After reading the Babylonian Talmud and making up my own mind (using multiple versions for verification) about what is written within the pages I attempted to post on the Wikileaks support forum direct quotes which state that having sex with 3 year old children is acceptable within the Jewish religion. The quotes I posted which can be verified directly from the Babylonian Talmud are as follows;
“R. Bebai recited before R. Nahman: Three [categories of] women may8 use an absorbent9 in their marital intercourse:10 A minor, a pregnant woman and a nursing woman. The minor,11 because [otherwise] she might12 become pregnant, and as a result13 might die. A pregnant woman,11 because [otherwise]. she might12 cause her foetus to degenerate into a sandal.13 A nursing woman,11 because [otherwise] she might12 have to wean her child prematurely14 and this would result in his death. And what is the age of such a minor?15 From the age of eleven years and one day until the age of twelve years and one day. One who is under,16 or over this age17 must carry on her marital intercourse in the usual manner. This is the opinion of R. Meir. The Sages, however, say: The one as well as the other carries on her marital intercourse in the usual manner, and mercy will be vouchsafed from heaven,18 for it is said in the Scriptures The Lord preserveth the simple.19“
8. “[So Rashi. R. Tam: Should use, v. Tosaf s.v. [H]“.
9. “[H], hackled wool or flax“.
10. “To prevent conception“.
11. “May use the absorbent“.
12. “Lit., ‘perhaps’“.
13. “[H] lit., ‘a flat fish’, i.e., a flat, fish-shaped abortion due to superfetation“.
14. “Owing to her second conception“.
15. “Who is capable of conception but exposed thereby to the danger of death“.
16. “When no conception is possible“.
17. “When pregnancy involves no fatal consequences“.
18. “To save her from danger“.
19. “Ps. CXVI, 6; those who are unable to protect themselves“.
“A girl who is three years of age and one day may be betrothed by cohabitation; if a levir cohabited with her, he has thereby acquired her;9 “.
9. “She is deemed to be his legal wife“.
“AND THERE IS WITH REGARD TO THEM NO CHARGE OF NONVIRGINITY. A WOMAN PROSELYTE, A WOMAN CAPTIVE AND A WOMAN SLAVE, WHO HAVE BEEN REDEEMED, CONVERTED, OR FREED [WHEN THEY WERE] MORE THAN THREE YEARS AND ONE DAY OLD — THEIR KETHUBAH IS A MANEH, AND THERE IS WITH REGARD TO THEM NO CHARGE OF NON-VIRGINITY“.
“GEMARA. Rab Judah said that Rab said: A small boy who has intercourse with a grown-up woman makes her [as though she were] injured by a piece of wood.1 When I said it before Samuel he said: ‘Injured by a piece of wood’ does not apply to2 flesh. Some teach this teaching by itself:3 [As to] a small boy who has intercourse with a grown-up woman. Rab said, he makes her [as though she were] injured by a piece of wood; whereas Samuel said: ‘Injured by a piece of wood’ does not apply to flesh. R. Oshaia objected: WHEN A GROWN-UP MAN HAS HAD INTERCOURSE WITH A LITTLE GIRL, OR WHEN A SMALL BOY HAS INTERCOURSE WITH A GROWN–UP WOMAN, OR WHEN A GIRL WAS ACCIDENTALLY INJURED BY A PIECE OF WOOD — [IN ALL THESE CASES] THEIR KETHUBAH IS TWO HUNDRED [ZUZ]; SO ACCORDING TO R. MEIR. BUT THE SAGES SAY: A GIRL WHO WAS INJURED ACCIDENTALLY BY A PIECE OF WOOD — HER KETHUBAH IS A MANEH!4 Raba said, It means5 this: When a grown-up man has intercourse with a little girl it is nothing, for when the girl is less than this,6 it is as if one puts the finger into the eye;7 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,’ and [with regard to the case of] ‘a girl injured by a piece of wood,’ itself, there is the difference of opinion between R. Meir and the Sages“.
“Rami b. Hama said: The difference of opinion8 is [only] when he9 knew her,10 for R. Meir compares her11 to a mature girl,12 and the Sages compare her to a woman who had intercourse with a man.13 But if he did not know her,14 all agree15 that she has nothing.16 And why does R. Meir compare her to a mature girl? Let him compare her to a woman who had intercourse with a man! — [In the case of] a woman who had intercourse with a man, a deed had been done to her by a man;17 but in her case18 — no deed has been done to her by a man. — And why do the Rabbis compare19 her to a woman who had intercourse with a man? Let them compare her to a mature girl! [In the case of] a mature girl no deed whatsoever has been done to her,20 but in her case — a deed has been done to her“.21
“‘But if he did not know her, all agree that she gets nothing’.22 R. Nahman objected: If she says. ‘I was injured by a piece of wood,’ and he says. ‘No, but thou hadst intercourse with a man’, Rabban Gamaliel and R. Eliezer say [that] she is believed!23 But, said Raba, whether he knew her24 and whether he did not know her,25 according to R. Meir [her kethubah is] two hundred [zuz];26 [whereas] according to the Rabbis, if he knew her [her kethubah is] a maneh, [if] he did not know her, she gets nothing“.27
“Raba however changed his opinion,28 for it has been taught: How [does] the bringing out of an evil name29 [take place]? He30 comes to court and says, ‘I, So-and-so,31 have not found in thy daughter the tokens of virginity.’ If there are witnesses that she has been unchaste under him,32 she gets a33 kethubah of a maneh.34 [But surely] if there are witnesses that she has been unchaste under him, she is to be stoned!35 — It means this: If there are witnesses that she has been unchaste under him, she has to be stoned; if she was unchaste before [the betrothal], she gets a kethubah of a maneh. Now R. Hiyya b. Abin said [that] R. Shesheth said: This teaches:36 If he married her in the presumption that she is a virgin and she was found to have had intercourse with a man,37 she gets a kethubah of a maneh. Whereupon R. Nahman objected: ‘If one marries a woman and does not find in her virginity, [and] she says, “After thou hadst betrothed me [to thyself] I was forced38 and [thus] thy39 field has been inundated,” and he says, “No, but before I betrothed thee [unto me] [thou hadst intercourse with a man], my bargain is [thus] a mistaken one.” [etc.]’40 and [this assuredly means] she is to get nothing!41 And R. Hiyya b. Abin said to them: Is it possible! R. Amram and all the great ones of the age sat42 when R. Shesheth said that teaching and they found it difficult43 and he44 answered: In which respect is it indeed a mistaken bargain? In respect of two hundred [zuz:], but a maneh she gets [as a kethubah]. And you45 say [that it means] she gets nothing! Whereupon Raba said: He who asked [this question]46 has asked well, for a mistaken bargain’ means entirely.47 But [then] that [other teaching] presents a difficulty.48 Put [it] right49 and say thus: If there are witnesses that she was unchaste under him50 she has to be stoned, if she was unchaste before [the betrothal], she gets nothing, if she was found to be injured by a piece of wood, she has a kethubah of a maneh. But Surely it was Raba who said [above that], according to the Rabbis, if he did not know her, she gets nothing!51 Hence you must conclude52 from this53 that Raba retracted from that [opinion]“.54
“Our Rabbis taught: If the first [husband] took her [the bride] to his home for the purpose of marriage. and she has witnesses that she was not alone [with him,]55 or even if she was alone [with him]. but she did not stay [with him] as much time as is needed for intercourse, the second [husband]56 cannot raise any complaint with regard to her virginity, for the first [husband] had taken her to his home [for the purpose of marriage]“.57
MISHNAH. WHEN A GROWN-UP MAN47 HAS HAD SEXUAL INTERCOURSE WITH48 A LITTLE GIRL,49 OR WHEN A SMALL BOY50 HAS INTERCOURSE WITH A GROWN–UP WOMAN, OR [WHEN A GIRL WAS ACCIDENTALLY] INJURED BY A PIECE OF WOOD51 — [IN ALL THESE CASES] THEIR KETHUBAH IS TWO HUNDRED [ZUZ]; SO ACCORDING TO52 R. MEIR. BUT THE SAGES SAY: A GIRL WHO WAS INJURED ACCIDENTALLY BY A PIECE OF WOOD — HER KETHUBAH IS A MANEH. A VIRGIN, WHO WAS A WIDOW, A DIVORCEE, OR A HALUZAH FROM MARRIAGE53 — HER54 KETHUBAH IS A MANEH.55
47. A man who was of age.
48. Lit., ‘who came on’.
49. Less than three years old.
50. Less than nine years of age.
51. Lit., ‘One who was injured by wood’, as a result of which she injured the hymen.
52. Lit., ‘the words of’.
53. A maiden was married, and immediately after the marriage, became a widow or divorced, or a haluzah; v. supra 10b.
54. Lit., ‘their’, that is, the kethubah of each of them.
55. Since the marriage had taken place she is regarded as a married woman and it is assumed that she is no more a virgin.
- “[Rashi reads [H] instead of the [H] in our printed texts. A male, aged nine years and a day who commits etc.] There are thus three distinct clauses in this Baraitha. The first — a male aged nine years and a day — refers to the passive subject of pederasty, the punishment being incurred by the adult offender. This must be its meaning — because firstly, the active offender is never explicitly designated as a male, it being understood, just as the Bible states, Thou shalt not lie with mankind, where only the sex of the passive participant is mentioned; and secondly, if the age reference is to the active party, the guilt being incurred by the passive adult party, why single out pederasty: in all crimes of incest, the passive adult does not incur guilt unless the other party is at least nine years and a day? Hence the Baraitha supports Rab’s contention that nine years (and a day) is the minimum age of the passive partner for the adult to be liable“.
- “The reference is to bestiality. If a woman allows herself to be made the subject thereof, whether naturally or not, she is guilty. But if a man commits bestiality, he is liable only for a connection in a natural manner, but not otherwise. Thus Rashi. Tosaf., more plausibly, explains it thus: If one commits incest or adultery with a woman, whether naturally or not, guilt is incurred; but bestiality is punishable only for a connection in a natural manner, but not otherwise“.
“Our Rabbis taught: In the case of a male child, a young one is not regarded as on a par with an old one; but a young beast is treated as an old one.23 What is meant by this? — 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 What is the basis of their dispute? — Rab maintains that only he who is able to engage in sexual intercourse, may, as the passive subject of pederasty throw guilt [upon the active offender]; whilst he who is unable to engage in sexual intercourse cannot be a passive subject of pederasty [in that respect].25“
“R. Jeremiah of Difti said: We also learnt the following: A maiden aged three years and a day may be acquired in marriage by coition, and if her deceased husband’s brother cohabited with her, she becomes his“.
“The best among the Gentiles deserves to be killed.”—Cf. “Gentile”, The Jewish Encyclopedia, Volume 5, Funk and Wagnalls Company, New York, (1903), pp. 615-626, at 617. See also: A. Cohen, “Soferim 41a”, The Minor Tractates of the Talmud Massektoth Ketannoth in Two Volumes, Volume 1, The Socino Press, London, (1965), pp. 287-288, especially note 50.
After verifying for yourself what is written within the pages and making up your own mind you will conclude that what I posted is actually written within the Babylonian Talmud.
For simply posting facts, direct quotes straight from the Talmud I was met with attempted bullying from 2 of the administrators, they were All Spiric & Koyaanisqatsi.
All Spiric attempted to bully me on multiple occasions, whenever I posted credible information from sources such as the British government & mainstream news reports he would post intentional mocking videos to discredit the information I had posted. He would send me personal messages calling me names and delete posts which had taken me ages to write, wasting thousands of hours of life and time I will never get back. He tried to call me anti-semitic for simply posting direct quotes from the Babylonian Talmud and would say things like deal with it after he had wasted hours of my life.
He attempted to tell me the quotes weren’t in the Talmud and I was lying when the information was taken directly from the Talmud and then verified with another version of the Talmud. He posted links to sites which had no credibility in an attempt to sway public opinion on the information I had provided and spoke down to me as if I was a child, which I am not. He tried to make me look like an uneducated fool who didn’t know how to research and fact check when in reality I have a computer science degree and have had papers publicly published while at university. It is some of the most disgusting treatment I have ever received from a website. I was treated like I was excrement on the bottom of his shoes, it left me feeling deeply hurt because I was simply posting factual information in a scholarly manner. He has threatened to sue me for slander over this article for telling the truth about his actions, claims I threatened his staff with violence which is an outright lie. He said I was stalking when it was him who was stalking my posts and mocking me for simply posting facts. Not only is All Spiric a bully, he is also a blatant liar and involved in character assassinating people, he told me to get help because I was a nut, as in mental which is part of the emotional demoralization tactics he was using.
Some of the information All Spiric has deleted includes but is not restricted to the following information;
I had an account since roughly late 2011-2012 and posted to the forum on and off for 2 years. He has recently deleted my account and all the information I had put together, including links to news articles on politicians and child abuse as well as genealogy research of the royal family.
The other administrator who attempted to bully me was Koyaanisqatsi, he deleted things I had said to make himself look good, like he was winning an argument when he wasn’t and when I would reply he would simply delete what I had said. He attempted to post information which he hadn’t read because there simply wasn’t time for him to read it, but would post things to simply try and character assassinate me. He would try and show his version of the story and remove what I was saying like it was a child in a playground, to be honest it was pretty disgusting behavior from someone who is meant to be there as an administrator and to support people who use the website.
As a fully grown man serving in the armed forces I am deeply shocked by the actions and attempted bullying by the administrators of the wikileaks support forum. They claim to be there for truth, but what I experienced from the administrators is anything but them supporting truth, the wikileaks support forum is a site to character assassinate and demoralize people. I feel their actions are a little strange to say the least, as if they have other motivations other than the truth. It was as if they were attempting to demoralize people emotionally by constantly having sly digs at me and character assassinating me every chance they could simply for having an opinion and using my god given gift of speech to speak out against child abuse.
Why would you attempt to bully someone for simply speaking out against child abuse, it still doesn’t make sense to me. Why would you support the paedophile and punish the people trying to bring light to dark rooms, that’s what the administrators did at wikileaks support forum.
The forum claims “Our goal is to create an open space for people to share their thoughts and ideas on Wikileaks and other topics without feeling as if they are going to be attacked for holding the particular views that they do“. I can tell you after spending two years on wikileaks forum that their rules and regulations are simply for show to get people to sign up, once you are posting information they then target you and attempt to character assassinate you using group bullying methodologies.
The human right act article 19 says “Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers“. Wikileaks support forum has disregarded my human rights and the their own terms and conditions in an attempt to destroy my character.
If you are someone who is seeking truth and justice, save yourself all the trouble I had to go through with the staff, stay clear, theres definitely something strange about the actions of the staff. I’m not saying this for any other reason than to warn people of how hurtful the actions of the staff were towards someone who simply posted truthful information from news and government websites as well as the odd verse from religious scripture.
The staff have a strange attitude towards child abuse campaigners and people who have bothered to research, those people who have the ability to use their own mind, not just accept a pre-packaged view provided to them by people they have never met.
Because “WikiLeaks has some Jewish staff and enjoys wide spread Jewish support“, I believe I have been targeted by these Jewish staff for simply posting quotes from their religious books (Haaretz, 2011).
Bullying is wrong, and if you don’t want to put yourself in a position where you are character assassinated stay clear of Youtube, Twitter, Facebook, LiveLeaks, WordPress, Project Avalon & Wikileaks Support Forum. Each one of these websites has made me feel like less than human simply for posting information which will further your world view not retard it, you will become empowered by the information, it will give you the truth about the world you live in not just lie after lie like you find on a lot of websites. One thing that binds all of these websites together is they are either owned or moderated by members of the Jewish community.
On a closing note, the wikileaks support forum protects child abusers and punishes those who are trying to give people information which will help them protect their children. To add to this, although I support the concept of leaking government documents, I do not support a man who is wanted for allegations of sexual assault. All of the mentioned websites have targeted child abuse campaigners and protected the paedophile. Learn from my mistakes and stay clear of the horrible people who work on the side of the people who want to harm your children like the administrators at wikileaks support forum.