——————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————
Orthodox Jewish families won’t identify circumcisers who gave babies herpes
Health Department says Orthodox relatives of infected infants refusing to reveal names, obstructing investigation
ed note–please consider for a moment the absolutely insanity of this situation and what it reveals about the Judaic mindset.
These babies are INFECTED and could die from it. The people responsible for doing this risk infecting other infants, but due to the Judaic attachment to this sick, perverse religious ritual of mutilating a little boy’s genitalia and then having one of these herpes-infected animals suck the blood out of the wound, a code of silence is maintained, protecting the animals who will doubtless go out and put more children’s lives at risk.
There simply is no other way to view/state it–Judaism is a sickness of the mind/heart/soul and embracing it in any form leads to mental illness, and until the rest of the sane world comes to this conclusion, mankind will continue to hurdle down the road towards universal armegeddon and will not realize until it is too late that this diagnosis should have been made thousands of years ago.
Times of Israel
The New York City Health Department said it cannot complete an investigation into who infected four infants with herpes through a circumcision rite because the boys’ fervently Orthodox families will not identify the mohels.
“Unfortunately, some in the community are resistant to sharing the name of the mohels,” Health Department spokesman Christopher Miller told DNAinfo New York on Tuesday. “This is a very insular community.”
According to DNAinfo, six families in Williamsburg, Brooklyn, have seen children contract herpes since 2015 from metzitzah b’peh, which involves the ritual circumciser, or mohel, cleaning the circumcision wound by oral suction. Among the six families, only two have provided the names of their mohels, Miller said.
In March, the city ordered those two mohels to stop performing metzitzah b’peh. A herpes infection in a newborn baby can cause brain damage and death.
Rabbi David Niederman, head of the United Jewish Organizations of Williamsburg and North Brooklyn, told DNAinfo that the community was “fully cooperating” with the investigation. However, an unnamed source said the community is skeptical about the allegations against the two named mohels because it believes the city wants to make all metzitzah b’peh illegal.
“That’s why we’re not willing to give out the mohels. We know the city is going to ban them without giving them due process,” the source said. “There is not proof that they actually infected the baby.”
The custom, rarely practiced outside the Haredi, or fervently Orthodox, community, has become a political football in New York City with its large Haredi population. In February 2015, the city eliminated a parental consent form mandated by former mayor Michael Bloomberg. In return, the community pledged to test a mohel after an infant contracts herpes.
City Health Commissioner Dr. Mary Travis Bassett said her department considers metzitzah b’peh an “unsafe practice,” but that as a religious practice it enjoys several legal protections.
Share this:
The Dershowitz question
ed note–Prima facia evidence as to why it is a complete waste of time to try and have a reasonable, rational conversation with those of the self-chosenite variety, as they are not interested in arriving at the truth, but rather only in achieving their agenda and even when they must lie through their teeth to do so.
The essay is in and of itself a living, breathing ratification/validation of everything that has been alleged by them since the time of Pharaoh in that they collude and conspire with each other against the interests of any Gentile host society. If there were a speaking engagement scheduled and the speaker in question were the most rabid pro-zionist Jew and a campaign to shut down that venue and prevent that individual from spouting his/her Hebraic black magic, why we would all be inundated–including by the likes of this author–with screeching Op-eds warning of the resurgence of the 3rd Reich and that a new Hollerco$t was being planned. However, when organized collusion takes place in the interests of censoring a discussion that is problematic in terms of the honest and accurate description of Jewish power emanating out of Judaic self-delusion, well, in such a case, ‘brownshirts’ of the Hebraic variety getting together for ‘book burnings’ is perfectly, well, kosher.
Now, as the world stands at the precipice of oblivion resulting directly out of the toxic nature of Jewish power and the disproportionate role it plays in human affairs, it is high-time that the rest of the world come to understand how pointless it is trying to have any kind of rational intercourse with a tribe of people who believe in all that nonsense of a jealous, vindictive, angry, violent god named yahweh favoring one tiny spec of human DNA as his ‘chosen’ people. You would get further talking to some street crazy screaming about an imminent invasion from outer space then you would with these people.
Simon Hardy Butler, Times of Israel
“What do you suggest I do?”
That was the query from eminent attorney Alan Dershowitz that I found in my e-mailbox a few days ago in response to a message I sent him relating to the scheduled appearance this month of notorious anti-Semite Gilad Atzmon at New York’s Theatre 80 St. Mark’s. Dershowitz has, in the past, referenced Atzmon in his writing, and I thought he might be interested in this latest Big Apple adventure—which I wrote about in a recent blog post for the Times of Israel. I sent him a link to my article as well.
“What do you suggest I do?” he asked. The question lingered in my mind. Suggest? Wouldn’t it be up to Dershowitz to know what the right course of action would be?
His inquiry surprised me, to say the least. But I suspect it probably shouldn’t have. Dershowitz is one of those folks who may need recommendations, solutions, rather than problems posed to him. He may need something spelled out.
So I conveyed out to him what I thought would be appropriate: writing. Writing an editorial in a major New York publication, such as the New York Daily News. He has done this sort of thing before. Why not do it again … this time, addressing the issue of Atzmon being able to broadcast, at a local Gotham venue, the hate speech he so frequently issues?
The truth is, I was disappointed in Dershowitz’s interrogative. I shouldn’t have to tell him what he should do in this case. He should already realize it. And the fact that he responded to my email instead of leaving it unanswered puzzled me. What was the point? If he didn’t want to do anything, why send his message to me at all?
Lorcan Otway, Theatre 80’s owner, did me the courtesy of addressing my dismay about Atzmon’s event in an eloquent fashion, and although he didn’t persuade me to agree with him, he made a powerful point about the need to allow for freedom of speech and not to censor others. Atzmon allegedly paid for the opportunity to speak at Theatre 80, and I did raise that issue, yet the institution does have the right to take whatever customers it wants. Otway, in this case, stayed consistent with his beliefs, and I respect that. He’s a good man.
Atzmon, on the other hand, is not, and the public denigration of Jews and all things Judaic on his website, gilad.co.uk, as well as in his Facebook and Twitter postings, is problematic to say the least. I don’t believe he should be given a forum to vent his anti-Semitic nonsense, but I understand Otway’s perspective … and for the record, Otway is not anti-Semitic. He disagrees completely with Atzmon’s outlook. Still, he is doing what he considers to be the right thing. I can’t argue with what he thinks.
I can, though, with Dershowitz, who seemed reluctant to address the problem I brought up in his message to me. Maybe that’s just as well. There is a protest apparently scheduled for the day Atzmon will host his event at Theatre 80, April 30, and it appears we, the people, need to address this hate speech the way we should: legally, peacefully and by ourselves. For no other individual can do it.
That is, I believe, the way it should be. That is, I suspect, the real answer to the Dershowitz question.
Isn’t it?
Share this:
