Public Jewish Talmud Readings with Fonterra CEO – Theo Spierings
Featured Degenerate Corporate Swine – Theo Spierings – Fonterra/ Fund Terror CEO
Media Whores is reaching out to Fonterra CEO and degenerate corporate swine – Theo Spierings – today to see if he would be at all interested in a weekly spot in the alternative media – reading out Jewish Talmud quotes to the public.
We are yet to hear back from Spierings on our request for comment on the secret elite corporate pedophile rings operating within our shores – so unsure just how keen he will be at this stage.
One thing is for sure – he was born for the part.
Let’s see how it goes…..
First up – a brief message from the NZ ‘s demonic dairy milk and baby animal slaughter ‘business’ – Talmudic rape plunder and pedophilia after that…..
Moed Kattan 17a: If a Jew is tempted to do evil he should go to a city where he is not known and do the evil there.
Penalty for Disobeying Rabbis
Erubin 21b. Whosoever disobeys the rabbis deserves death and will be punished by being boiled in hot excrement in hell.
Hitting a Jew is the same as hitting God
Sanhedrin 58b. If a heathen (gentile) hits a Jew, the gentile must be killed.
O.K. to Cheat Non-Jews
Sanhedrin 57a . A Jew need not pay a gentile the wages owed him for work.
Jews Have Superior Legal Status
Baba Kamma 37b. If an ox of an Israelite gores an ox of a Canaanite there is no liability; but if an ox of a Canaanite gores an ox of an Israelite…the payment is to be in full.
Jews May Steal from Non-Jews
Baba Mezia 24a . If a Jew finds an object lost by a gentile (“heathen”) it does not have to be returned.
Jews May Rob and Kill Non-Jews
Sanhedrin 57a . When a Jew murders a gentile, there will be no death penalty. What a Jew steals from a gentile he may keep.
Baba Kamma 37b. The gentiles are outside the protection of the law and God has “exposed their money to Israel.”
Jews May Lie to Non-Jews
Baba Kamma 113a. Jews may use lies (“subterfuges”) to circumvent a Gentile.
WAIT…THERE’S MORE –
Non-Jewish Children are Sub-Human
Yebamoth 98a. All gentile children are animals.
Abodah Zarah 36b. Gentile girls are in a state of niddah (filth) from birth.
Abodah Zarah 22a-22b . Gentiles prefer sex with cows.
Yebamoth 63a. Declares that agriculture is the lowest of occupations.
Yebamoth 59b. A woman who had intercourse with a beast is eligible to marry a Jewish priest. A woman who has sex with a demon is also eligible to marry a Jewish priest.
Hagigah 27a. States that no rabbi can ever go to hell.
Baba Mezia 59b. A rabbi debates God and defeats Him. God admits the rabbi won the debate.
Gittin 70a. On coming from a privy (outdoor toilet) a man should not have sexual intercourse till he has waited long enough to walk half a mile, because the demon of the privy is with him for that time; if he does, his children will be epileptic.
Menahoth 43b-44a. A Jewish man is obligated to say the following prayer every day: “Thank you God for not making me a gentile, a woman or a slave.”
What Jewish Scholars Are Saying:
Rabbi Meir Kahane, told CBS News that his teaching that Arabs are “dogs” is derived “from the Talmud.” (CBS 60 Minutes, “Kahane”).
University of Jerusalem Prof. Ehud Sprinzak described Kahane and Goldstein’s philosophy: “They believe it’s God’s will that they commit violence against goyim,” a Hebrew term for non-Jews. (NY Daily News, Feb. 26, 1994, p. 5).
Rabbi Yitzhak Ginsburg declared, “We have to recognize that Jewish blood and the blood of a goy are not the same thing.” (NY Times, June 6, 1989, p.5).
Rabbi Yaacov Perrin said, “One million Arabs are not worth a Jewish fingernail.” (NY Daily News, Feb. 28, 1994, p.6).
ENTER THE US GOVERNMENT.
U.S. Government Lays Groundwork for Talmudic Courts: “Our” government under Presidents Reagan, Bush and Clinton, has provided, under the euphemism of education (for example, House Joint Resolution 173 and Public Law 102-14), a groundwork for the establishment of Talmudic “courts of justice” to be administered by disciples of Shneur Zalman’s Chabad successor, Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson.
For more information regarding any of the above (from where much of this information was obtained) see: http://www.hoffman-info.com/talmudtruth.html
Response to ‘QUOTES FROM THE TALMUD’ http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Cyprus/8815/qts.html
Also known as “Non-Jews as seen in the Jewish Talmud” and “Jewish Racism towards Non-Jews as expressed in the Talmud”
CLAIM “The modern Jew is the product of the Talmud…” “Babylonian Talmud”, published by the Boston Talmud Society, p. XII
The Jews refer to the remainder of Earths inhabitants, the non-Jewish peoples, as “Gentiles”, “Goyim”. Let’s see what the Jewish Talmud teaches the Jews concerning the non-Jewish majority, i.e. those who are not part of Jahve’s “Chosen People”:
RESPONSE It is true that modern Judaism derives most of its teachings from the Talmud, but what anti-Semites claim about the Talmud is quite different from the truth. David S. Maddison (firstname.lastname@example.org)
CLAIM “The Jews are called human beings, but the non-Jews are not humans. They are beasts.” Talmud: Baba mezia, 114b
RESPONSE (1) This represents a lack of knowledge of Hebrew at a most fundamental level. Here, the anti-Semites claim that Adam means human but it really means man. “Yetsoor” is the Hebrew word for human. Jews are referred to by the singular form of man, Adam, whilst non-Jews are referred to by the plural form of man, or anasheem. Both forms of the word mean human, but one is single, the other is plural. The reason that Jews are referred to in the singular is that if one Jew does something bad, or is alleged to have, all Jews are blamed for it. So, for the wrongdoing or alleged wrongdoing of one, all suffer. In the case of non-Jews, only individuals suffer, not all of the non-Jews. So that is why Jews are referred to as a single person and non-Jews are referred to in the plural. David S. Maddison (email@example.com)
RESPONSE (2) (Also, see other responses elswhere.) Apparently a deliberate mistranslation. The passage deals with the technical rules of corpse-impurity which, according to the author of this text, apply to Jews and not to gentiles. In this connection Ezekiel 34:31 is cited: “And ye My sheep [referring to Israel], the sheep of My pasture, are _men [Hebrew: “adam”]_, and I am your God, saith the Lord God.” From a careful midrashic reading of this Biblical verse, Rabbi Simeon ben Yohai deduced “Only “ye” [i.e., Israel, not other nations] are designated “adam,” in the sense that only Jewish corpses and graves generate impurity according to Numbers 19:14: “This is the law: when a _man [‘adam’]_ dieth in a tent, every one that cometh into the tent…shall be unclean seven days…” The passage is legal and exegetical, not theological. If anything, it seems to put Jews on a lower footing than non-Jews. Typically, the words “but beasts” were added on by whoever put this list together. They do not appear in the original. Correspondent of firstname.lastname@example.org (Sara Salzman) email@example.com
CLAIM “The Akum (non-Jew) is like a dog. Yes, the scripture teaches to honor the the dog more than the non-Jew.” Ereget Raschi Erod. 22 30
RESPONSE The reference cited is does not exist, therefore the “quote” is forgery. Also “Akum” specifically means idolater. It does not refer to non-Jews in general. Additionally, the writing style is totally inconsistent with writings of this type which are extremely terse and abbreviated since they assume a great deal of prior knowledge. David S. Maddison (firstname.lastname@example.org)
CLAIM “Even though God created the non-Jew they are still animals in human form. It is not becoming for a Jew to be served by an animal. Therfore he will be served by animals in human form.” Midrasch Talpioth, p. 255, Warsaw 1855
RESPONSE (1) I was unable to check this reference in my extensive Judaica library. The book “Midrash Talpiyyot” is appparently an obscure eighteenth-century Kabbalistic work that is little known and carries no authority whatsoever. Even if the citation were correct (which seems doubtful in light of the other examples on this list, and the fact that Jews never employ the designation “Jehovah”), it is hard to imagine what could be proven from it about Judaism or the Talmud. From Usenet message email@example.com
RESPONSE (2) Apart from anything else, the use of the term “Jehovah” should be an immediate indicator of a forgery since Jews don’t write this term in books. The actual book in question is not part of the Talmud but was written by a Turkish Jew called Elijah ben Solomon Abraham, ha-Koen in the eighteenth century. And it is unlikey that the quote exists given the other forgeries on this list. David S. Maddison (firstname.lastname@example.org)
CLAIM “A pregnant non-Jew is no better than a pregnant animal.” Coschen hamischpat 405
RESPONSE The above quote is a wrong inference from a fiscal law in Shulchan Oruch, Choshen Mishpat 405.3, that relates to times when slavery was a standard and accepted practice across the world.
It states that if an ox gored a pregnant woman, and this resulted in the loss of the fetus, the owner does not have to pay for the loss of the fetus (medical expenses and other damages are discussed elsewhere). If an ox gored a pregnant non-Jewish slave-woman, the owner of the ox has to pay for the loss of the fetus to the owner of the slave-woman (because the owner would have had another slave to work for him had the woman given birth). The same applies if the ox gored a pregnant cow, or a sheep, because had the animal given birth, the owner would have had an extra one. The law is clearly hinged on the rights of the owner, and does not compare non-Jews and animals in any way. It is purely legal, and does not have any philosophical or social implications. I.I.
CLAIM “The souls of non-Jews come from impure sprits and are called pigs.” Jalkut Rubeni gadol 12b
RESPONSE The above quote does not exist in the source. The reference to page 12b in Yalkut Reuveini is meaningless, as the pages are numbered individually, not having “a” and “b” parts.
Yalkut does quote from Shnei Luchot Habrit (in Sefer Dovor Shebikdusho, Os Alef), that the souls of two ancient nations (Amoni and Moavi that do not exist now), come from “the spirit of impurity”, but the same goes for the soul of a bastard (mamzer) of Jewish origin. I.I.
CLAIM “Although the non-Jew has the same body structure as the Jew, they compare with the Jew like a monkey to a human.” Schene luchoth haberith, p. 250 b
RESPONSE A complete fabrication. The reference to p.250 b is meaningless (unless “b” stands for “column 2”), as each page is individually numbered. There is no mention of any comparison of Jews to non-Jews on page 250. I.I.
CLAIM “If you eat with a Gentile, it is the same as eating with a dog.” Tosapoth, Jebamoth 94b
RESPONSE This appears to be a forgery. Joe Slater
CLAIM “If a Jew has a non-Jewish servant or maid who dies, one should not express sympathy to the Jew. You should tell the Jew: “God will replace ‘your loss’, just as if one of his oxen or asses had died”.” Jore dea 377, 1
RESPONSE The Mishna from which this law is derived speaks about a specific formula [in] Hebrew “Hamokom menachem eschem” that is said to somebody whose close relative died within [the] last 7 days, it does not mean regular words of consolation. A question is asked by the commentators: the above formula is said [by] the grieving person only for a close relative, and not even for a distant relative or a regular Jew, so why do we have to be told that it’s not said for a servant? Several answers are given: either the personal servant is so close to his master, that he is considered by the master as his son, or because the servant was his property the master considered him part of his body so to speak. So why not say the above formula? The reason given is that people who don’t know the master might hear and think that the slave was completely Jewish and part of master’s family, which might lead to confusion. Actually, the same Mishna mentions that R. Gamaliel accepted this formula [of] condolence for his slave, because he respected the slave greatly for his Torah knowledge. I.I.
CLAIM “Sexual intercourse between Gentiles is like intercourse between animals.” Talmud Sanhedrin 74b
RESPONSE It does not say this or any such thing. David Maddison (email@example.com)
CLAIM “It is permitted to take the body and the life of a Gentile.” Sepher ikkarim III c 25
RESPONSE This is a misquotation. Rabbi Yosef Albo (the author) was asked by a Christian thinker about seeming injustice of the laws of Judaism dealing with charging interest on a loan. (According to Deuteronomy 23:20 and 23:21, a Jew is not allowed to lend with interest to another Jew, but may do so to a Gentile). R. Albo answers: The “Gentile” or “heathen” in the above passage refers to idolater, who refuses to keep seven Noahide laws. The laws are universal for all mankind: 1) prohibition of idolatry, 2) prohibition of blasphemy, 3) prohibition of murder, 4) prohibition of immorality and promiscuity, 5) prohibition of theft, 6) establishment of judicial system, 7) prohibition of cruelty to animals. Such a person, who does not respect other’s rights, places himself apart from human community and therefore can expect to be treated according to his own rules. He is a threat to everyone around and hence if somebody kills him, that person is not charged. On the contrary, even according to non-Jewish philosophers in those days (14th and 15th century, Spain), as R Albo brings, such a person should be killed. So it is regarding money matters: the prohibition of taking interest, that applies to everybody, including a non-Jew who keeps the Noahide laws (as R. Albo mentions a few sentences earlier), do not apply to him. I.I.
CLAIM “It is the law to kill anyone who denies the Torah. The Christians belong to the denying ones of the Torah.” Coschen hamischpat 425 Hagah 425. 5
RESPONSE This is from the Shulcan Aruch and applies to killing Jewish heretics. The following line in this passage is that this law does not apply to anyone non-Jewish and it is forbidden to harm any gentile. The Jewish heretics are people which are a potential cause of harm and trouble to the Jewish nation. The penalty is designed to demonstrate the severity with which heretical views were considered, rather than a practical penalty as such penalties were rarely imposed. E.S./David S. Maddison (firstname.lastname@example.org)
CLAIM “A heretic Gentile you may kill outright with your own hands.” Talmud, Abodah Zara, 4b
RESPONSE It does not say this – this is a forgery. David S. Maddison (email@example.com)
CLAIM “Every Jew, who spills the blood of the godless (non-Jews), is doing the same as making a sacrifice to God.” Talmud: Bammidber raba c 21 & Jalkut 772
RESPONSE Midrash Bamidbar Raba 21: “[Numbers 23:11 regarding Phinehas who killed Zimri for fornicating with a Midianite woman] `Because he was zealous for his G-d and atoned for the children of Israel’ It says he atoned – did he bring a sacrifice? This teaches us that whoever spills the blood of the wicked is like someone who brings a sacrifice.” Joe Slater
Jewish Talmudic Quotes – Facts Are Facts
From Acharya S
The decisions of the Talmud are words of the living God. Jehovah himself asks the opinions of earthly rabbis when there are difficult affairs in heaven.
Rabbi Menachen, Comments for the Fifth Book
Jehovah himself in heaven studies the Talmud, standing: he has such respect for that book.
R. Johanan said: A heathen who studies the Torah deserves death, for it is written, Moses commanded us a law for an inheritance; it is our inheritance, not theirs. Then why is this not included in the Noachian laws? — On the reading morasha [an inheritance] he steals it; on the reading me’orasah [betrothed], he is guilty as one who violates a betrothed maiden, who is stoned. An objection is raised: R. Meir used to say. Whence do we know that even a heathen who studies the Torah is as a High Priest? From the verse, [Ye shall therefore keep my statutes, and my judgments:] which, if man do, he shall live in them. Priests, Levites, and Israelites are not mentioned, but men: hence thou mayest learn that even a heathen who studies the Torah is as a High Priest! — That refers to their own seven laws.
To communicate anything to a Goy about our religious relations would be equal to the killing of all Jews, for if the Goyim knew what we teach about them, they would kill us openly.
Libbre David 37
A Jew should and must make a false oath when the Goyim asks if our books contain anything against them.
Szaaloth-Utszabot, The Book of Jore Dia 17
We beg Thee, O Lord, indict Thy wrath on the nations not believing in Thee, and not calling on Thy name. Let down Thy wrath on them and inflict them with Thy wrath. Drive them away in Thy wrath and crush them into pieces. Take away, O Lord, all bone from them. In a moment indict all disbelievers. Destroy in a moment all foes of Thy nation. Draw out with the root, disperse and ruin unworthy nations. Destroy them! Destroy them immediately, in this very moment!
Prayer said on the eve of Passover (Pranajtis: Christianus in Talmudae Judeorum, quotations from: Synagoga Judaica)
The Feast of Tabernacles is the period when Israel triumphs over the other people of the world. That is why during this feast we seize the loulab and carry it as a trophy to show that we have conquered all other peoples, known as “populace”…
Zohar, Toldoth Noah 63b
When the Messiah comes every Jew will have 2800 slaves.
Simeon Haddarsen, fol. 56-D
Resh Lakish said: He who is observant of fringes will be privileged to be served by two thousand eight hundred slaves, for it is said, Thus saith the Lord of hosts: In those days it shall come to pass, that ten men shall take hold, out of all the languages of the nations shall even take hold of the skirt of him that is a Jew, saying, We will go with you, etc.
Mas. Shabbath 31b
On the house of the Goy [Goy means unclean, and is the disparaging term for a non-Jew] one looks as on the fold of cattle.
Tosefta, Tractate Erubin VIII
When a Jew has a Gentile in his clutches, another Jew may go to the same Gentile, lend him money and in turn deceive him, so that the Gentile shall be ruined. For the property of a Gentile, according to our law, belongs to no one, and the first Jew that passes has full right to seize it.
Schulchan Aruch, Choszen Hamiszpat 156
If it can be proven that someone has given the money of Israelites to the Goyim, a way must be found after prudent consideration to wipe him off the face of the earth.
Choschen Hamm 388, 15
Happy will be the lost of Israel, whom the Holy One, blessed be He, has chosen from amongst the Goyim, of whom the Scriptures say: “Their work is but vanity, it is an illusion at which we must laugh; they will all perish when God visits them in His wrath.” At the moment when the Holy One, blessed be He, will exterminate all the Goyim of the world, Israel alone will subsist, even as it is written: “The Lord alone will appear great on that day!…
Zohar, Vayshlah 177b
That the Jewish nation is the only nation selected by God, while all the remaining ones are contemptible and hateful.
That all property of other nations belongs to the Jewish nation, which consequently is entitled to seize upon it without any scruples. An orthodox Jew is not bound to observe principles of morality towards people of other tribes. He may act contrary to morality, if profitable to himself or to Jews in general.
A Jew may rob a Goy, he may cheat him over a bill, which should not be perceived by him, otherwise the name of God would become dishonoured.
Schulchan Aruch, Choszen Hamiszpat, 348
R. Hanina said: If a heathen smites a Jew, he is worthy of death; for it is written, And he looked this way and that way, and when he saw that there was no man, he slew the Egyptian. [Ex. 2:12] R. Hanina also said: He who smites an Israelite on the jaw, is as though he had thus assaulted the Divine Presence; for it is written, one who smiteth man [i.e. an Israelite] attacketh the Holy One.
[In other words, if a non-Jew kills a Jew, the non-Jew can be killed. Punching an Israelite is akin to assaulting God. (But killing a non-Jew is NOT like assaulting God.]
If a goy killed a goy or a Jew he is responsible, but if a Jew killed a goy he is not responsible.
Tosefta, Aboda Zara, VIII, 5
Has it not been taught: “With respect to robbery — if one stole or robbed or [seized] a beautiful woman, or [committed] similar offences, if [these were perpetrated] by one Cuthean [“Cuthean” or “Samaritan” = goy/gentile/heathen/non-Jew] against another, [the theft, etc.] must not be kept, and likewise [the theft] of an Israelite by a Cuthean, but that of a Cuthean by an Israelite may be retained?” But if robbery is a capital offence, should not the Tanna have taught: He incurs a penalty? — Because the second clause wishes to state, “but that of a Cuthean by an Israelite may be retained,” therefore the former clause reads, “[theft of an Israelite by a Cuthean] must not be kept.” But where a penalty is incurred, it is explicitly stated, for the commencing clause teaches: “For murder, whether of a Cuthean by a Cuthean, or of an Israelite by a Cuthean, punishment is incurred; but of a Cuthean by an Israelite, there is no death penalty?”
[Translation: A Jew may rob a Goy, but a Goy may not rob a Jew. If a Goy murders another Goy or a Jew, he should be killed, but a Jew will not be incur the death penalty for killing a non-Jew.]
Kill the Goyim by any means possible.
Choshen Ha’mishpat 425:50
Everyone who sheds the blood of the impious [non-Jews] is as acceptable to God as he who offers a sacrifice to God.
Extermination of the Christians is a necessary sacrifice.
Tob shebbe goyyim harog – Even the best of the Goyim (Gentiles) should be killed.
Soferim 15, Rule 10
[NB: Hoffman says, “This passage is not from the Soncino edition but is from the original Hebrew of the Babylonian Talmud as quoted by the 1907 Jewish Encyclopedia, published by Funk and Wagnalls and compiled by Isidore Singer, under the entry, ‘Gentile,’ (p. 617).” Another source says this passage is at Avodah Zara 26b. We have not been able to verify any of these references. It does not seem to be at Avodah Zara 26b of the Soncino edition.]
What is [the meaning of] Mount Sinai? The mountain whereon there descended hostility [sin’ah ] toward idolaters [non-Jews].
The same has been taught as follows: If the ox of an Israelite gores an ox of a Canaanite [non-Jew] there is no liability, but if an ox of a Canaanite gores an ox of an Israelite… the payment is to be in full, as it is said: He stood and measured the earth, he beheld and drove asunder the nations [Gentiles], and again, He shined forth from Mount Paran…implying that from Paran he exposed their money to Israel.
Baba Kama 38a
[Trans: The property of the Israelite is more valuable than that of the Gentile. Mount Paran refers to Deut. 33:2, where God offered the law to the nations (Gentiles), who rejected it. The money of the Gentiles is available to the Israelites.]
ONE SHOULD NOT PLACE CATTLE IN HEATHENS’ INNS, BECAUSE THEY ARE SUSPECTED OF IMMORAL PRACTICE WITH THEM. A WOMAN SHOULD NOT BE ALONE WITH THEM, BECAUSE THEY ARE SUSPECTED OF LEWDNESS, NOR SHOULD A MAN BE ALONE WITH THEM, BECAUSE THEY ARE SUSPECTED OF SHEDDING BLOOD. . .
Why then should we not leave female animals alone with female heathens? — Said Mar ‘Ukba b. Hama: Because heathens frequent their neighbours’ wives, and should one by chance not find her in, and find the cattle there, he might use it immorally. You may also say that even if he should find her in he might use the animal, as a Master has said: Heathens prefer the cattle of Israelites to their own wives, for R. Johanan said: When the serpent came unto Eve he infused filthy lust into her.
Avodah Zarah 22a-b
He who pours the oil of anointing over cattle or vessels is not guilty; if over heathens or the dead, he is not guilty. The law relating to cattle and vessels is right, for it is written: Upon the flesh of man [adam] shall it not be poured; and cattle and vessels are not man. Also with regard to the dead, [it is plausible] that he is exempt, since after death one is called corpse and not man. But why is one exempt in the case of heathens; are they not in the category of adam?-No, it is written: And ye my sheep, the sheep of my pasture, are adam [man]: Ye are called adam but heathens are not called ‘adam. But is it not written: And the persons [adam] were sixteen thousand? — Because it is used in opposition to cattle. But is it not written: And should I not have pity on Nineveh [that great city, wherein are more than six score thousand persons [adam]?–This too is used in opposition to cattle.
Mas. K’rithoth 6b
[This passage refers to anointing with oil. “Heathens,” i.e., Gentiles, are not “adam” or man but are equated with cattle]
An objection was raised: And the persons were sixteen thousand!–This is due to [the mention of] cattle. Wherein are more than six-score thousand persons that cannot discern between their right and their left hand!–This is due [to the mention of] cattle.
Mas. Yevamoth 61b
[Again non-Jews are referred to as “cattle.”]
All Israelites will have a part in the future world… The Goyim, at the end of the world will be handed over to the angel Duma and sent down to hell.
Zohar, Shemoth, Toldoth Noah, Lekh-Lekha
Jehovah created the non-Jew in human form so that the Jew would not have to be served by beasts. The non-Jew is consequently an animal in human form, and condemned to serve the Jew day and night.
Midrasch Talpioth, p. 225-L
Everything a Jew needs for his church ritual no goy is permitted to manufacture, but only a Jew, because this must be manufactured by human beings and the Jew is not permitted to consider the goyim as human beings.
Schulchan Oruch, Orach Chaim 14, 20, 32, 33, 39
A Jew may do to a non-Jewess what he can do. He may treat her as he treats a piece of meat.
Hadarine, 20, B; Schulchan Aruch, Choszen Hamiszpat 348
A Jew may violate but not marry a non-Jewish girl.
Gad. Shas. 2:2
A boy-goy after nine years and one day old, and a girl after three years and one day old, are considered filthy.
Pereferkowicz, Talmud t.v., p. 11
Raba stated: With reference to the Rabbinical statement that [legally] an Egyptian [Gentile] has no father, it must not be imagined that this is due to [the Egyptians’] excessive indulgence in carnal gratification, owing to which it is not known [who the father was], but that if this were known it is to be taken into consideration; but [the fact is] that even if this is known it is not taken into consideration…. Thus it may be inferred that the All Merciful declared their children to be legally fatherless, for [so indeed it is also] written, Whose flesh is as the flesh of asses, and whose issue is like the issue of horses.
[Trans.: A non-Jew is “legally fatherless,” regardless of whether or not the father is known. Gentile children are essentially asses and horses, i.e., animals.] [The daughters of the heathens] should be considered as in the state of <http://jewish.com/askarabbi/askarabbi/askr4942.htm>niddah [separation?] from their cradle…
Avodah Zarah 36b
They decreed in connection with a heathen child that it should cause defilement by seminal emission so that an Israelite child should not become accustomed to commit pederasty with him…. It is therefore to be concluded that a heathen girl [communicates defilement] from the age of three years and one day, for inasmuch as she is then capable of the sexual act she likewise defiles by a flux. This is obvious!
Avodah Zarah 36b-37a
R. Joseph said: Come and hear! A maiden aged three years and a day may be acquired in marriage by coition [intercourse], and if her deceased husband’s brother cohabits with her, she becomes his. The penalty of adultery may be incurred through her; [if a niddah] she defiles him who has connection with her, so that he in turn defiles that upon which he lies, as a garment which has lain upon [a person afflicted with gonorrhoea].
Rab said: Pederasty with a child below nine years of age is not deemed as pederasty with a child above that. Samuel said: Pederasty with a child below three years is not treated as with a child above that.24 (24) I.e., Rab makes nine years the minimum; but if one committed sodomy with a child of lesser age, no guilt is incurred. Samuel makes three the minimum.
Raba said. It means this: When a grown-up man has intercourse with a little girl it is nothing, for when the girl is less than this [three years old], it is as if one puts the finger into the eye; but when a small boy has intercourse with a grown-up woman he makes her as ‘a girl who is injured by a piece of wood.’…
[This debate concerns whether or not someone is a virgin. Virginity is prized above all, such that it is believed that a girl under the age of three will regain her virginity, even if a man has had intercourse with her. (Fn. 7 says, in regard to putting “the finger into the eye”: “I.e., tears come to the eye again and again, so does virginity come back to the little girl under three years.”) Since virginity is prized above all, one could assume that this conclusion has allowed grown men to have sex with little girls with immunity. A grown-up woman is not deflowered by having sex with a small boy, however, since he is only like a “piece of wood.”]
It was taught: R. Judah used to say, A man is bound to say the following three blessings daily: “[Blessed art thou…] who hast not made me a heathen,” “…. who hast not made me a woman”; and “… who hast not made me a brutish man.” R. Aha b. Jacob once overhead his son saying “[Blessed art thou…] who hast not made me a brutish man,” whereupon he said to him, “And this too!” Said the other, “Then what blessing should I say instead?” [He replied,]…h who hast not made me a slave.” And is not that the same as a woman? – a slave is more contemptible.
[A “prayer” or “benediction” to be said by a Jewish man every day: “Thank God for not making me a Gentile, a woman or a slave.”]
Do not save Goyim in danger of death.
Show no mercy to the Goyim.
Hilkkoth Akum X1
A Jew is forbidden to drink from a glass of wine which a Gentile has touched, because the touch has made the wine unclean.
Schulchan Aruch, Johre Deah, 122
And he who desires that none of his vows made during the year shall be valid, let him stand at the beginning of the year and declare, ‘Every vow which I may make in the future shall be null.1 [HIS VOWS ARE THEN INVALID,] PROVIDING THAT HE REMEMBERS THIS AT THE TIME OF THE VOW.
[Essentially the “Kol Nidre” prayer said every year at Yom Kippur. Fn. 1 says: “This may have provided a support for the custom of reciting Kol Nidre (a formula for dispensation of vows) prior to the Evening Service of the Day of Atonement (Ran.). The context makes it perfectly obvious that only vows, where the maker abjures benefit from aught, or imposes an interdict of his own property upon his neighbour, are referred to. Though the beginning of the year (New Year) is mentioned here, the Day of Atonement was probably chosen on account of its great solemnity. But Kol Nidre as part of the ritual is later than the Talmud, and, as seen from the following statement about R. Huna h. Hinena, the law of revocation in advance was not made public.”]
All of these are the reasons why each and every person should DEMAND that all references to the so-called “Ten Commandments” be removed from all public state and governmental places. The first three “commandments” demand that we all bow down to the “god” of the Jews, who apparently cannot run the universe unless consulting with immoral men who think no laws apply to them – or have clever ways around all of the laws. These are the men who have been claiming for far too long that they are channeling “god.” This is not a god of peace, love and brotherhood. It is a god of war, suffering, and horror. Reflections of this so-called god can be seen in the “state” of Israel. The Jews might wish to continue hanging on to this channeled god born of their own egos, but the rest of us deserve something far better.
When I stumbled upon your webpage with what you claimed where quotes from the Talmud, I thought I would assist you in correcting your mistakes so that you may have an accurate understanding of what you clearly did not. However, after scrolling down I noticed that many of these books, “tractates”, whatever you want to call them don’t even exist. You even use the name of a 10th century commentator as a book. Here are accurate answers:
The lulav is not a trophy, it is a symbolism of uniting the Jews and hoping us all to possess good deeds and torah. Goy doesn’t equate heathen, impious, etc. Goy translates to any gentile nation. There is nothing more to that. If the Talmud ever refers to idolators, heathens, impious people it is referring to anyone, including Jews, that encapsulates these qualities. The Mount Sinai story recounts the receiving of the ten commandments and also of Jews who became idolators.. Its a well known story of the torah so I don’t understand how you can get that one wrong. There are 3 things, according to Talmudic Law, a Jew must never do, even if threatened by death. The three things are idolatry, sexual crimes and murder. These apply to all people. This sacred law alone discounts over half of your claims. Lastly, Kol Nidre isn’t a prayer and it only applies to specific vows made between 2 Jews. Any other vow that exists outside the jewish judicial system must still be upheld. Its difficult to give you the benefit of the doubt, attributed by ignorance, when outright lies are printed to be true. All I can hope is that you can accept that you were wrong, if you were simply making ignorant mistakes, and update your website to a truthful standing. If you are a self-titled truth teller, you should tell the truth.
Online Talmud Resource: HERE