New Posts
  • Hi there guest! Welcome to PoliticalJack.com. Register for free to join our community?

Why US and Israel wants to ban this video...

ouch. Titus wasn't going in for any of that. Circumcision in the spiritual realm is the removing of the veil between us and Christ. He could have called it "the Circumcision of St John" ... same difference.
Nah it was different back then --- not done to a babe with out a foreskin --- and only an overhang was cut, no skinning.
 
Some Christian... nice reply, can I assume you won't be joining me for fellowship any time soon?

keep up the personal attacks, Marvin. But don't expect me to "owe up" to your garbage, any more than I expect you to fellowship in Christ.
You're not a Christian, you're a Nazi.
 

Days

Commentator
You're not a Christian, you're a Nazi.
No, the pope was a nazi. me, never. try again.

Are you not all in a tizzy over Israel? Isn't that the knocker that rings your bell? Specifically, my attributing the Zionist movement to the Illuminati?

so. who are they? zionists? Aren't they the political arm of the Rothschilds' occult ambition to rule the world through Jerusalem? Isn't Israel the pet project of the Rothschild family?

What is anti-semitic about exposing a bunch of devil worship? What does worshiping Lucifer have to do with being Jewish? You are not defending Jews, and you certainly are not defending Christians, you are defending Lucifer.
 

Days

Commentator
You're pushing the wrong button. I'm not Catholic. But you're still a Nazi.
Hitler was a Rothschild, he was in on the game, and the Russians never got him, neither was any corpse identified to be him. Adolph probably holed up in his Antarctic base. Just another pawn in the game. You've got a grand plan for 3 world wars, and I don't know how you could call the current series of wars against the Arabs anything less than a world war. Illuminati run and orchestrated. So the nazis were just another political arm of the Rothschilds. Do you really think I'm one of them? hint: I'm not on your side, I'm on Jesus side.

I didn't say you was Catholic, I said you a kazarian jew, at least, you post like one. you are a zionist, probably a close friend of the devil. You are charming like the devil, and you love to attack others like the devil; if it looks like a duck and waddles like a duck...
 
yikes, well, they do it to 12 year-olds in some African tribes, is that okay?
A rite of passage. The males is taken from the female and the female from the male to prepare them for their roles in adult life, a man in total and a woman in total -- Mandela said that after that experience he could take anything life threw at him. African women say the same.
It is not that I agree with it but that there are deeper reasons, when cultural, of specific regions/territories in the World, tough terrains. In the Sudan where the most extreme form of fgm is performed it is a choice of the young women, even when the parents plead 'don't do it', the young women perform it on each other --- some forms of fgm are just a pin prick to draw blood. None are as brutal as what has come to be accepted as the norm in the US for male babies. And yet it is illegal for a Dr to perform fgm on an African or Asian woman because 'it is cultural' but cool for a Dr to perform genital enhancement on girls ( as young as 13) and women of European extraction.

But legally anyone can slice a baby boys penis up --- anyone

In my view children's genitalia should be left alone, Consulting adults must do as they wish ---- Of other countries I have no right to say but I am horrified that still in Britain babies are legally and knowingly caused such pain and put in such danger for no good reason what so ever and usually at the hands of the untrained.
 

MaryAnne

Governor
For Heavens sake, baby boys have the foreskin taken off when they are tiny.Today it is mostly for cleanliness. Very simple.

That may have been true in old times,it is not today.

The knife went the way of a simple procedure in the Doctors office.
 
For Heavens sake, baby boys have the foreskin taken off when they are tiny.Today it is mostly for cleanliness. Very simple.

That may have been true in old times,it is not today.

The knife went the way of a simple procedure in the Doctors office.
Baby boys don't have a foreskin, the fore skin when it separates from the main body of the penis at about three years of age, should never be pulled back by anyone but the boy himself, some can't pull them back fully until they are 19 years old. No form of fgm is as brutal as your 'simple procedure'. Feminism, what about male-ism? Who do baby boys have to protect them in the law? No one.

100 baby boys die of the simple procedure, officially, in the US every year, many more are horribly damaged for life.
The penis is self cleaning, the fore skin, as well as having 10,000 erogenous nerves which are torn off in circumcision before they are properly formed, is there for a function, to protect.

Describe the simple procedure, please.

Most of which are not done by doctors in the US, they are done by trainee docs and nurses without anesthetics, even so the trauma to the tiny bodies is horrendous and the pain excruciating. In order to circumcise a boy one needs no medical training, under the law.

FGM is illegal, doctors my not perform any surgery, even to right damage caused by giving birth, to any black or brown women or girls because it is said to be cultural --- and yet as plastic surgery they may perform genital 'enhancement' on girls ( as young as 13) and women of European extraction.
 
Last edited:
Hitler was a Rothschild, he was in on the game, and the Russians never got him, neither was any corpse identified to be him. Adolph probably holed up in his Antarctic base. Just another pawn in the game. You've got a grand plan for 3 world wars, and I don't know how you could call the current series of wars against the Arabs anything less than a world war. Illuminati run and orchestrated. So the nazis were just another political arm of the Rothschilds. Do you really think I'm one of them? hint: I'm not on your side, I'm on Jesus side.

I didn't say you was Catholic, I said you a kazarian jew, at least, you post like one. you are a zionist, probably a close friend of the devil. You are charming like the devil, and you love to attack others like the devil; if it looks like a duck and waddles like a duck...
;) Hitler wasn't a Rothschild ---------------
 

MaryAnne

Governor
Baby boys don't have a foreskin, the fore skin when it separates from the main body of the penis at about three years of age, should never be pulled back by anyone but the boy himself, some can't pull them back fully until they are 19 years old. No form of fgm is as brutal as your 'simple procedure'. Feminism, what about male-ism? Who do baby boys have to protect them in the law? No one.

100 baby boys die of the simple procedure, officially, in the US every year, many more are horribly damaged for life.
The penis is self cleaning, the fore skin, as well as having 10,000 erogenous nerves which are torn off in circumcision before they are properly formed, is there for a function, to protect.

Describe the simple procedure, please.

Most of which are not done by doctors in the US, they are done by trainee docs and nurses without anesthetics, even so the trauma to the tiny bodies is horrendous and the pain excruciating. In order to circumcise a boy one needs no medical training, under the law.

FGM is illegal, doctors my not perform any surgery, even to right damage caused by giving birth, to any black or brown women or girls because it is said to be cultural --- and yet as plastic surgery they may perform genital 'enhancement' on girls ( as young as 13) and women of European extraction.
Bull, Queenie, I raised two boys and was in the Doctors office with them,along with my Husband.
 
Bull, Queenie, I raised two boys and was in the Doctors office with them,along with my Husband.
So what was the procedure?


http://www.intactamerica.org/

http://www.doctorsopposingcircumcision.org/

http://blog.practicalethics.ox.ac.uk/2012/08/the-aap-report-on-circumcision-bad-science-bad-ethics-bad-medicine/


The role of infant circumcision in the United States of America is mysterious. The US is the only country in the world where the majority of baby boys have part of their penises cut off for non-religious reasons. Yet this extraordinary custom is very much taken for granted. If it were being introduced today, it would certainly be rejected as barbaric and un-American.

History
Contrary to most accounts, the ancient history of ritual circumcision is almost completely irrelevant to the US. Secular circumcision began as a "cure" for masturbation late in the 19th century in England. It swiftly crossed the Atlantic - though it was only ever confined to the upper classes in its homeland, where it has since withered and died.

In the US, it rose during the 2 - 5 years after each war the US has been involved in. It peaked at 90% in 1964, according to the Laumann study (based on self-reporting by adults). The "war" connection ("It'll make a man of him"?) suggests it will rise again, perhaps using the "desert sand" myth.

A recent paper claims a startling rise in the rate of circumcision. This is however based on some quite selective statistics. Figures from the National Center for Health Statistics show a slow decline. Both sets of figures show a higher rate in the Midwest and a much lower rate on the west coast.

Conformity
Peer pressure, social pressure, and pressure from circumcised fathers and grandparents intoning the mantra "A boy should look like his father", all have combined to make "circumcised" an integral part of the concept of a USAmerican man.

Rights
Infant circumcision flies in the face of the country's far older tradition of Liberty and individual rights.





It is defended by a curious perversion of those rights, a supposed "right" of parents to cut healthy tissue off a helpless baby - a "right" that has been totally extinguished when that baby is a girl, and is never missed.........................

....................... Hygiene
The claim that the intact penis is "dirty" and that circumcision makes him "clean" is widespread - often in an exaggerated form, when you consider that women'ssmegma is more copious and pungent than men's, and that the great majority of men in the world are intact, without similar complaints from their womenfolk. Women who have never seen an intact penis convince each other that it is "Eeew, gross!"

http://www.circumstitions.com/USA.html
 
Last edited:

Days

Commentator
;) Hitler wasn't a Rothschild ---------------
Okay, the story I read on this was that a Rothschild had an illegit son with a maid and they gave the child the mother's last name, and then that son had a son and named him Adolph. Don't have any way of verifying this stuff, so much is written and how can we know what is true? This much I do know; they claim he was part jewish (kazarian, no doubt) and he had the backing of international bankers in England and America.
 
Okay, the story I read on this was that a Rothschild had an illegit son with a maid and they gave the child the mother's last name, and then that son had a son and named him Adolph. Don't have any way of verifying this stuff, so much is written and how can we know what is true? This much I do know; they claim he was part jewish (kazarian, no doubt) and he had the backing of international bankers in England and America.
Nope, not true.

It is true that the Nationalized Industries he sold but only because the State couldn't suport them and But but but what he did do was regulate the work places, so that every factory had to have sports and rest facilities for its workers, the more workers the better the facilities. he bought us the 40 hr week ( now dead) paid hols, decent housing and etc --- there were two banking systems on the go, one for in country with no interest rates and other for International shit --- but he bartered with friendly countries --- a film:-

 
Last edited:
Top