters who are unbalanced.
Good one!
Back under your bridge now, little troll, or we release the billygoats.
(This gives you the perfect opportunity to post that one more reply which will convince you -and alas, *only* you- that you've "won" something, while still allowing you to ignore the fact that people are refusing to play your game. Of course you could prove me wrong by simply not posting another reply.... Heh.)