Voodoo circumcision
Martin
slew of medical benefits. However, scratch beneath the surface and
you discover a homo-erotic undercurrent; the procedure is about
exerting power over others and initiation.
The medical claptrap put forward to promote the bizarre practice of
circumcision is simply a smokescreen.
Here we have a news article from South Africa about a bunch of men who
are miffed because they're prevented from getting their hands on young
boys so they can mutilate their genitals.
Nice work if you can get it, I guess.
<http://www.weekendpost.co.za/article.aspx?id=491349>:
----- Begin Quote -----
DISGRUNTLED Eastern Cape traditional leaders want the Health
Department to relinquish all powers vested in it to save initiates’
lives during the forthcoming summer initiation season.
The traditional leaders recently launched a bid to have the
Application of Health Standards in Traditional Circumcision Act
amended.
About 54 boys died and 13 others lost their genitals because of
botched circumcisions during the winter circumcision season in
Transkei.
Areas affected included Ngqeleni, Libode, Lusikisiki and Qumbu.
One effect in the Act, passed by the Eastern Cape legislature in 2001
to address problems relating to the custom, was that traditional
leaders were made to play fringe roles.
Congress of Traditional Leaders of SA (Contralesa) provincial
secretary Chief Xolile Ndevu said this week the leaders wanted
“complete power” to drive the tradition.
According to the Act, traditional surgeons and their attendants cannot
perform circumcisions unless they are approved by a medical officer
appointed by the department. No initiation school may operate before
obtaining permission from the local medical officer.
Ndevu said he felt government had given too much power to the Health
Department to run the tradition.
“We say the Act should be amended and depict clearly what role the
Health Department should play. They mustn’t hand all powers to the
department.
“Boys should go to a hospital for check-ups before going to the bush,
but everything else should fall under our jurisdiction as traditional
leaders.
“All these years we have been begging the department to have this Act
amended, but to no avail.”
Although he would not say much, Contralesa chairman Chief Ngubo
Mgcotyelwa confirmed that the bid to have the Act amended was an
“ongoing” initiative.
However, provincial Health spokesman Sizwe Kupelo said this week his
department would not back down, and would continue to intervene in the
custom. “We will continue to play our part as long as there is a
problem that is health-related.”
He claimed the department was not interested in running the practice
itself. “The only thing we are concerned about is the health of these
young boys who go to the bush. So any goal that is aimed at protecting
their lives is welcomed by the department,” he said.
Kupelo brushed off claims that the Act had given the department too
much power over traditional leaders regarding the custom. He said the
only problem traditional leaders had with them was probably “that we
are too good in what we do” (protecting the lives of initiates).
----- End Quote -----
--
<http://www.hiv-poz.co.uk/>
14 years, 9 months and 16 days.
john
"Martin" <mar...@hiv-poz.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1164.1256816...@hiv-poz.co.uk...
> Circumcision nutters tout their fetish as a necessity which offers a
> slew of medical benefits. However, scratch beneath the surface and
> you discover a homo-erotic undercurrent; the procedure is about
> exerting power over others and initiation.
>
Most would be done by circumcised people , could be all, that way they keep
the denial going about being abused themselves. The usual idiotic belief
that drives it is some health benefit--less chance of infections or some
such drivel, using HIV.
They don't want to know that something like 50% of their erogenous nerves
have been removed, and maybe your ability to orgasm, most men think
ejeculation is orgasm.
Bit like hysterectomy where they kill your sex life too
Jake Waskett
I wouldn't dream of questioning your sincerity, but it must be remarkably
convenient to be able to dismiss all the evidence against your position as
artifacts of "denial". Saves you from having to think.
john
"Jake Waskett" <ja...@waskett.org> wrote in message news:MNyHm.80547
>
> I wouldn't dream of questioning your sincerity, but it must be remarkably
> convenient to be able to dismiss all the evidence against your position as
> artifacts of "denial". Saves you from having to think.
That was thinking.
john
> convenient to be able to dismiss all the evidence against your position as
> artifacts of "denial". Saves you from having to think.
You come up with another reason why people circumcise their children when it
is such a idiotic thing to do.
Jake Waskett
Has the thought occurred to you that the people who circumcise their
children probably would not agree that it is an idiotic thing to do?
Jack
> On Mon, 02 Nov 2009 14:41:34 +0000, john wrote:
>
> >> I wouldn't dream of questioning your sincerity, but it must be
> >> remarkably convenient to be able to dismiss all the evidence against
> >> your position as artifacts of "denial". Saves you from having to
> >> think.
>
> > You come up with another reason why people circumcise their children
> > when it is such a idiotic thing to do.
>
> Has the thought occurred to you that the people who circumcise their
> children probably would not agree that it is an idiotic thing to do?
The thought occured to me that you are trying to reason with an idiot,
although his heart might be in the right place.
john
Oh yes, I know two, but both have circumcised fathers. And their only
argument is to do with hygiene. How absurd.
It is curious to me why they don't know that a typical western medical
circumcision results in the loss of approximately 1/2 of the total surface
area of the penis and between 50 and 80% or more of its erogenous sexual
nerves.
And I'd like to see a survey of homosexuals and psychopaths to see how many
had been circumcised. The most violent nation on the planet is Israel,
whose soldiers take pleasure in killing children with stomach shots
http://www.whale.to/b/barrett1.html
"Then too, homosexuality also seems to be related to circumcision. First to
report this was Melitta Schmideberg (Psychoanalytic Review, 1948), who
treated two patients, homosexuals, who had been circumcised. In one of them,
"The resentment and fear of his mother associated with circumcision was an
important factor in the development of his homosexuality." More recently, a
study was made of admissions to a large Naval hospital. Of all admissions,
32% had been circumcised. Of all admission with the diagnosis of "overt
homosexuality," 100% had been circumcised. [1966] THE UNKINDEST CUT OF ALL
By John M. Foley, M.D.
Jack
> "Jake Waskett" <j...@waskett.org> wrote in message
>
> news:ToEHm.72957$KU2....@newsfe26.ams2...
>
> > On Mon, 02 Nov 2009 14:41:34 +0000, john wrote:
>
>
> >>> I wouldn't dream of questioning your sincerity, but it must be
> >>> remarkably convenient to be able to dismiss all the evidence against
> >>> your position as artifacts of "denial". Saves you from having to
> >>> think.
>
> >> You come up with another reason why people circumcise their children
> >> when it is such a idiotic thing to do.
>
> > Has the thought occurred to you that the people who circumcise their
> > children probably would not agree that it is an idiotic thing to do?
>
> Oh yes, I know two, but both have circumcised fathers. And their only
> argument is to do with hygiene. How absurd.
>
> It is curious to me why they don't know that a typical western medical
> circumcision results in the loss of approximately 1/2 of the total surface
> area of the penis and between 50 and 80% or more of its erogenous sexual
> nerves.
>
> And I'd like to see a survey of homosexuals and psychopaths to see how many
> had been circumcised. The most violent nation on the planet is Israel,
>
> "Then too, homosexuality also seems to be related to circumcision. First to
> report this was Melitta Schmideberg (Psychoanalytic Review, 1948), who
> treated two patients, homosexuals, who had been circumcised. In one of them,
> "The resentment and fear of his mother associated with circumcision was an
> important factor in the development of his homosexuality." More recently, a
> study was made of admissions to a large Naval hospital. Of all admissions,
> 32% had been circumcised. Of all admission with the diagnosis of "overt
> homosexuality," 100% had been circumcised. [1966] THE UNKINDEST CUT OF ALL
> By John M. Foley, M.D.
shut up
David Z
news:99193236-3548-4cdc...@z41g2000yqz.googlegroups.com...
******************************************************
Now you know what it's like trying to reason with you.
Jack
> "Jack" <furgfurgf...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
For example... oh that's right you can never come up with examples of
anything.
David Z
********************************************************
Never? See message entitled "Jack's Oblivion." You have no memory at all.
You're just a total moron.
Jake Waskett
> "Jake Waskett" <ja...@waskett.org> wrote in message
> news:ToEHm.72957$KU2....@newsfe26.ams2...
>> On Mon, 02 Nov 2009 14:41:34 +0000, john wrote:
>>
>>> "Jake Waskett" <ja...@waskett.org> wrote in message news:MNyHm.80547
>>>>
>>>> I wouldn't dream of questioning your sincerity, but it must be
>>>> remarkably convenient to be able to dismiss all the evidence against
>>>> your position as artifacts of "denial". Saves you from having to
>>>> think.
>>>
>>> You come up with another reason why people circumcise their children
>>> when it is such a idiotic thing to do.
>>
>> Has the thought occurred to you that the people who circumcise their
>> children probably would not agree that it is an idiotic thing to do?
>
> Oh yes, I know two, but both have circumcised fathers. And their only
> argument is to do with hygiene. How absurd.
"Absurd" seems a little strong. Incidentally, do you think that it is
reasonable to extrapolate from a sample of two?
> It is curious to me why they don't know that a typical western medical
> circumcision results in the loss of approximately 1/2 of the total
> surface area of the penis and between 50 and 80% or more of its
> erogenous sexual nerves.
Maybe they're not sufficiently naive to believe anti-circumcision
propaganda?
> And I'd like to see a survey of homosexuals and psychopaths to see how
> many had been circumcised. The most violent nation on the planet is
> Israel, whose soldiers take pleasure in killing children with stomach
> shots http://www.whale.to/b/barrett1.html
Every single soldier? Wouldn't it be more accurate to say that at least a
few Israeli soldiers are guilty of barbaric acts?
john
"Jake Waskett" <ja...@waskett.org> wrote in message news:sRTHm.20517
>
> Maybe they're not sufficiently naive to believe anti-circumcision
> propaganda?
Let me guess, you are cicumcised? You have circumcised children?
> Every single soldier? Wouldn't it be more accurate to say that at least a
> few Israeli soldiers are guilty of barbaric acts?
>
No, it comes from the top. Like My Lai, which was Operation Phoenix.
john
"Jake Waskett" <ja...@waskett.org> wrote in message news:sRTHm.20517
>
> Every single soldier? Wouldn't it be more accurate to say that at least a
> few Israeli soldiers are guilty of barbaric acts?
>
Here is MyLai, and we all thought that was an isolated incident of a
soldier/s gone haywire http://www.whale.to/b/my_lai_massacre.html
And I guess you have missed the Israeli army's genocide on the Palestinians,
let me help you http://www.whale.to/b/palestinian_genocide.html
but given your blind spot over circumcision, I don't hold out much hope
and look at the T shirts the army make for themselves
Jake Waskett
What the *!*! does it have to do with circumcision? I'm just questioning
the soundness of your claims.
Jake Waskett
> "Jake Waskett" <ja...@waskett.org> wrote in message news:sRTHm.20517
>>
>> Maybe they're not sufficiently naive to believe anti-circumcision
>> propaganda?
>
> Let me guess, you are cicumcised? You have circumcised children?
Yes, I'm circumcised. I don't have any children. More to the point, I've
been studying the literature on the subject of circumcision for many
years, have published papers on the subject, and am regarded by many as an
expert in the field.
john
"Jake Waskett" <ja...@waskett.org> wrote in message news:YVVHm.20774
> Yes, I'm circumcised. I don't have any children. More to the point, I've
> been studying the literature on the subject of circumcision for many
> years, have published papers on the subject, and am regarded by many as an
> expert in the field.
Ok, so how much, % wise, of the skin area, and erogenous nerves are removed
with circumcision?
and how many % wise circumcisions are performed without anasthetic?
what papers do you have to support any health benefits?
I guess you must be an atheist, as you don't believe the body was created
correctly in the first place?
john
American Academy of Pediatrics states, "[t]o make an informed choice,
parents of all male infants should be given accurate and unbiased
information and be provided the opportunity to discuss this decision."
Now there is an outfit to trust! Liars and then some.
A front group for the drug industry. Deny, deny vaccine damage, suppress or
fake research when that doesn't work (think Pediatrics Journal and Eric
Fombonne), and take money from formula companies, drug as many kids as
possible, just for starters. Circumcision flack Schoen is a member.
http://www.whale.to/vaccines/aap.html
john
Can't see much health benefits even on the Wiki page
"Reviews of these studies have reached differing conclusions about whether
circumcision could be used as a prevention method against HIV"
and that is before you know HIV is a hoax
and so on
so what exactly is the advantage?
windinghighway
>>
> Here is MyLai, and we all thought that was an isolated incident of a
>
> And I guess you have missed the Israeli army's genocide on the Palestinians,
> let me help youhttp://www.whale.to/b/palestinian_genocide.html
>
Well, lets lets take a look at the perpetrators of some of the
greatest military massacres in history
Hitler and his armies -- uncircumcised
Mao and his armies -- uncircumcised
Stalin and his armies -- uncircumcised
Napoleon and his armies -- uncircumcised
Spanish conquistadors -- uncircumcised
Attilla and his armies -- uncirucmcised
Alexander and his armies -- uncircumcised
Caesar and his armies -- uncirumcised
Imperial Japanese armies -- uncircumcised
Genghis Kahn and his armies -- uncircumcised
These and other uncircumcised maniacs have been responsible for
hundreds of millions of deaths.
So, if Johns logic about the relationship between circumcision and
violence is correct, it would seem that the relatively modest and
infrequent massacres by Israelis and Americans prove that circumcision
actually reduces violence! It is the man bearing both weapon and
foreskin that we have to fear!
But then, John isnt interested in logic, or facts. All he believes
in are conspiracy theories -- and the crazier and more self-
contradicory they are, the more he likes them. He thinks AIDS is a
hoax, vaccines are a hoax -- well, pretty much anything that anybody
tells him is a hoax is fine with him. His idea of "thinking" begins
and ends with the uncritical acceptance of whatever conspiracy theory
he can find on the web -- and he finds a lot of them!
John is a full-time paranoid nutcase, poor chap. To glimpse into his
mind, check out the conspiracy theory websites he so proudly refers
us to -- they are a hoot!
Jake Waskett
> "Jake Waskett" <ja...@waskett.org> wrote in message news:YVVHm.20774
>> Yes, I'm circumcised. I don't have any children. More to the point,
>> I've been studying the literature on the subject of circumcision for
>> many years, have published papers on the subject, and am regarded by
>> many as an expert in the field.
>
> Ok, so how much, % wise, of the skin area, and erogenous nerves are
> removed with circumcision?
The short answer is that nobody knows. Neither have actually been
established.
We could make a rough estimate, however. The only study giving
measurements of the foreskin's area is that of Kigozi et al (http://
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19770623). That study gives an estimate of
36.8 sq cm for the foreskin area. So let's estimate the total surface
area of the penis, making the simplifying assumption that it can be
considered as a simple cylinder of skin covering length times
circumference, plus the area of the foreskin itself. Although not in a
peer-reviewed journal, a reasonably good source for penis size data seems
to be http://sizesurvey.com/result.html; this gives figures of 16.15cm and
12.76 cm for the length and circumference respectively, or 206.074 sq cm.
37 is approximately 15% of 243 (206 + 37).
For "erogenous nerves", unfortunately, I'm not even sure that we could
make an estimate. First of all we'd have to specify what is meant by an
"erogenous" nerve: how does an erogenous nerve differ from a non-erogenous
nerve? Secondly, we'd have to find nerve count data for both the foreskin
and the penis itself; reliable figures do not exist.
> and how many % wise circumcisions are performed without anasthetic?
In what context? If you mean tribal circumcisions in Africa, probably 0.
If you mean childhood circumcisions in Western nations, probably 100%. If
you mean infant circumcisions in the US, there isn't any definitive data
for recent years; my guess would be about 80%.
> what papers do you have to support any health benefits?
There are literally thousands of such papers, but a good place to start is
the table on page 15 of the World Health Organisation document at: http://
www.malecircumcision.org/media/documents/MC_Global_Trends_Determinants.pdf
You might also find helpful a slightly older, but more detailed discussion
by the American Academy of Pediatrics, here:
http://aappolicy.aappublications.org/cgi/content/full/pediatrics;103/3/686
> I guess you must be an atheist, as you don't believe the body was
> created correctly in the first place?
I am an atheist, yes. I didn't say there was anything wrong with the
body, though.
Jake Waskett
> "Jake Waskett" <ja...@waskett.org> wrote in message
> news:YVVHm.20774$6O1....@newsfe08.ams2...
>> On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 11:35:26 +0000, john wrote:
>>
>>> "Jake Waskett" <ja...@waskett.org> wrote in message news:sRTHm.20517
>>>>
>>>> Maybe they're not sufficiently naive to believe anti-circumcision
>>>> propaganda?
>>>
>>> Let me guess, you are cicumcised? You have circumcised children?
>>
>> Yes, I'm circumcised. I don't have any children. More to the point,
>> I've been studying the literature on the subject of circumcision for
>> many years, have published papers on the subject, and am regarded by
>> many as an expert in the field.
>
> Can't see much health benefits even on the Wiki page
>
> "Reviews of these studies have reached differing conclusions about
> whether circumcision could be used as a prevention method against HIV"
Care to explain why you think this negates the health benefit?
> and that is before you know HIV is a hoax
I'm sorry, I'm not going to waste time on this.
john
> On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 13:50:49 +0000, john wrote:
>
>> "Jake Waskett" <ja...@waskett.org> wrote in message news:YVVHm.20774
>>> Yes, I'm circumcised. I don't have any children. More to the point,
>>> I've been studying the literature on the subject of circumcision for
>>> many years, have published papers on the subject, and am regarded by
>>> many as an expert in the field.
>>
>> Ok, so how much, % wise, of the skin area, and erogenous nerves are
>> removed with circumcision?
>
> The short answer is that nobody knows. Neither have actually been
> established.
I doubt that. If that was true how idiotic to chop bits off with out
knowing how it was going to affect your sex life, don't you think?
You wouldn't read what it said for sex effects
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circumcision and want to get it done
>
>
> There are literally thousands of such papers, but a good place to start is
> the table on page 15 of the World Health Organisation document at: http://
> www.malecircumcision.org/media/documents/MC_Global_Trends_Determinants.pdf
>
> You might also find helpful a slightly older, but more detailed discussion
> by the American Academy of Pediatrics, here:
> http://aappolicy.aappublications.org/cgi/content/full/pediatrics;103/3/686
I looked at the wiki page, which you edit, and there was no consensus in
favour of health benefits as far as I could see.
>
>> I guess you must be an atheist, as you don't believe the body was
>> created correctly in the first place?
>
> I am an atheist, yes. I didn't say there was anything wrong with the
> body, though.
But you want to chop a bit off as it causes health problems? That is saying
there is something wrong with it, obviously.
What was your reason for getting it done? and what age were you?
john
"windinghighway" <winding...@aol.com> wrote in message news:8135cf4d-
More like forced sodomy of children is the key problem with that lot
http://www.whale.to/b/sodomy_h.html
eg Hitler and Alexander
Hitler was a sexual deviant who would do anything to hide his sexual
proclivities from the public. This made him a puppet to any foreign country
or ideology with the knowledge on him. This is known as "the wood" on a
person and anyone with 'the wood' has control over that person. ......Hans
Mend: "In 1915 we were billeted in a brewery and slept in the hay. Hitler
was bedded down at night with Schmidtl, his male whore. We heard a rustling
in the hay. Then someone switched on his electric flashlight and growled
'look at those two faggots'.....Many of the highest-placed leaders in the
Nazi party, including IHitler, Roehm, Forster, von Schirach and almost all
of his bodyguards were gay. Hitler surrounded himself with homosexuals and
even retrieved Roehm from Bolivia, making him Deputy Fuhrer. This knowledge
enabled outside countries like Britain and ideologies like the Freemasons to
control Hitler, his high command and his bodyguards. Hitler and his band of
merry bandits became puppets with wooden strings. In this way, any foreign
society can be destroyed with a leader hiding their sexuality. Hitler,
Roehm, Forster and von Schirach took part in destroying their own societies
while enjoying the power it gave them. Hitler was a double agent prime
minister. He worked for a foreign country (Britain) and a foreign ideology
(the Freemasons). The formula proved so effective it is still used today, in
politics and the media, especially with TV personalities, radio announcers,
prime ministers and presidents, both male and female. Hitler was a British
Agent by Greg Hallett p.65
john
"windinghighway" <winding...@aol.com> wrote in message news:8135cf4d-
also Kissinger who is behind 6 million deaths at very least. And the Global
illegal drug trade http://www.whale.to/b/kissinger.html
Homosexual Paedophile.
john
hoax, vaccines are a hoax -- well, pretty much anything that anybody
tells him is a hoax is fine with him. His idea of "thinking" begins
and ends with the uncritical acceptance of whatever conspiracy theory
he can find on the web -- and he finds a lot of them!
John is a full-time paranoid nutcase, poor chap. To glimpse into his
mind, check out the conspiracy theory websites he so proudly refers
us to -- they are a hoot!
Ad hominem, a sign of someone with no argument
Even the aids hoax is creaking at the seams dear, and as for vaccination, an
easier hoax to debunk would be hard to fin
Jake Waskett
> "Jake Waskett" <ja...@waskett.org> wrote in message
> news:sYWHm.20799$6O1....@newsfe08.ams2...
>> On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 13:50:49 +0000, john wrote:
>>
>>> "Jake Waskett" <ja...@waskett.org> wrote in message news:YVVHm.20774
>>>> Yes, I'm circumcised. I don't have any children. More to the point,
>>>> I've been studying the literature on the subject of circumcision for
>>>> many years, have published papers on the subject, and am regarded by
>>>> many as an expert in the field.
>>>
>>> Ok, so how much, % wise, of the skin area, and erogenous nerves are
>>> removed with circumcision?
>>
>> The short answer is that nobody knows. Neither have actually been
>> established.
>
> I doubt that. If that was true how idiotic to chop bits off with out
> knowing how it was going to affect your sex life, don't you think?
I thought you wanted to talk about percentages of skin area and erogenous
nerves? If you want to talk about sexual consequences instead, fine, but
please make up your mind.
> You wouldn't read what it said for sex effects
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circumcision and want to get it done
Would you not?
>> There are literally thousands of such papers, but a good place to start
>> is the table on page 15 of the World Health Organisation document at:
>> http://
>> www.malecircumcision.org/media/documents/
MC_Global_Trends_Determinants.pdf
>>
>> You might also find helpful a slightly older, but more detailed
>> discussion by the American Academy of Pediatrics, here:
>> http://aappolicy.aappublications.org/cgi/content/full/
pediatrics;103/3/686
>
> I looked at the wiki page, which you edit, and there was no consensus in
> favour of health benefits as far as I could see.
Perhaps your reading comprehension is lacking; I don't know.
>>> I guess you must be an atheist, as you don't believe the body was
>>> created correctly in the first place?
>>
>> I am an atheist, yes. I didn't say there was anything wrong with the
>> body, though.
>
> But you want to chop a bit off as it causes health problems? That is
> saying there is something wrong with it, obviously.
Please could you quote the relevant part of the discussion where I said
that anyone should chop any bits off.
> What was your reason for getting it done? and what age were you?
It was elective, at age 26.
john
"Jake Waskett" <ja...@waskett.org> wrote in message news:%pXHm.20971
>>
>> I doubt that. If that was true how idiotic to chop bits off with out
>> knowing how it was going to affect your sex life, don't you think?
>
> I thought you wanted to talk about percentages of skin area and erogenous
> nerves? If you want to talk about sexual consequences instead, fine, but
> please make up your mind.
Try the above question.
>
> It was elective, at age 26.
obviously at that age, but why?
john
"Jake Waskett" <ja...@waskett.org> wrote in message news:%pXHm.20971
>
> It was elective, at age 26.
have you read AIDS Cult by Lauritsen?
john
"windinghighway" <winding...@aol.com> wrote in message news:8135cf4d-
>Stalin and his armies -- uncircumcised
Re Stalin as you are clearly clueless about real history, he was a Zionist
and most of his internal death camps etc were run by Jews
http://www.whale.to/b/stalin1.html
and one of the worst camp chiefs in Poland was a Jew
http://www.whale.to/b/salomon_morel.html
Also the man behind Terror Bombing that targeted civilains, arguably the
worst war crime of WW 2 was a Zionist http://www.whale.to/b/lindemann_h.html
and the worst post war crime was by Morgenthau
http://www.whale.to/b/morgenthau_h.html that killed more innocent people
than Auschwitz
john
"Jake Waskett" <ja...@waskett.org> wrote in message news:MNyHm.80547
>
> I wouldn't dream of questioning your sincerity, but it must be remarkably
> convenient to be able to dismiss all the evidence against your position as
> artifacts of "denial". Saves you from having to think.
I doubt if you have ever thought in your life outside the box.
You wont give any reason why you had an elective circumcision, yet spend a
huge amount of time promoting it, which could just be denial you made the
wrong decision, a pretty fine example of covert-hostile unless you had a
medical reason for doing so http://www.whale.to/a/minshull_b.html
I know lots of 1.1's and don't agree with her analysis on the worst points,
but I certainly wouldn't want to live with one, go into business with one,
or take medical advice from one.
read AIDS Cult by Lauritsen http://www.whale.to/a/lauritsen_h.html as that
backs up the tone scale. In brief they were clamouring for AZT purely
because it was so toxic.
I am sorry to be the one to tell you, but there you go. I can undertstand
how people feel, but I don't agree with taking it out on babies.
All the problems of the world today are caused by psychopathy, another
position on the tone scale. No doubt they are covertly behind the promotion
of circumcision, just like they are behind pedophilia and the rest, plus all
the wars since 1900, and probably the year dot.
I collect their poisoning, abuse and genocide attempts here
http://www.whale.to/b/covert_q.html
Jack
>
> - Show quoted text -
No memory at all?
David Z
No memory at all?
*********************************************************
Apparently not. See above.
Jake Waskett
> "Jake Waskett" <ja...@waskett.org> wrote in message news:MNyHm.80547
>>
>> I wouldn't dream of questioning your sincerity, but it must be
>> remarkably convenient to be able to dismiss all the evidence against
>> your position as artifacts of "denial". Saves you from having to
>> think.
>
> I doubt if you have ever thought in your life outside the box.
>
> You wont give any reason why you had an elective circumcision, yet spend
> a huge amount of time promoting it, which could just be denial you made
> the wrong decision, a pretty fine example of covert-hostile unless you
> had a medical reason for doing so http://www.whale.to/a/minshull_b.html
I do find these kinds of theories amusing. :)
> I know lots of 1.1's and don't agree with her analysis on the worst
> points, but I certainly wouldn't want to live with one, go into business
> with one, or take medical advice from one.
>
> read AIDS Cult by Lauritsen http://www.whale.to/a/lauritsen_h.html as
> that backs up the tone scale. In brief they were clamouring for AZT
> purely because it was so toxic.
Sorry, I'm not interested in paranoid conspiracy theories.
> I am sorry to be the one to tell you, but there you go. I can
> undertstand how people feel, but I don't agree with taking it out on
> babies.
There's no reason to apologise. You have every right to your opinions.
You disagree with "taking it out on babies", by which I presume you must
mean circumcising babies. I think it's perfectly acceptable. It's okay.
We can disagree.
> All the problems of the world today are caused by psychopathy, another
> position on the tone scale. No doubt they are covertly behind the
> promotion of circumcision, just like they are behind pedophilia and the
> rest, plus all the wars since 1900, and probably the year dot.
>
> I collect their poisoning, abuse and genocide attempts here
> http://www.whale.to/b/covert_q.html
Yeah, probably. I'm not sufficiently interested to read it, sorry.
john
> On Wed, 04 Nov 2009 12:33:33 +0000, john wrote:
>
>> "Jake Waskett" <ja...@waskett.org> wrote in message news:MNyHm.80547
>>>
>>> I wouldn't dream of questioning your sincerity, but it must be
>>> remarkably convenient to be able to dismiss all the evidence against
>>> your position as artifacts of "denial". Saves you from having to
>>> think.
>>
>> I doubt if you have ever thought in your life outside the box.
>>
>> You wont give any reason why you had an elective circumcision, yet spend
>> a huge amount of time promoting it, which could just be denial you made
>> the wrong decision, a pretty fine example of covert-hostile unless you
>> had a medical reason for doing so http://www.whale.to/a/minshull_b.html
>
> I do find these kinds of theories amusing. :)
>
Yeah, I can understand ;o)
Been proven long ago.
Still no answer as to why you had one
Jack
>
> - Show quoted text -
Seeing something above can't possibly show that I "have no memory at
all" so you're wrong.
David Z
**********************************************************
Idiot
john
"Jake Waskett" <ja...@waskett.org> wrote in message news:DugIm.70258
>>
>> You wont give any reason why you had an elective circumcision, yet spend
>> a huge amount of time promoting it, which could just be denial you made
>> the wrong decision, a pretty fine example of covert-hostile unless you
>> had a medical reason for doing so http://www.whale.to/a/minshull_b.html
>
> I do find these kinds of theories amusing. :)
>
As long as I've worked you out.
and anyone after the truth never labels things 'paranoid conspiracy
theories'
so if you aren't after the truth then you are just a time waster with the
psychology as explained above
'paranoid conspiracy theories' is a label people use to protect their well
cherished beliefs, part of their denial mechanism,
explained here http://www.whale.to/a/conspiracy.html
"The real meaning of the word paranoia is--- a man or person who has the
ability to link events that seemingly are not connected."
well beyond your thinking ability, obviously, and we know why now.
David Z
news:XpCdnWT9WvDLS2zX...@bt.com...
>
> "Jake Waskett" <ja...@waskett.org> wrote in message news:DugIm.70258
>>>
>>> You wont give any reason why you had an elective circumcision, yet spend
>>> a huge amount of time promoting it, which could just be denial you made
>>> the wrong decision, a pretty fine example of covert-hostile unless you
>>> had a medical reason for doing so http://www.whale.to/a/minshull_b.html
>>
>> I do find these kinds of theories amusing. :)
>>
>
> As long as I've worked you out.
>
> and anyone after the truth never labels things 'paranoid conspiracy
> theories'
>
That would be you.
john
"Jake Waskett" <ja...@waskett.org> wrote in message news:R%WHm.20800
>>
>> "Reviews of these studies have reached differing conclusions about
>> whether circumcision could be used as a prevention method against HIV"
>
> Care to explain why you think this negates the health benefit?
'Differing conclusions' means they haven't a clue either way, so not exactly
an indication to chop bits off your penis.
>
>> and that is before you know HIV is a hoax
>
> I'm sorry, I'm not going to waste time on this.
>
No, it would blow the main argument for circumcision clean out the
water--preventing HIV transmission. Any 12 year old schoolboy could figure
out HIV doesn't do anything and may not even exist.
But your psychology is to waste time on things that support your bias.
Jake Waskett
> "Jake Waskett" <ja...@waskett.org> wrote in message news:R%WHm.20800
>>>
>>> "Reviews of these studies have reached differing conclusions about
>>> whether circumcision could be used as a prevention method against HIV"
>>
>> Care to explain why you think this negates the health benefit?
>
> 'Differing conclusions' means they haven't a clue either way, so not
> exactly an indication to chop bits off your penis.
No, "differing conclusions" means that different authors have made
different concluding statements over the years about whether circumcision
should be used to prevent HIV. When you consider the fact that the
evidence has grown over time, it shouldn't be surprising that there was a
time when there was less certainty about the protective effect.
Jake Waskett
I get the feeling that John's just nuts. I don't think he's doing it on
purpose. I may be wrong, but that's my intuition.
john
"Jake Waskett" <ja...@waskett.org> wrote in message news:tnmIm.75848
>
> I get the feeling that John's just nuts. I don't think he's doing it on
> purpose. I may be wrong, but that's my intuition.
Yeah, don't forget your 'intuition' was behind your circumcision ;0)
Lucky it didn't take off your nuts too :0)
and 'nuts' is basic ad hominem, ie no argument, or basic denial mechanism
john
"Jake Waskett" <ja...@waskett.org> wrote in message news:tnmIm.75848
Oh, and you STILL haven't said why you circumcised yourself.
Martin
wrote:
>I wouldn't dream of questioning your sincerity, but it must be remarkably
>convenient to be able to dismiss all the evidence against your position as
>artifacts of "denial". Saves you from having to think.
What do you find most compelling about HIVAIDS theory?
Is it the HIV test which, despite its name, *does not* test for HIV?
Is it the woolly definition of AIDS which HIVAIDS boffins can't even
agree on?
Is it the HIV wonder-drugs, which few HIVers bother to take as and
when prescribed, that come with a slew of horrific side-effects
including HIVAIDS-like symptoms and premature death?
Is it the vaccine research, which has produced nothing and been an
absolute and complete failure? Okay, so I'm exaggerating a little:
HIV boffins did manage to come up with a vaccine that *increased* the
likelihood of testing positive for HIV (antibodies).
<http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/7246969.stm>:
----- Begin Quote -----
After two decades of research into an HIV vaccine, there comes a bleak
message from one of those leading the hunt.
Professor David Baltimore, president of the American Association for
the Advancement of Science, said that while efforts are continuing,
there is "little hope" of success.
"In 1984, we were told that as the virus had been found, a vaccine
should be just around the corner," he said.
"But we are no closer to a vaccine now than we were then."
----- End Quote -----
And <http://www.southkoreanews.net/story/429808>:
----- Begin Quote -----
A clinical trial testing the effectiveness of what was believed to be
a promising new HIV vaccine has resulted in failure.
The vaccine, made by the pharmaceutical company Merck, offered no
protection against infection by the Aids virus.
[...]
Researchers also found that the likelihood of becoming HIV positive
was highest among men who received the vaccine, compared to those who
received a placebo.
----- End Quote -----
Would you agree the futures of HIV and circumcision are intertwined?
If one falls they both go. Two for the price of one.
--
<http://www.hiv-poz.co.uk/>
14 years, 9 months and 22 days.
Jake Waskett
It would hardly be anything else: the comment to which I replied was about
you, not circumcision, and consequently my reply was also about you.
David Z
He's a wacko. A total waste of time. Just like the "birthers."
Unfortunately, ever since we've started cross-posting with the AIDS
newsgroup, the percentage of wackos has increased dramatically.
David Z
"Nuts" is an adjective. In your case, an entirely appropriate one.
Martin
wrote:
>I get the feeling that John's just nuts. I don't think he's doing it on
>purpose. I may be wrong, but that's my intuition.
What does your intuition tell you about newsgroup clowns David Z and
Andrew Usher? Does it tell you their intelligent debating skills
(cough) and sharp wit (cough) reflect well on the pro-circumcision
argument?
Jack
You're slow but I wouldn't say you're an "idiot."