<bgsound src="http://www.harfesoft.de/midi/mozart/midi/mz298.mid" loop="1"> footnoted article Sources: http://blogs.abcnews.com/theblotter/2006/07/warrants_were_p.html http://www.gawker.com/news/crime/exclusive-jeffrey-epsteins-sex-slave-190625.php http://www.palmbeachpost.com/localnews/content/local_news/epaper/2006/07/26/s1b_EPSTEIN_0726.html Some other articles and google. Testimonies from girls Lesbian sex with employee rape Laid there and masturbate Sarah and Adrianan Another Girl - intercourse Three massages a day
ok...so you are the new skinhead on ET trying to establish a reputation for anti-semitism. *yawn* How long did you spend putting that post together? Clearly you have too much free time on your hands. GET A JOB.
Roy Black works out in my Gym....You could never in a million years tell he is one of the most powerful lawyers in the US..he often wears a wifebeater and bobo's to workout...im going to approach him on this matter next time i see him. I have never said a word to him, but i am now...peace
Okay Pubby, let me see if I follow... A rich Jew is a scumbag --> hence, all rich Jews are scumbags --> and since he is a rich Jew, he can get away with scumbag activities? Did I get that right? I guess there are no rich Non-Jews that are scumbags? And there are no rich Non-Jews that get away with things? The Kennedys and OJ will be glad to hear it! And let's not forget your average rich Muslim terror bombers? (they are just Freedom Fighters, huh?) Get a life...
It's quite amazing how naive those girls are though, but I guess one can not expect them to know about every danger in the world at 14. Whether it's a non-Jew or a Jew wouldn't make any difference, other than that if it was a gentile it would be all over the news. I tend to believe that there is more to this story, particularly when considering that a guy like this could go to Thailand or China and do whatever his sick mind wants, while he decided to chose Christian girls to abuse; there has to be some sort of deep religious desire to pervert those who belong to the religion he hates so much. A few quotes from the Talmud tell you all you need to know. You will end up deep in regret, if you believe to love a Jew(ess), who was never the echo of covetous passions, because they all read the Talmud.
Sarcasm aside, have you read Final Judgement by Michael Collins Piper? It's by far the most convincing theory on his death, I have yet to see a rebuttal of it. I listen to Piper's daily radio show aswell. It's located here. I have been listening to it for over a year, calling in occassionally, and it's pretty interesting anti-zionist radio. I'd recommend to listen even if it's just to hear all sides of the story.
What a fucking moron. `The Talmud' is a vast document. There's more than one Talmud for a start. A few quotes translated into English tell you absolutely nothing whatsoever. It takes a lifetime of study, as well as deep knowledge of Hebrew and Aramaic, and of Jewish society of the first four centuries CE to begin to find a way into the Talmud. Let's examine just one of these `quotes', and add back a little of the context which was purposefully removed in order to distort the meaning. The underlying discussion in which this quotation comes up is an argument between Rabbis over the marital property rights of women who are virgins, versus the property rights of women who are not virgins. Under halakhah virgins have greater rights than non-virgins. So the specific question arises: `What if a woman has been raped at a young age? Is she considered to be a virgin under the law?' The answer is yes, a woman who was raped as a child (under the age of three) is considered to be a virgin. The rape IS AS NOTHING with respect to her marital rights. IS AS NOTHING is a common formula in Talmudic discussions, which always means that the speaker is of the opinion that the matter has no bearing on the subject under discussion. The statement IS AS NOTHING does not mean that it is permissible for a grown man to have intercourse with a young child. A fuller quotation including context will serve to clarify the meaning somewhat. The rest of the quotations are similar distortions and lies. To sum up, and repeat what is becoming more and more obvious with every new post he makes: `Publisher' is a vile, lying, skinhead, neo-Nazi Jew-hater, who spews filthy antisemitic propaganda across this website. He is a waste of bandwidth and a waste of oxygen. It would be well worth finding out who he is and publishing it. Of course, he is too much of a coward to ever publish his name.
If you can prove that the "Talmud" doesn't negatively refer to Jesus (which you can't), I will personally appologize for hurting the Jewish people. I don't consider apologists, who lie about that aspect of the Talmud, to be trustworthy. For years, Jews have tried to cover up their blistering Talmudic hatred for Jesus, as it isn't compatible with "Christian Zionism". Yet, their lies have been well debunked, sometimes even by Jews themselfs as demonstrated in the following link. Come clean on your hatred for Jesus and then we can talk about the other quotes. http://www.revisionisthistory.org/talmudtruth.html http://www.revisionisthistory.org/wire1.html
Idiot. The two Talmuds were written between the turn of the millenium and the sixth century CE. Let me make this as clear as possible: The neo-Nazi formerly known as `Publisher' has no basis, no basis whatsoever for the assertion that I or any living person hates Jesus. In addition to being a transparent liar and repeater of lies, he is also a clumsy smear artist. He should apologize forthwith. Following him around and correcting his errors is a little like following around an Elephant and trying to clean up the shit that it drops. He simply leaves too much lying around.
http://press.princeton.edu/titles/8383.html Now Princeton professors are going to be called anti-Semites aswell? When I spoke of hatred, I meant the hatred your religion spouts towards Jesus Christ, for I am unable to prove that you hate Jesus, just as much as I am unable to prove that you (or anyone else) believe anything in the Bible, Torah or any other sacred book. This has always been the strongest argument against the Talmud, and Jews have systematically tried to cover it up. If you just admitted that the Talmud is hostile towards Christ, that would give your religion a much more honest reputation. My argument is: If you want us "anti-Semites" to take your refutations seriously, you should stop lieing about the defamation of Jesus in the Talmud. The reason I refered to "you" as if you were a religion is because, so far, you have done everything in your might to defend the "devine" religion of Hollywood. Perhaps you should ask your sister-in-faith Madonna what she thinks about Christianity? I'd say she represents the Talmud quite well.