Israeli woman fined $140 a day for refusing to circumcise son

See full article and photo at

Rabbinical judges in the case said they fear the effect that allowing Israeli Jews to freely decide on the ritual circumcision of their own children might have on the global debate over the issue.

An Israeli woman is being fined NIS 500 ($140) every day for refusing to circumcise her one-year-old-son, Israel’s Channel 2 reported today. There is no sweeping legal requirement for Jews in Israel to circumcise their children, but the woman is undergoing a divorce process at the Haifa Rabbinical Court, and her husband has appealed to the court to pressure the woman into circumcising the son.

“I’ve been exposed to a lot of information about circumcision and decided not to proceed with the circumcision,” the woman told Channel 2. “I have no right to cut at his genitals and to maim him, and the court has no authority to force me to.” Her lawyer also said the rabbinical court does not have the authority to enforce the procedure, but the secular family court would. The woman went on to add she was unemployed, and cannot afford to pay the fine, which already adds up to NIS 2,500 ($700). She said her husband originally had no objections to avoiding circumcision when the child was born, but changed his mind during the divorce process.

The rabbinical judges in the case said in their decision the woman was opposing the circumcision as a means to bringing her husband back to her. They also referred explicitly to the growing debate around ritual male circumcision elsewhere in the world, and voiced their fear of the precedent that could be created by a Jewish Israeli woman allowed not to circumcise her son.

“We have witnessed for some time now public and legal struggles against the brit milah in many countries in Europe and in the United States,” the judges wrote. “The public in Israel has stood as one man [sic] against these trends, seeing them as yet another aspect of displays of anti-Semitism that must be combatted. How will the world react if even here the issue of circumcision is given to the discretion of any person, according to their own beliefs?”

Religious courts in Israel hold complete sway over all matrimonial issues, including divorce. An appeal to the Haifa District Court by the woman was turned down, and the woman said the only resort left now is an appeal to the Supreme Court.

More on the circumcision debate:
Stand up for your son: Say ‘no’ to ritual circumcision
My (inadequate) justification for circumcision
Outlawing circumcision: Anti-Semitic and Islamophobic

How they rigged the WTC towers for demolition

This video answers how they could have rigged the towers easily and why jetfuel and external damage cannot never in a million years of fire (from jetfuel) cause even a partial collapse let alone an implosion.

AE911truth – Experts Speak out explain it with actual science. Any “expert” that supports the official theory is either afraid for his life or career or believes that by supporting the government story he might be approached by shadow government agents and get paid for his “services”. The last and most common is that people are psychologically handicapped and their brain will do anything and hold on to any pathetic argument that supports their worldview and nothing can change their mind.

Rockefeller Medicine – The Corbett Report

As Americans fret about the Obamacare website and wonder how the country became enslaved to the highest healthcare costs in the world, we turn back the pages to look at how the modern medical paradigm came together in the early 20th century, courtesy of the Rockefeller Foundation and their cronies. Join us this week as we explore the real history of modern healthcare and the real motivations behind the family that brought it to you.

Show notes at

JFK Assassination: Interview with Dave Ratcliffe

I skyped with Dave last sunday for our first interview about JFK and “deep politics”.  Here’s the audio:

And here are some related links:

“JFK: An Unsolved Murder” in the reference section

Transformational Journey – John F. Kennedy’s Turning Toward Peace, by David Ratcliffe, 2 Sep 2013

The Improbable Triumvirate: John F. Kennedy, Pope John, Nikita Khrushchev, by Norman Cousins, (W.W. Norton & Co., 1972)

President Kennedy, American University Address, 10 June 1963

JFK and the Unspeakable – Why He Died and Why It Matters, by James Douglass, ( Simon & Schuster 2010 softcover edition)

Letter to Vincent J. Salandria, April 15, 1995
by E. Martin Schotz, History Will Not Absolve Us:
Orwellian Control, Public Denial, and the Murder of President Kennedy
( Kurtz, Ulmer, & DeLucia Book Publishers, Brookline MA, 1996)

Notes on the Dynamics of Public Denial in the Assassination
by E. Martin Schotz, History Will Not Absolve Us (1996)

The Waters of Knowledge versus the Waters of Uncertainty:
Mass Denial in the Assassination of President Kennedy

by E. Martin Schotz, 1998 COPA Conference,
20 November, Dallas, Texas

Understanding Special Operations, And Their Impact on The Vietnam War Era
1989 Interview with L. Fletcher Prouty, Colonel USAF (Retired)
, by David Ratcliffe (rat haus reality press, 1999)

Success: “Government” Brought Down the Economy

A terrible mistake.  How could they have known?

Earlier this month, a prominent New York Federal Court Judge – and former Chief of the fraud unit for the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York (Jed Rakoff) – agreed:

The government … had a hand in creating the conditions that encouraged the approval of dubious mortgages. It was the government, in the form of Congress, that repealed Glass-Steagall, thus allowing certain banks that had previously viewed mortgages as a source of interest income to become instead deeply involved in securitizing pools of mortgages in order to obtain the much greater profits available from trading. It was the government, in the form of both the executive and the legislature, that encouraged deregulation, thus weakening the power and oversight not only of the S.E.C. but also of such diverse banking overseers as the O.T.S. and the O.C.C. It was the government, in the form of the Fed, that kept interest rates low in part to encourage mortgages. It was the government, in the form of the executive, that strongly encouraged banks to make loans to low-income persons who might have previously been regarded as too risky to warrant a mortgage. It was the government, in the form of the government-sponsored entities known as Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, that helped create the for­a-time insatiable market for mortgage-backed securities. And it was the government, pretty much across the board, that acquiesced in the ever greater tendency not to require meaningful documentation as a condition of obtaining a mortgage, often preempting in this regard state regulations designed to assure greater mortgage quality and a borrower’s ability to repay.

The result of all this was the mortgages that later became known as “liars’ loans.” …

Who benefits?  Open your eyes.