Rabbi Yosef: Gentiles exist only to serve Jews

[Ry]

joys of religion.

[Ry]

Some christians believe this too. How are adults so brainwashed. These silly books dictate their whole lives right down to the multi thousand dollar put me ina bax and pay a preacher ritual of their death.

[Drew J]

Justin Pranaitis wrote that book THE TALMUD UNMASKED. There is a lot of hate for him on the internet but it can easily be neutralized for someone who does their homework. Like me. For all the dumbass Zionist, David Maddison clones out there, when they talk shit about Pranaitis and his supposed inaccuracies, they can just shut the hell up.

http://z10.invisionfree.com/The_Unhived ... topic=1201

Arnold Leese claimed that that Justin Pranaitis, author of THE TALMUD UNMASKED said at the Kiev ritual murder trial that the boy murdered had thirteen stab wounds in his head as prescribed by the Talmud. A Russian lawyer wrote a book about that case and he had a picture of the corpse of the boy. Let's look at it.



I count thirteen stab wounds. Not only that but according to some researchers, a clear kabbalistic mark can be found on his head among those thirteen marks.


Schin

Now look at the boy. You can clearly see that symbol carved into his head.

As for Pranaitis, some have claimed he was incompetant with Hebrew.

Pranaitis was called as a prosecution witness to testify to the allegedly horrible things said about Christians in the Talmud. His credibility, however, was quickly destroyed by the defence who asked him a few basic questions which anyone with even the slightest knowledge of the Talmud would be expected to know:

The particular questions that Panaitis was asked under cross-examination that completely destroyed his credibility were as follows:

Q: What is the meaning of the word Hullin?
A: I don't know.
("Hullin" means "ordinary produce" in Hebrew as opposed to "sanctified produce".)

Q: What is the meaning of the word Erubin?
A: I don't know.
("Erubin" means "domains which have been set up to allow Jews to carry outside their homes on the Sabbath".)

Q: What is the meaning of the word Yevamot?
A: I don't know.
("Yevamot" means "brothers in law in reference to Leverite marriage - a certain type of marriage relating to the command to marry one's dead brother's wife if he died without children".)

Q: When did Baba Bathra live and what was her activity?
A: I don't know.
(Baba Bathra was not a person but it is a Talmudic Tractate.)

Ref: "Blood Accusation: The Strange History of the Beiliss Case" by Maurice Samuel. Quote supplied by Joseph Hertzlinger ([email protected])

This was an attempt to make Pranaitis look like a fool by the Jewish lawyers because Baba is Russian for grandmother and so he was answering what he thought may have been a question about some Russian woman. So he wasn't totally sure he was being asked a Russian question or a Jewish question. Detractors love to use this against Pranaitis, but the problem is, this exchange never really happened and was just made up. The trial transcripts in Russian are here and this is the only exchange that even remotely resembles what Samuel just made up and said happened.

Karabchevskij: I think you mentioned tractate Hullin. Is there such [a tractate -SR]?
Pranaitis: I don't remember.
Karabchevskij: How so, you don't remember you own expert opinion?
Pranaitis: I can't remember when I have read something.
Karabchevskij: But you know about Hullin tractate? How do you translare this name, what's it about?
Pranaitis: silent.
Karabchevskij: You can't tell?
Pranaitis: silent.
Karabchevskij: Then there's something about Makhshirim. What does that mean?
Pranaitis: This is liquid. Are you testing me?
Karabchevskij: No, it's for myself, because you have Hebrew words here.
Shmakov: Defence is testing... This cannot be done.
President: Defence is interested in translation of these words and has a right to ask the expert about this.
Shmakov: It is hardly permissible to ask such questions. He doesn't have to remember. This is a test.
President: An expert is a knowledgeable person and under no circumstance he should be tested.
Shmakov: After all, he cannot remember each tractate.
Karabchevskij: You, Mr. Shmakov, don't like it when I ask expert Pranaitis; I can refrain from it.
Zarudnyj: And I think that I have a right to ask an expert for a translation, on which he relies, and I think I have a right to know the meaning of the name of the tractate on which expert relies in his expert opinion. You, by the way, refer to tractate Yevotojt [sic]?
Pranaitis: I refuse to answer.
President: If an expert doesn't wish to reply, he cannot be asked.
Zarudnyj: I obey. Maybe you would like to translate the name of the work Midrash.
Pranaitis: silent.
Zarudnyj: What about tractate Shaalot Uteshubot?
Pranaitis: silent.
Zarudnyj: I want you to write in the protocol that when asked about the meaning of names to which the expert referred, he said that he doesn't know.
President: He said that he doesn't wish to answer.
Zarudnyj: No, he said that he doesn't know. And if he knows, let him translate.

Whatever the facts are on Pranaitis, he got the number of stab wounds right. The detractors have claimed it was fourteen but we know that is wrong.

A minor sensation was produced when the testimony dealt with the number thirteen, a number which was supposed to have great significance when used in a Jewish context. The prosecution insisted that the thirteen wounds which Professor Sikorsky had discovered on Andriusha's body proved that they had been inflicted in accordance with "Jewish ritual." When it was discovered afterwards that there were actually fourteen wounds, the ritual murder charge lost even more credibility.

http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Cyprus/ ... aitis.html

Second of all, if the boy really was killed by some random gang, how did they know to make thirtten marks, and have five of those marks make a kabbalistic letter? It makes no sense.

You can bet your ass that these Jewish liars weren't counting on some people getting a hold of the original Russian book of the Beilis case which showed the picture of the dead child with 13 stab wounds. What proof did they have it was really 14? WHY JUST THEIR WORD OF COURSE. Not that it matters. It's okay in Judaism to lie to gentiles anyway.

[Drew J]

Even that gas chamber and diesel engine monger Roberto Muehlenkamp, whom I have butted heads with many times over codoh, admits that Samuel made this exchange up. Again, not even the pro Zionist crowd, at least the seemingly more honest ones, can deny this Jewish lie.

The real exchange wasn't as "clever" as the fake one in Samuel's book, and by itself didn't show Pranaitis' ignorance - whether he didn't know (or remember) how most words were translated, or whether he really didn't wish to be "tested" (it was a weird rule in that court that experts, as "knowledgeable people", couldn't be "tested" akin to schoolboys, but the court would decide whether they were credible) cannot be determined from the quoted excerpt. Pranaitis' negative reply to the first question probably referred to him forgetting about whether he referred to Hullin in his expert opinion (his forgetfulness even caused this opinion to be read in court in full), and not to the existence of the tractate itself. Erubin wasn't mentioned, and neither do we see any coup de grâce in the form of Baba Bathra question, when, according to Samuel, Jewish public present in the court was supposed to laugh at Pranaitis' obvious ignorance.

Indeed, even if Pranaitis forgot the meanings of most tractate names, there is no doubt that he would at least identify "Baba Bathra" and other well-known terms as Talmudic tractates, if only because 20 years before that, he published a whole book about Talmud, wherein he listed all these tractates.

The story about Pranaitis' humiliation through a clever trick was taken by Samuel from a memoir of a certain writer Ben-Zion Katz, who was present at the trial. But Samuel, who had the transcripts at hand, is also to be blamed for spreading false information - he used the transcripts extensively and knew that no such exchange took place. Why he wrote what he did is up to the reader to decide.


http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot. ... aitis.html

Let's also look at Sergy Romanov's comment on that page. He too, blames a gang of criminals for the murder of Youschinsky.

Sergey Romanov said...
As Tager proves with the original documents, police knew who the real murderers were. Parallel investigation was conducted, which was kept secret by Col. Ivanov, when he testified during the trial, all the while knowing that Beilis was innocent. There were even direct forgeries, like falsification of the original medical expert report, as Tager also proves. Tsarist officials wrote in secret reports that they hoped that Beilis would be convicted on the basis of "tribal hatred". And they came close to it - if one believes some accounts, the jury split 6:6 when asked about Beilis' personal guilt.

Also, let's not forget that the first question - whether Jushchinskij's murder was ritual (i.e., by implication, a Jewish ritual murder) - was answered positively by the jury. So in some sense the prosecution (and thus the Black Hundreds) was not completely crushed during the trial, as it should have been.

Monday, July 03, 2006 1:03:00 PM

Okay smartass, how did these crooks know to make 13 stabs in the head? If Pranaitis was so wrong about there needing to be 13 stabs, why were there 13 stabs? Do you expect us to believe that Gentile crooks who killed the boy knew how to make a Jewish kabbalistic mark?

These are the people we are dealing with in the information war, folks. Liars and willfully blind gentile helpers.

From Arnold Leese.

There were many strange features about this trial, viz.:

(1) On 17th October, 1913, the presiding Judge had to warn the Jewish pressmen against persisting in reporting perverted renderings of the evidence, and said that if they continued in this practice, then would be refused permission to attend the Court.

(2) Two children, Genia and Valentine Tcheberiak, who were important witnesses against Beiliss, died suddenly shortly after his arrest. This was after they had eaten sweetmeats given to them by a degraded police agent called Krassowsky. They were examined by two Jewish doctors at the hospital and were certified to be suffering from dysentery the bacilli of that disease having been found in them according to the report.

Next, it was discovered that their mother had been offered (and had refused) a bribe of 40,000 roubles by a Jew lawyer to take upon herself the guilt for the murder of the stabbed boy Joutchinski.

Finally, the Jews actually suggested she had poisoned the two children, the Jews having characteristically forgotten for the moment those dysentery bacilli that had been reported to have been discovered!

(3) Several important witnesses gave expert opinion that the Jews use Christian blood to mix with the unleavened bread at certain feasts, and that Christian children are killed by Jews for the purpose.

One of these was Father Pranaitis, theologian and Hebraist, who considered that the evidence showed every sign of it being a Jewish ritual murder. Father Pranaitis said that the Zohar, the cabbalistic book of the Chassidim sect of Jews, described the ritual of murder, prescribing thirteen stabs in the right temple seven in the left one, which is exactly how the head of the murdered boy had been treated. Another expert witness was Professor Sikorski of Kiev University, a medical psychologist, who also regarded the case as one of Ritual Murder.

After the Jewish Bolshevik revolution, the Cheka shot the Judge, the Public Prosecutor and many of the witnesses, including Father Pranaitis, the medical expert Kozoratov, and Professor Sikorski. Professor Pawlow, who was a witness for the defence, became a leading scientist in Bolshevik Russia!

The ex-General Alexandre Netchvoldov of the Russian Imperial Army, tells us the rest in an article, "La Russie et les Juifs," in Le Front Unique, published at Oran, 1927, p. 59: Quoting Evrijskaja Tribuna of 24th August, 1922, he says "that at a visit of the Rabbi of Moscow to Lenin, the first word Lenin said to his visitor was to ask him it the Jews were satisfied with the Soviet tribunal which had annulled, the Beiliss verdict, saying that Joutchinksy had been killed by a Christian!"

Looks to me like Pranaitis has been vindicated.

[Ry]

that video graphs on this which I wrote http://www.ancreport.com/forum/v ... =11&t=5196

Please someone send this rabbi my videos. He'd shit himself if he saw mine on 911.