873 Part I is better but this is still pretty illuminating. What I find really sad is that this sort of thinking fed Reagan's Attorney General Ed Meese's pornography commission and has probably been seen hundreds of times by Jerry Falwell and his ilk. It's hard to imagine that anyone would believe this crap but I'm sure 25 million George Bush Jr. voters do. Hilarious BlondeRedHead 2003-01-07 03:44:57 2003-01-07 03:44:57 3 1758 WOW, 40 years ago this movie predicted what would happen if nothing was done about this problem. One can't deny there is more pornography available today than in our past and there are more men who are sexually dysfunctional than anytime in our past. For that be have kids are raping kids, child sexual abuse is out of control, women are being raped in record numbers. Men no longer know the difference between love and lust. The proof of what I say is in the newspapers everyday. Pro pornography forces said 40 years ago that more pornography and open sex would set us free and sexual assaults would disappear. It is obvious the pro sex people were wrong. Based on my reserach and personal interviews that the #1 reason for divorce today is sexual addiction. Men can't view pornography, visit strip bars and say they still respect women. Disrespect of women is the first sign that a man is heading for a divorce. Visit www.victimsofpornography.com and read the victims stories for yourself. Only those who are hooked on pornography could say this movie was not a prediction of where we are today. Prediction Correct Research 2003-03-30 05:07:52 2003-03-30 05:07:52 5 2624 Anyone who believes the words of this nutcase is in need of help. Run to your local priest miss "Research." Your personal views and circle of friends are not scientific fact. People are more liberated about sex then 50 years ago thanks to porn. This is an excellent film. It demonstrates the process of shame, fear, guilt, redemption that the status quo uses to control individuals.I can haer the voice of William S. Burroughs doing a parody on this guy. Funny thing is the film shows us more variety of porn in a half hour than most people see in a lifetime. I never knew about some of this stuff. Now I'm more interested in finding out more. Say, could that really be the subtext of the film? Don't look at this disgusting, filthy, aweful, smut.....wink, wink. Oh My God Mr. Benway 2003-06-13 13:05:14 2003-06-13 13:05:14 5 5238 This has got to be about the most hilariuous of all anti-porn I've seen. Mr. Keating has SEVERE sexual identity issues and his tyrannical rant makes it so obvious it's almost sickening. Thank GOD we have outgrown these types of attitudes on the issue of pornography. The lies that Mr. Keating spreads are worse then any form of venereal disease known to exist! The values of people like him and some of the reviews written above are the reason for societies demise. Now as Christianity and especially Catholicism begin to crumble we can see who the TRUE deviants are and once again begin to evolve s humans and embrace homosexuality and "deviance" as he calls fetish as the rich diversity that they are. With the abscense of sexual relase we see things like pedophilia and rape thrive--just look at the Catholic crises for godsaakes!! These are men who swore to celibacy and look at what we get--a religius history RICH in pedohilia nad rape--thank God it is finally dissolving before our very eyes--next to go--CHRISTIANITY--then all organized bigotry Be gone Keating!! I hope for humanity's sake that he is dead now! Truely a hilariuos film but for it's time--I would consider it a CRIME. Any sane human intellegence would tell us that pornography AND the art of fetish are healthy sexual discoveries for every free human to decide for themselves. Thank GOD for separation of church and state and freedom of expression!! Flush Keating Rev. Colon Pal 2003-07-19 11:43:55 2003-07-19 11:36:21 1 9638 bzzzt bzzt... 'Very Few Blind People join the nudist colony".. bzzt bzzt "Are cross dressers afraid of sex?".. Bzzt bzzt.. "75 to 90% ends up in the hands of our children".. bzzt bzzt... "The Tumbler place on her thigh"... Man, I could go on and on and on about this film, I've seen this at least.. I'll say 40 times. Ever since Rick came to town with his bag o' films and showed this heap of communism-feaaring mumbo-jumbo about perversion, I have been fascinated by this film. This is a film that I never get tired of watching, and is a complete joy to watch with audiences. From the titles "Citizens for Decent Literature!!" to the end, it captivates audiences like no other, and is one of the cornerstones of this collection. This is a MUST SEE on this site.. But you already know that. Putnam's Perverted Pals Please Spuzz 2004-02-17 14:35:13 2004-02-17 14:35:13 5 10219 What intrigues me most is the naiveté of the porn on display here. Girlie magazine pictures from the 1950s and early 1960s have a peculiar artificial still-life quality to them, as if the models were wax fruits or something. The best part of the porn on display, for me, was the classic fetish cartoons from the period. I am fairly sure that Eric Stanton was one of the artists represented. Of course, today most people at least know the names of the secret sexual practices alluded to in the film. Yet, somehow, we managed to escape the clutches of the Communist masters of deceit. Extremely funny SteveGus 2004-03-08 08:28:21 2004-03-08 08:28:21 4 10273 By any intellectual or artistic standards,this film is JUNK. A comparable junk film could be made by a competant person, with cheap video camera andcomputer in a few days. The original film was made ,40 years ago, by a stupid millionaire wasting a lot of money. It is now a historic relic . So why do we have a reviewer saying it is a must see film and that he has seen it at least 40 times and that it is a cornerstone of this archive.? This film has been used as ammunition by persons advancing their own arguments,. But they also do not give any details of the quality tv programs, journalism , and books on this subject junk film cashel 2004-03-09 15:44:05 2004-03-09 15:44:05 2 10678 The reviews here are so funny. Some people give this film 5 stars because it's so ridiculous, while others give it 5 stars because they absolutely agree with it! And then there are a few who just don't get it at all, and give it 1 or 2 stars because it's badly-made... I say it's a classic, with both sociological significance and laffs o' plenty. But then, I think sex is healthy, the human body is not shameful, and the far right is full of hypocrites, so what do I know... PLUG: Please enjoy my sneaky little remix of this film <a href="http://www.archive.org/movies/movies-details-db.php?collection=opensource_movies&collectionid=come_join_the_fun2004">here</a>. Thanks for the idea Spuzz. Classic! trafalgar 2004-03-28 15:07:12 2004-03-21 10:28:50 5 11829 I disagree with the other reviewers everything in this film is true. Mr Keating is doing our crumbling society a favor by showing us the evils of pornography. Obscene material is just another one of Satan’s tools to poison people’s minds and lead them to hell. Once people are exposed to pornography, their lives are ruined for ever unless they repent and call on Jesus to save them from eternal damnation. I speak from experience, once last year I was exposed to a film called “Midnight Librarians” and while watching it, I sinned. After working with my pastor for several months, I have made things right with Jesus, and will be able to resist the devil’s sly temptations. If all of our troubled youth were to watch this video and take it to heart, our world would be a better place. Essential viewing for today's troubled Youth. CreatorzHandz 2004-04-17 23:00:01 2004-04-17 23:00:01 5 12726 Well darn! Apparently I'm eternally damned. That sounds like it's really going to cut into my leisure time. If only I could get right with Jesus. But alas, I ate my pastor with some fava beans and a nice chianti several weeks ago. If only I'd read the previous review sooner. Look, it really isn't my fault. I never intended to look at pornography. When we were 11, my friend Dennis and I were in his dad's garage and he goes, "hey, look at this" and I'm like, "at what?" and he hands me this old 1970's Playboy centerfold. Wham-o! Damned! Just like that, without so much as a how-do-you-do. I'm just saying, I don't think it's fair that I have to burn in hell. Perhaps Jesus could arrange for Dennis and I to alternate days in hell, just to get some relief from the heat, you know what I'm saying? He really should share some of the responsibility and therefore the damnation too. Worship me! Join my dark legions! Become my willing thrall! pornyporn 2004-05-05 21:29:13 2004-05-05 21:29:13 3 15892 Well hindsight is 20/20, isn't it. We now know that the world isn't flat, that you won't turn black if you stay in Africa long enough, that you won't go gay if you see enough pictures of nekkid guys in a magazine, and that masking over dark and scary things with a Lawrence Welk grin isn't such a good idea. (And how can something be a capitalist racket and a communist conspiracy thing at the same time?) There is a message in here that needn't be lost though. Many North Americans now give in to temptation WAY too easily; just feeding one whim after another instead of doing something constructive, and ultimately walking around confused and depressed. That said, at least we know from watching this that there was SOME entertaining reading material back in the day. :) Hmm... heheh 2004-07-04 11:00:20 2004-07-04 10:43:40 4 21070 In part two of the clip, the presentation continues the idea that mere presentation of information to people has a contagious effect and is therefore deleterious. Combined with the curiosity of youth into obscure secrets of human life, this is supposedly the mechanism which is to make our civilization fall down. If this underlying premise were true, wouldn't the curiosity of youth into obscure but vital issues of human life lead them to peek into the bible, as many do, and be influenced to: - Arrange the treacherous death of a close friend so as to then have sex with his wife (David and Bathsheba) - Practice pimping their wife out as their sister to rich men and getting a massive gift of wealth after the truth is known (Abraham and Sarah) - Practice genocide, all the way down to innocent newborns and innocuous girls, to found new "Living Room" in place of the old inhabitants former fields and dwellings (as Israel did under Saul - claiming "Got Min Uns" in the process - against inhabitants of various cities) I know many devote Christians, and none of them has to my knowledge practiced murder for the purpose of enabling adultery in a lawful way, pimped out their wife, or approved of genocide to gain Liebensraum. This is so even though they are devote believers in the Bible as divine instruction. Therefore: I doubt that information in itself is anywhere near as contagious from mere contact with it as this film presupposes. The lenghty fictional passage recited by the narrator could be compared to 1800's Western dime novels, with some changes, and we didn't see entire generations of young men becoming desparados and young women whores of the brothel because of it. Basically, this film preaches to the choir. Preaching to the Choir Part II nullportal 2004-09-17 14:15:39 2004-09-17 14:15:39 2 21071 In part two of the clip, the presentation continues the idea that mere presentation of information to people has a contagious effect and is therefore deleterious. Combined with the curiosity of youth into obscure secrets of human life, this is supposedly the mechanism which is to make our civilization fall down. If this underlying premise were true, wouldn't the curiosity of youth into obscure but vital issues of human life lead them to peek into the bible, as many do, and be influenced to: - Arrange the treacherous death of a close friend so as to then have sex with his wife (David and Bathsheba) - Practice pimping their wife out as their sister to rich men and getting a massive gift of wealth after the truth is known (Abraham and Sarah) - Practice genocide, all the way down to innocent newborns and innocuous girls, to found new "Living Room" in place of the old inhabitants former fields and dwellings (as Israel did under Saul - claiming "Got Min Uns" in the process - against inhabitants of various cities) I know many devote Christians, and none of them has to my knowledge practiced murder for the purpose of enabling adultery in a lawful way, pimped out their wife, or approved of genocide to gain Liebensraum. This is so even though they are devote believers in the Bible as divine instruction. Therefore: I doubt that information in itself is anywhere near as contagious from mere contact with it as this film presupposes. The lenghty fictional passage recited by the narrator could be compared to 1800's Western dime novels, with some changes, and we didn't see entire generations of young men becoming desparados and young women whores of the brothel because of it. Basically, this film preaches to the choir. Preaching to the Choir Part II nullportal 2004-09-17 14:17:34 2004-09-17 14:17:34 2 21960 This hilarious anti-porn documentary was produced by none other than millionaire savings-and-loan criminal Charles Keating. So, pornography is bad, but it's okay to steal people's life savings? What hypocrisy! Like most pinheaded conservative blowhards, host Putnam refuses to consider society's real ills (lack of employment and a living wage, underfunded public schools, domestic violence, racism, etc.) and uses pornography as a scapegoat in much the same way that Hitler blamed Jews for Germany's woes. While it's true that pornography and promiscuity can become addictions, so can smoking, drinking, and gambling. Alcoholism and compulsive gambling and their effects are far more destructive to the family unit than pornography, yet you don't hear a word about those subjects. That's because these same conservatives like to sip on snifters of brandy at the country club while they bet on sporting events. And let's not forget the damaging effects of religion. There's nothing like religion to inspire fear, ignorance, and intolerance. Over the centuries, more innocent people have been murdered in the name of religion than for any other reason. The Catholic Church alone has exterminated more people than Hitler and Stalin combined, but like Bob Dylan once sang, you don't count the dead when God's on your side. Criticisms aside, I still give this film five stars for its camp value. It's a real hoot to watch this idiot Putnam rant and rave and interpret the meanings of pictures in dirty magazines in ways that make no sense whatsoever. The bottom line is that regardless of what you believe about the subject of pornography, Perversion For Profit is a must-see on this site. What a joke! A criminal protests porn! Eric_Petersen 2004-09-30 19:46:52 2004-09-30 19:46:52 5 28011 The biggest problem with this film is that it is dated, moves slowly, and relies too heavily upon monologue all shot from one angle, on an overemphatic reader. But what a shame that this material is buried in the manner it has been. This film should be revised to bring it up to date in terms of the numbers and the law, but the basic thesis is airtight. The basic facts are indisputable, and well-proven. The notion that pornography has no such impact as that described in this film is incredibly naive and dangerous. The industry in question is probably a two trillion dollar industry today. The protections of the law, and the overwhelming assistance of profesional medicine have been all but erased, infiltrated and subverted. For example, the American Psychological Association revised the Manual for Diagnostics and Statistics to eliminate homosexuality as a mental illness - which it clearly is, but in almost the same instant, it softened the language against pedophilia, suggesting in the current version that such thoughts are not evidence of mental illness until acts are committed. Garbage! This film should be reshot with updated narration, up-to-date statistics, and a key communicator reading the information (such as Mel Gibson, Tom Selleck, maybe even Arnold Schwarzenegger) to reinvigorate the movement against this horribly destrcutive stuff. Shockingly Accurate - Just Needs a Remake MAJWhite 2005-01-01 20:05:43 2005-01-01 20:04:01 5 28083 Unfortunately, our friend MAJWhite overlooked some critical facts. 1. The Meese report, commissioned in the 1980's by a CONSERVATIVE president, which measured among other things the social impact of porn, concluded that the biggest threat pornography posed was paper cuts. You could get those from your "Left Behind" novels just as easily. 2. If homosexuality is an illness, then please kindly provide a current, scientific, unbiased, clinical report which supports this thesis. I don't buy this whole "gay agenda" nonsense, someone out there would have to have such a resource if it were true, so where is it? Otherwise, please don't bother us with unsupportable rhetoric. 3. Pedophilia and homosexuality are unrelated. I know of nothing beyond right-wing witch hunting that would suggest they were. Once again, an objective source, if such exists, would be appreciated. 4. This was a film by a financier, paranoid about preserving the social conditions that allowed him to bilk millions and get away with it. If people are out "huntin' commies," then they'll turn their attention from the real threat. 5. Attitudes about sex are much looser in many other countries, yet we are constantly told how "moral decay" is to blame for all the violent crime. If Europeans are not terrified of sexuality and have low rates of rape and murder, and societies like the Taliban are afraid of sexuality and are some of the most violent regimes on earth, tell me where the real decay is. Ahem.. Cynical_fox 2005-01-02 23:58:25 2005-01-02 23:58:25 2 28109 These films are essentially as MAJWhite has characterised them. A bit melodramatic, and somewhat out-of-date (the stats are even more alarming now), he is generally spot on, in my view. Of course, now the personal attacks must begin against him. You would think to read the last review that pornography is beneficial, if not benign. Europe is a great place to start discussing the issue - what a horrid model for America to follow. I suggest that immorality is not a condition brought about only by guilt preaching from the radical Taliban. There are things which are wrong. APA validation of homosexuality as natural and not destructive is one of them. MAJWhite has quite correctly identified that related error. The links between homosexuality and every sort of health problem are truly amazing. Psychiatric difficulties are proven. But did you know of any of the myriad other health concerns, some unknown in the heterosexual population, which come from homosexual conduct? Homosexuality is not a style or color preference - but a profound behavioural condition with incredibly powerful and deleterious effects. Consider the study by Theo Sandfort, Ron de Graaf, et al., “Same-sex Sexual Behavior and Psychiatric Disorders,” Archives of General Psychiatry, 58(1)(January 2001). In it, we learn that despite public approval of the so-called "gay lifestyle" in Holland (gay marriage is legal there), suicide rates among homosexuals in the Netherlands are much higher than among others. Homosexuality is also definitely linked to pedophilia, as is pornography, by the way - and not just in old (but still valid) studies. 1. Almost exclusively, pedophiles are male. 2. More than 1/3 of their victims are boys. 3. Homosexuals comprise less than 3% of people. A clear correlation, if not a causal link, let the reader judge. Here's one reviewer who has had it with reductionists who equate all religiously influenced thinking with being a member of the Taliban. Please leave that bit of thinking where it belongs, at an American Democrat Party rally. Real Dangers DrKinsey 2005-01-03 11:02:29 2005-01-03 10:59:23 5 30556 First of all, these "reviews" seem to be nothing of the sort. Second, almost anyone who has looked into the issue of homosexuality without bias will see that it is not an illness, and while not proven, it is most likely caused by the anterior hypothalamus near where the spinal cord connects to the brain. This organ, itself no larger than the size of a pea, is marginally smaller in gay males than in non-gay males. This study is flawed, however, because it looked only at males, not females, and only males that died of AIDS. However, the unbiased evidence points to un-alterable and perfectly natural genetics, not disease or disorder. Still, none of this really matters here, as this space is reserved for reviews of a film, not soap-box politics. ... huh? iynque 2005-01-31 11:31:23 2005-01-31 11:31:23 3 33058 If looking at the unedited versions of these pictures and texts for prolonged periods of time can result in perversion, what happened to the editors who pasted all those little red rectangles on all the pictures? I just have one question... Darthdemona 2005-02-25 10:21:37 2005-02-25 10:21:37 2 Very funny film indeed. Ridiculous and nonsensical ideas in a straight-faced way. Idiocy of the 60s. fun for me :) 2 bilingual 2005-06-28 06:51:22 2005-06-28 06:51:22 That guy would drive anyone to drink, smoke, fight, and seek porn for escape. No wonder the 50s produced a prozac Nation 3 TWADEM 2005-09-12 20:41:00 2005-09-12 20:41:00 The novel Putnam reads from, "Sex Jungle," was a "Nightstand Publication" of 1960 by Don Elliott. Don Elliott's better-known name is Robert Silverberg, who in a 2000 interview said: "The other erotica I did, the Don Elliott books, etc., was undertaken at a time when I was saddled with a huge debt, at the age of 26, for a splendid house that I had bought. There would have been no way to pay the house off by writing science fiction in that long-ago era, when $2500 was a lot to earn from a novel that might take months to write, so I turned out a slew of quick sex novels. I never concealed the fact that I was doing them; it made no difference at all to me whether people knew or not. It was just a job. And it was, incidentally, a job that I did very well. I think they were outstanding erotic novels." http://www.strangehorizons.com/2000/20001211/silverberg.shtml Adding One Historical Footnote 5 Souldogs 2005-10-16 21:55:35 2005-10-16 21:55:35 Most pornography that I have seen is an unproductive exhibition of vigorous copulation. Usually, there are components of depravity or humiliation associated with the climax scene. So people are social animals, same as insects, dogs, and other creatures. However, we are the only species who "can" do complex mathematical problems. Why aren't there more riots and protests against mathematians and their work. Shouldn't they be hounded and forced into sexual copulations that they don't like? How come leading institutions don't advocate pornography as some of the leading hotel chains do? Too many questions...? To be or not to be 5 Severus 2006-03-15 19:56:10 2006-03-15 19:56:10 Dig! It's not just 'garbage in-garbage out'. It's more like 'garbage in- garbage stays in'. If you are what you eat...well then, what do you say about what you put into your brain? Out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh. Let The Buyer Beware 5 J. DeKay 2006-09-26 00:56:07 2006-09-26 00:56:07 ...the more they stay the same. To most eyes, this is a hilarious reminder of a bygone era. This seems silly in many ways, and it is. Look at the review by MAJWhite from 2005 below. He says this is all true, just needs to be updated. A sample: "This film should be reshot with updated narration, up-to-date statistics, and a key communicator reading the information (such as Mel Gibson, Tom Selleck, maybe even Arnold Schwarzenegger) to reinvigorate the movement against this horribly destrcutive [sic] stuff." Imagine that. Tom Selleck (he made that movie with Kevin Kline where he played a gay man! (gasp) Mel Gibson, who has made some of the most violent mainstream movies, and is a documented drunk and anti-Semite. And Arnold (aka "The Gropinator") who is a well-known "flirt" and womanizer. And remember his film "True Lies," where he has his wife unknowingly strip for him. Yeah, those are some good role models. But my favorite part of this film is the plethora of photos offered by the host. Probably more than anyone watching this film had ever seen. And they probably secretly loved them. The More Things Change... trakblue 2007-05-07 04:39:11 2007-05-07 04:39:11 0 Everything that Mr.Putnam says in the film is completely true...except people these days are so brainwashed by the liberal media, or haven't been taught moral values to begin with by their ex-hippie parents. Then if someone speaks out against perversion and depravity when it comes to the gay issues, everyone else thinks that they are being a bigot for standing up for good moral values. Its rediculous! Its all true! LFF27 2007-08-15 23:41:56 2007-08-15 23:41:56 5 Pornography is for profit? Really? Gee, ya think? I'm sure this guy would be the first to support American freemarket capitalism over government-controlled or non-enterprise based systems, like those damn Ruskies! But apparently freedom and market-driven products is only okay when it's "moral" and not "perverted." Dude I got news for you: If you want to live in a free country, there's gona be porn, because people like porn and given the opertunity will buy it. And where there's a market someone will provide it. Get it? Such hypocracy Dr Buzzo 2007-09-25 21:44:15 2007-09-25 21:44:15 4 This piece of pious clap trap might carry some small bit of credibility had the producer not later been tried convicted and sentenced to 10 years in prison for the crimes of fraud, racketeering and conspiracy. There is something perverse about extolling the wrongness of sex while cheating people out of their money to add more to an already vast fortune. On the producer pjdarling12 2007-09-26 01:01:17 2007-09-26 01:01:17 1 This guy was one of John McCain's backers before the savings and loan scandal, I think "W" must have watched this and decided it was for him! He seems to prefer killing, raping, torture and pillaging over law and order. I couldn't watch the whole the thing, it's much too absurd. Charles Keating slugs and urchins 2008-05-28 01:28:48 2008-05-28 01:28:48 0 He warns parents for teaching good morals to their children. But I think it has gone out of hands now. The parents in today's date are perverts themselves. In their youth, today's parents have slept with a crowd. They have used all kinds of drugs. They have 'tried' all kinds of sex. I remember a girl at college told me that she had watched a gay porn movie. I asked her why. She replied, "I just wanted to check it out." What do you expect from such parents? Will they listen to advice of this guy? Or will they laugh at him? Actually, today'a parents push condoms in pockets of their kids when they go out. A lady in neighborhood, stopped her teenager son(14) and his friends. Then she brought dozens of condoms and gave them to the boys. And then said, "Ok now you can go." The girls standing with boys were giggling and boys smiled. Welcome to 2008. All advice is in vain. Pornography is a profession. gone out of hands The Keyboard Caper 2008-08-06 00:10:24 2008-08-06 00:10:24 5 But really, despite what other reviewers are claiming, in regards to rape, and crime in general, we're a lot safer than we were 30, 40 years ago. People have this image of the "olden days" being pure and wonderful, which is totally untrue. Pornography is easier to get than ever, but still crime goes down, and the average quality of life improves. If homosexuals were recruiting, wouldn't there be way more actual homosexuals now? Most people I know have no problem with gays, you'd think that'd make them ripe for recruitment, but I don't see it happening. The idea that gays have increased instances of psychological and health problems entirely because of their "gayness" doesn't really make much sense. Keep in mind that if you're gay you're more likely to be an outcast when you're young, you're more likely to be disowned by your family, be forced to start working and drop out of school, and doing what most teenagers do when they end up on their own before they're mature, party and try to get laid. The gays who have supportive families nowadays often go off to university and end up in good jobs. Characterizing gays as a bunch of depraved lunatics who live their lives in some kind of drugged up bath house environment is like saying all women are lusty nymphomaniacs. Quite Entertaining. IanKoro 2008-12-16 19:17:15 2008-12-16 19:17:15 4 I gave it four stars because it's a good choice if you're looking for the moral panic of the 1960's. I thought it was funny how inconsistent the editing was. Putnam shows "girly magazines" and sometimes blocks out parts and other times doesn't. Moral Panic (Part II) zythmer 2009-02-02 03:03:06 2009-02-02 03:03:06 4 C.S. Lewis wrote that "there are people who are doing everything they can to keep our sexual passions inflamed in order to make a lot of money out of us. Because, as everyone knows, a man with an obsession is a man with very little sales resistance." And E Michael Jones, author and editor of "Culture Wars" Magazine, reveals some little-known facts about the Porn industry. He states in “Rabbi Dresner’s Dilemma”: "I quoted Al Goldstein, who said that Jews were involved in pornography because “Christ sucks,” and was termed an anti-Semite for quoting him. But then [Nathan] Abrams quotes me and presumably uses his article, which makes essentially the same points as mine, as reason for raise and tenure for his academic sinecure, whereas my article, the source of Abrams’ ideas, gets me banned from Catholic University. (E. Michael Jones, Anti-Semitism and Thought Control at Catholic University) "The connection between Jews and pornography is like the connection between Jews and Bolshevism. Both are forms of revolutionary activity, ultimately traceable to Jewish concepts that have been secularized. Jews become involved in pornography for reasons similar to why they become involved in Communism, which is to say, not just because they happened to be Jews but because being Jewish as they and Sabbatai Zevi and Wilhelm Reich defined it found logical expression in producing pornography as a form of cultural warfare through moral subversion. 'Jews who came to America,' Elliott Abrams writes, 'were usually. . . not the most devout people in their communities' anyway. The decline in faith and morals, however, did not mean that they stopped defining themselves as Jews. Socialism and sexual liberation simply filled up the religious vessels from which the Torah had evaporated. ...The Israelis have recently shown themselves well-versed in what one could call the military use of pornography. At 4:30 PM on March 30, 2002, Israeli military forces took over Palestinian TV stations when they occupied Ramallah in the West Bank, immediately shutting them down. What followed was a little more unusual. Shortly after occupying the Al-Watan TV station, the Israeli forces began broadcasting pornography over its transmitter. Eventually, according to a report from The Advertiser, an Australian newspaper, the Israelis expanded their cultural offensive against the Palestinian people by broadcasting pornography over two other Palestinian stations, the Ammwaj and Al-Sharaq channels. ... The simple fact of the matter is that this incident simply cannot be explained according to the principles available in contemporary American culture. In order to understand the disparity between the official explanation of pornography and what might be termed its military use, we have to go back to the ancients. The story of Samson and Delilah might be a good place to start. Israel was invincible militarily then too -- at least that part hasn't changed -- so the Philistines decided that they had to get at the Israelite leader by other than military means. Unable to defeat him in battle, they decided to seduce him sexually. Once Samson succumbed to Delilah's wiles, he lost his power, and Israel lost its leader. They could find him then not on the field of battle, but rather to use Milton's phrase 'eyeless in Gaza, grinding at the mill with slaves.' The story of the Palestinian TV stations broadcasting pornography has a curiously Biblical ring to it. Having learned their lesson, the Israelis decided to turn the tables on their opponents, because they knew that a blind opponent is no opponent at all, and because they knew -- as the ancient Greeks knew -- that lust makes a man blind. St. Thomas Aquinas, giving voice to that same tradition over a millennium later said that lust 'darkens the mind.' Suddenly, Israel's use of pornography in their battle against the Palestinians isn't so inexplicable anymore because a blind opponent is a weak opponent. A blind opponent is no opponent at all." http://www.culturewars.com/2003/rabbidresner.html In his new book Jones says: "Jewish chutzpah was displayed no better than when Al Goldstein, the Jewish publisher of Screw, was asked by Luke Ford why so many Jews were engaged in trafficking porn. Goldstein’s answer was: “The only reason that Jews are in pornography is that we think that Christ sucks. Catholicism sucks. We don’t believe in authoritarianism” (p. 1056). But there is a more practical reason Jews dominate pornography, for it is a means to revolution. As even Luke Ford admits: “‘Why does porn attract so many non-Jewish Jews?’ Because ‘even when Jews live in a society that welcomes them instead of harassing them, many Jews hate the majority culture.’ Pornography weakens the majority culture by moral subversion. Jews often lead in the application of new technology. That meant using high resolution photography, the VCR, and the Internet to deliver pornography just as it meant dynamite, forgery, and smuggling to bring down the Czar in Russia” (Jones, The Jewish Revolutionary Spirit and Its Impact on World History, p. 1055). Here are a few good quotes on Porn and Purity: Just say No to Porn. Say Yes to Love. Porn addiction? Pray, and see www.Dads.com God made you to be free and happy. Don't submit to the slavery of Porn. Porn destroys souls, relationships, marriages, and societies. Save America. Fight Porn. Pornography Is Moral Pollution (PIMP) Who is Behind the Porn Industry (Besides Satan)? vidmonko 2009-02-02 03:39:11 2009-02-02 03:39:11 1 I used to think my reviews were pointless and irrelevant, then I started reading the reviews on this film, and wow, you guys are a bunch of nuts! I used to think I failed at life, now I see that compared with the average person, I am actually quite smart! Thanks Guys! Both the Pro-Porn people and the Anti-Porn people keep posting nauseating reviews which having nothing to this with this film. See! You just read ANOTHER irrelevant "review", except this time, I wrote it and mocked the UNFUNNY AND OVERRATED reviewers who have reviewed this film. Gee! Seto-Kaiba_Is_Stupid 2009-02-02 03:50:30 2009-02-02 03:50:30 3 Seto-Kaiba Got One Thing Right....HE IS STUPID! The Lone Ranger's Kimo Sabbe Mantra....Sez.... doowopbob 2009-04-15 12:54:11 2009-04-15 12:54:11 0 Back in 1996 a group in Virginia called "People for Decent Commonwealth Broadcasting " made a film kinda of similar to this though in that case about 80% of the movie was about the evils and dangers of people who are gay and/or those with HIV & AIDS being allowed to be on the air inside Virgnia. The usual stuff..a gay disc jockey can recruit the young to be gay by spreading the gay agenda, all child molestion cases are the result of gay men ( what about all the young little GIRLS who are molested by men? Where is the "gay" connetion to that? ). That movie also pointed out how Virginia's rock music stations like Roanoke's K-92FM or Richmond's WRVQ Q-94 ( those stations were mentioned ) were pushing kids to have sex and do drugs. Of course the film overlooked COUNTRY music. Hmmmmmmm .... Not sure whatever became of this "People for Decent Commonwealth Broadcasting" but I do have the film in my collection. I was actually thinking about uploading to this site, however in the movie there was an interview with Diana Greenfield who back in 1995 had wrote abook called "WFQX...Froggy 99FM is EVERYWHERE", about a dj at WFQX in Winchester, VA who was discovered who had HIV thanks to a nurse at a local hospital who had nothing better to do than check out one's health records..and yes the woman was fired for doing it too. How the local Winchester, Virginia community was sooooo upset, how this guy can spread the virus to listeners and how 35 listners turned gay thanks to this dj ( of course the names of those listeners weren't mentioned ). Anyway in the film ( and the book ), it was mentioned that Paul Harvey ( yes THAT Paul Harvey )had wrote a letter saying that unless WFQX would fire that disc jockey who had HIV, he would yank his programming off from WFQX. Well the movie and book came to the attnetion of Mr. Harvey and ABC Radio and both had totally denied Harvey writting that letter to WFQX and yes, lawsuits were filed though they were dropped and part of the settlement was that the book and film be..well withdrawn and forgotten ( it is for the most part..good luck finding either anyplace ). As I was saying I was thinking about uploading the movie here but with the recent death of Paul havey and knowing ABC/Disney/Citadel and their lawyers...it would be yanked so why bother. After watching this movie, ( a movie that ws speaking out aginst porn..yet showing porn )..I have to say people who are that extreme on this subject and others like homosexuality..why is it when I hear some of the comments by SOME of this crowd..makes me think of that phrase.."people who speak out the most...chances are they are into what they are against". Like that interview some years back I heard on a West Virginia radio station with Fred "God Hates Fa gs" Phelps..in the interview that man knew more about gay sex than my own brother who is gay. Kinda reminds me of Exodus International..the "ex-gay" group. Last year Denver's KHOW AM 630 had reported that some of them members, who claim they are "ex-gays" not only still had profiles on many gay adult websites that are active but some of this folks still were downloading gay porn from their churches ( do these people know such stuff can be tracked down? ). Then there is that man in my hometown some years back who had won tickets to the Indy 500 from an auto parts store only to tear up the ticket because the city of Indianpolis still has gay bath houses and whose websites were full of naked men having sex and they went against his faith. OK..this man was against gay bath houses but as a local radio talk show in my hometown had mentioned at the time..to see the "naked men" on those Indy gay sites , well they require a credit card to view them. So did this man pay for something he was against? Whoops !!! Yes people have the right to be for-porn or against-porn...but the message ( to me anyway ) gets lost if people tend to do not practice what they preach ). Dont like porn..then don't give them a dime !!! There is an indirect remake to this film.... cathyftr 2009-05-24 22:21:20 2009-05-24 22:21:20 3 1964, 1965. So the B&W Sexploitation films of those 2 years would include SIN IN THE SUBURBS, WHITE SLAVES OF CHINATOWN, OLGA'S GIRLS, OLGA'S HOUSE OF SHAME, SEX PERILS OF PAULETTE, BAD GIRLS GO TO HELL, WATCH THE BIRDIE, THE DEFILERS, & THE UNSATISFIED. Test Title saducimus 2009-06-23 05:27:06 2009-06-23 05:27:06 5 people that think they've seen the virgin mary are insane. people that blame one group of people (jews\gays)for all society's problems are insane.people that still swallow david irvings psychotic racist(to everybody "see below")ravings is stupid and insane theres not much hope for you now is there vidmonko stop posting shit you lonely retarded xenophobe you look stupid despite your big words (misspelled frequently too) face it the world hates everyone on this site hates you and the ones that don't are hated little rednecks too i hate you too even your non-existent god hates you too fuck off and die one less lunatic get help seriously fuck head you're infuriating vidmonko you sir are a total fucking dribbling moron ReligionIsTheDeathOfIntelligence 2009-09-14 08:42:24 2009-09-14 08:42:24 0 38 3.62