Sunday, August 20th, 2000

Deep Porn Party

parandlv21@hotmail.com writes: Luke I'm hoping you can help. Went to the "Deep Porn" CD party at 7969 last night. Not 5 minutes after we got in, my gal comes back from the bathroom with Racquel Moore in tow. They proceed to heat up the dance floor, putting on quite the show. I'm lucky enough to be sandwiched between them for most of the evening and there was talk of getting together in the future for bigger and better things. However, Rayvenne and Kiki D'Aire showed up and got Racquel distracted and we lost her in the back room. Kiki talked to my gal about getting together for a big all-girl orgy soon, too. Well, we wound up leaving with no way to contact either of them. This after Michael Somebody tried VERY hard to get my lady to agree to do a porno with Racquel; everyone was salivating over her all night and WISHING she was in porn! Anyway, if you can contact Racquel, give her this e-mail addie and tell her if she wants to be in touch, feel free.

Career Arc of a Porn Starlet

Curious writes: Luke, since you are too much of a gentleman to drop the bomb on the starry-eyed Tawny, the 24 year old Britney Spears look alike who wants to make a million dollars on her website by 30, I will.

Tawny dear, this is how the porn fame game is played. Start by going to see the top pornographer in Las Vegas, Mad Jack. Tell Jack that Luke sent you. Do a few gonzos with him to get established. (Caution: Do not get drunk with Jack as his starlets frequently marry him while intoxicated.) Also DO NOT do any: anal, gang bang or interracial scenes this early in your career! I will explain why later.

Then move to Los Angeles with your gonzos under your arm and start knocking on doors. Your first stop has to be World Modeling for a quick Jim South blow job. Can he help your career? Probably not, but do it for good luck. He's kind of like the Blarney Stone of porn. (Note: Blowing Luke is a career neutral move so why bother?) Next you are off to Vivid Video. Be advised that if you do not find Steve Hirsch attractive a contract is out of the question as contract girls are required to date Steve. If there is no interest there go on to Ed Powers. I know that he looks like Wally Cox with a pony tail, but he pays very well. Again I remind you no anal! Next stops ... Wicked ... Anabolic ... Elegant Angel ... and if still no luck ... Max Hardcore. Be advised that the no anal option is null and void once you enter Max's Altadena home.

Now that you are an established "cock socket" it's time to sink that cash into some obnoxiously large breast implants and tattoos. Remember one of the tenants of capitalism is to reinvest in the means of capital production. Now you can start stringing your $300 f--- scenes together into a tidy little sum. Maybe even grossing $40,000 a year! Or even more with stripping income and Bunny Ranch brothel appearances.

Eventually, 18 to 24 months down the road, your popularity will begin to wane and then you can cash in on your strategically held reserves. You do the anal! Then the interracial! Then the gang bang! And finally, the interracial anal gang bang with a Howard Stern listener thrown in for extra publicity value! Now you are spent!

Then it's time to move back to Vegas and to begin trying to live down your porn career with only a barbed wire tattoo, two rock hard implants, Charlie Sheen's pager number, a stint in rehab and your genital warts to remind you of the folly of your misspent youth. Cheer up in about 5 years you can stage a "comeback" and begin the porn game anew!

Good luck Tawny. We are with you all the way!

Kendra Jade Update

I talked to Kendra Jade Sunday afternoon by phone. She's been on the road dancing. She has the flu and is upset that she lost her collection of 300 compact discs (which she uses to put on her strip shows).

Curious writes: hmmmmm ... I noticed that you put the Kendra Jade update conspicuously close to the Career Arc of a Porn Starlet. Tawny learn from Kendra's mistakes. She squandered her precious anal, interracial, and gang bang scenes prematurely in her career, in fact, simultaneously in 'Gang Bang Auditions'. She's done the huge implants and multiple tattoos already and at the ripe old age of 23 has already retired and comeback in 'Sopornos 2.' s--- Tawny, you're 24 get your ass moving!

Ripoff

Kyle Phillips writes: Dear Luke, This is a public service announcement of sorts.

For years I have been a respected, (I would like to think), professional, working in the industry. I have worked for many reputable companies that were a pleasure to work for- Shooting Star-Sticky, Notorious, Extreme, to name a few. Then, there are the companies at the bottom of the preverbal porno barrel, namely Victor Salazar of Jalapeno. As I am sure you have heard before, the stories of Victor and John Bowen's bad habit of issuing payroll checks in empty accounts.

Well now it is official. Myself and another top female actress who shall remain nameless were issued checks that immediately bounced, and have remained unpaid for 45 days. The female talent in this case was a two-time bad check recipient from this dastardly duo. When questioned about it directly on the phone Victor answered to the charges, " I don't care", and "oh well". Not very responsible behavior from a "director" in the industry. Especially in light of the amounts of the LA City Attorney's, and Labor Board's fines in these cases. In fact Victor is just a lackey for Bowen who is the most unprofessional producer I have met. He constantly yells, is rude, and pisses off the female talent to the point of reporting behavior to the authorities, (two occasions I heard of first hand). So watch out all you upcoming actors and actresses following in my footsteps. Be careful who you work for, and do a merchant check verification by phone from the set the first time you work for someone. All banks have an 800 or 888 number for this purpose. Dial 1800-555-1212, ask for the banks merchant check verification phone number, you will be glad you did. If the check is not funded, offer to let the police handle it, or pay you in cash immediately. Just because they say they are honest, does not necessarily mean they are.

Another problem in the industry is that I don't think it is fair that you find a new girl, take her to a company like Victor, they use her for $10,000 in bookings and the shmuk that brought her there gets a pat on the back. Any agent would have pocketed a grand. In closing hoorah for the companies that actually have some respect for the actors, it is not an easy job by anyone's standards

Barely Legal 6

Patrick Riley writes on RAME: Remember the thrill of seeing the box of #1 and #2 and #3 with their gorgeous little cutie pies? #4 and #5 dropped in quality but now we may be back up to near the level of the first three.

The girl on #6 looks gorgeous: pretty, shoulder length fine blonde hair, tiny tits, nice smile, tight waist, fine golden down on her arms, no visible tats and not even a belly button ring. Her picture on the back shows her with a dick near her mouth (unfortunate) and a slightly drugged-up look but still cute.

Four other girls in the movie, one of whom is Dominica Leoni, and the other three I don't recognize. One has shoulder length very curly brown hair which is always a bad sign; the other two have short hair, one blonde and one black (hair; all the girls are white). No obvious bodily disfigurements. All look at least passable. All photos could be airbrushed of course. Overall box color is peach. Release date is September 5, 2000 which means that with the perverts in my video stores, I'll probably see it about November.

BTW, putting on my Gemini999 (aka ReelToReel aka Mintball) hat, the Teen Choice awards are on Fox on Tuesday at 8pm. While this is primarily a vehicle for early-teen females to drool over teenage males (according to my sources, teenage males are all playing video games or watching survivor--idiots) they do have some very cute little chickies along the lines of Britney Spears and Mya (sp?) who I discovered the other day. I'm booking a front row seat to drool. Of course, if you prefer the attainable woof-woofs on Jenny Jones you might obtain advice from the real Gemini999.

Luke's Favorite Links

Click here: X-E - CHICK COMICS THEATER: What Do You Expect In A Town called Sodom?

More losers arguing about who's the hottest porn babe. Click here: Hottest Adult Star? - Stunning Curves

What I Have Learned From Porn

Barefoot Grrl writes on RAME:

1. There are many receptacles for sperm, but the vagina is not one of them.

2. There are such things as door-to-door dildo salespeople. (Usually women)

3. Order anything -- pizza, groceries, a dildo -- and someone will get laid.

4. Strangers at the door are dying to give it away.

5. Anyone dressed in a French maid's outfit is begging for it.

6. There are about eleven ugly guys in Southern Califronia who get all the girls.

7. Women adapt to lesbianism without any problem at all.

8. 2 people having sex are always open to having a 3rd (or 4th, or 5th or 6th etc.) person join them..

9. The correct answer to the question "do you like me f---ing your mouth?" is "Emm-hmmm!"

10. The performers in Leisure Time Videos cannot pronounce the word "f---."

11. Wearing high heels in bed is perfectably acceptable.

12. Bikinis and high heels is a fashion statement.

13. If you turn around or raise your legs chances are you'll get your asshole licked.

14. Tommy Byron would probably rather have have his asshole licked than anything else.

15. Every time someone has sex in Southern California, someone else starts playing really cheesy music.

16. Asians, often thought to be shy and demure, are, in pornoland, always "awesome."

17. "Awesome" asian tapes frequently begin with a couple of asian girl scenes.

18. When they run out of asians, they use Latinas with lots of eye make-up.

19. When they run out of asians and latinas with lots of eye make up they use girls with black hair.

20. When they run out of asians, latinas with lots of eye make up and girls with black hair they use...girls.

21. Every girl in porn is issued with 1: a tattoo, 2: another, even worse, tattoo, 3:a tongue stud, 4: one more tattoo, 5: a belly ring, 6: toe rings. 7. Clit ring. 8. Ugly boyfriend lurking somewhere.

22. All porn women are betweeb 18-25 although some of them look like they remember the Eisenhower administration (fondly).

23. At some time or another every porn woman has been with (ick) Ron Jeremy. Including Mamie Eisenhower.

24. Buy an ugly plaid couch -- get laid by a porn girl.

25. If you are an ugly guy with a hundred bad tattoos for some reason you are up to your neck in girls.

26. People hardly ever laugh in porn movies. (And let's face it, there's lot to laugh about.)

[Taliesin: As for #26, well, check out some of the videos I've directed. One actress told me that working for me was the most fun she had ever had on a porn set. I think one of the keys to making a really hot sex movie is to show the performers having a good time. If they're having a good time, having fun, enjoying what they are doing, then the audience will respond positively to what they see on the screen.]

27. Want an A? Screw your teacher. (This never fails.)

28. Your boss (male or female) will want to screw you..

29. Your boss will screw you.

30. If you are male and you screw your boss you will enjoy it.

31. If you are female you won't enjoy it until your boss promises you a big promotion.

32. If you are dressed in a nurses uniform....oh well you can guess the rest...

Tetsuwan adds:

33. lesbians won't have sex with each other without the use of at least three different types of dildos.

34. pornology defines lesbian sex as something done when you have been treated poorly by your boyfriend.

35. Guy Da Silva is black as is Steven St Croix

38. 50 year old unfit, unattractive men always have 20 something hard bodied babes begging them to give it to them harder.

Mr Scorpio:

38. Out in the world there's a branch of the Lynn family that sends all of it's girls into the porn business.

39. Most Czech and Hungarian girls may not understand a lick of English, but somehow they all know the phrase "Let me f--- you up the ass".

40. All women are born knowing how to handle fifteen dicks at once.

41. If you want to completly immobilize a man, have a woman lick his nipples or asshole.

42. Most women take an enema everyday, just in case they might get assf---ed.

43. Cops in California don't enforce indecent exposure laws.

44. Pantyhose is a myth.

45. Kitchens are use more for having sex than preparing food.

46. All oncoming orgasms must be announced. That's becouse it's a secret signal for the girl to jump up and swallow a load.

47. A visit to the OB GYN comes with complementary sex.

48. Cum facials automatically trigger a sympathetic orgasm in women.

49. Porn directors think that we really want to see guys get scrunchy faced when they come.

50. Schools in L.A. enforce a dress code that mandates micro-mini skirts, pony tails, bobby socks and high-heel platform shoes.

51. Whenever your boss is sitting at his desk, he's getting a blowjob.

52. Blond with dark roots is the predominant hair color in California.

53. If a woman owes money to a man, he'll always accept sex as a substitution.

54. In California, all blowjobs come with a smile. I know, I read the porn review magazines.

55. Condoms are useless for containing sperm. That's why everyone always takes them off for the money shot.

56. Seymore Butts doesn't have a jealous bone in his body.

57. A gang of guys don't mind waiting their turn to get at a girl, but bunch of women will have a riot to get at a guy.

58. The dingleberry is a myth.

Rob: If a woman's first name and last name begin with the same letter then she is a slut.

A woman's name may have 3 x's or two x's in her name, but never jusy one x.

Gay men like to have sex with women as long as there are other men present (ie director, camera man, ...).

Women who love to suck cock hate to kiss.

A man can have gay sex with another man and then change his name and not be considered gay anymore.

All platinum blondes have a barbwire tattoo aroung their right bicep to demonstrate their uniqueness.

A woman cannot have a truly satisfying orgasm until a man's semen pelts her face.

Hot chicks love to have their vagina's racheted open with a speculum. Really hot chicks like one in their ass too.

At a gang bang each thrust is considered a distinct and separate sex act.

More Things I've Learned From Porn

Barefootgrrl writes on RAME: The response to the original thread was so enthusiastic and subsequent observations by other posters were so witty, I thought I'd keep it going.

1. Strange phenomenon: the more famous a porn girl gets, the larger her breasts become.

2. Pure speculation: the very 1st time Max saw a girl in high heels and anklets his response was probably something like "Yowzaa...me likey!"

3. You play director: you have a beautiful porn girl in your lens. Do you: a, show her pretty face, breasts, legs, feet, hair etc from time to time, or do you b, show some gnarly cock grinding into her for about, oh, twenty minutes?

4. The correct answer to the question: "Why do you want to get into the business?" is a: "I love sex," not "I want to have sex with ugly stranger for money." (extra credit if you said "So I can headline at the Hot Buns Club in Galveston.")

5. Glasses on a porn girl = smart. Glasses on a porn boy = nerd.

6. Your girlfriend comes home and finds you with another woman. The correct response is (always) "Ohh, you're in trouble now" which means threeway sex.

7. In LA, poolboy, gardener, chauffeur and room service waiter are extremely sweet gigs.

8. 1 minute of pussy licking gets you 9hrs of cock sucking.

9. One of these damn days that jerking off in the face thing is going to result in a chick getting her nose broken.

10. Amateur tapes usually contain 80% professional filler.

12. Allow me to get serious for a moment: Leisure Time (and its myriad aliases) ought to be ashamed of themselves.

13. Approach a single girl in a park, tell her you are student filmaker and you will get laid very, very soon.

14. There is a school somewhere that teaches porn girls to push cum out of their mouths.

15. You know they are cheerleaders because they never take off their sneakers.

16. "Sure, you can pull that cock out of some girls asshole and I will suck it." (Makes for great cinema.)

17. Two girls, one guy. Girl 1 (riding guy) to other girl "Your turn now" actually means, "Man, am I sick of this."

18. 99% of really atrractive girls are never seen again. (Except for Katie Gold -- Katie e-mail me)

20. They are getting those luxurious house from somewhere (hands up mainstream Hollywood producers, we can guess who you are).

21. The writing on boxcovers is so small for a reason.

22. If I hear that Cumback pussy song one more time...

23. Coffee table porn should not be left on the coffee table. (or watched)

24. Gangbang videos CAN'T be good for you. Or for the performers.

25. Really good looking girls get humungeous tattoos on their tits because...Well, I don't know why.

26. In real life, girls, if you had a choice between say, Mel Gibson and a porno guy would you really choose the porno guy?

27. Open, obvious, masturbation leads to sex. (I got caught masturbating by another girl in college and almost transferred because of it.)

28. Its obvious that lesbians love dildoes the way demonstrators love rubber bullets.

29. She says "slap my ass" He doesn't. (What's up with that?)

30. Actual living, breathing human women have sex with TT Boy.

31. Actual, living breathing human women have sex with that guy who always puts panties on his head -- or at least around hs neck.

32. Porno sex is nasty, unrealistic and poorly paid.... Anyway, we should all be so lucky...

Puke Porn

Rob writes: > I believe it's called "Vomitorium" winner of XRCO's worst film of 1999. > Go to www.mondofamilyfilms.com > > Can I ask you what in the world is appealing about women vomitting? The > arousal factor eludes me completely.

David Austin, a Philosophy professor, replies on RAME: Emetophilia seems to be one of the rarest sexual interests. Like most sexual interests, it's far more complicated than the label tends to suggest.

One of the main differences is apparently between interest in degrading vomiting and interest in non-degrading vomiting, though it's not a sharp difference and some emetophiles span the divide. (Of course, similar differences are found, for example, among golden, and even brown shower enthusiasts, who appear far more numerous than emetophiles.)

Among those who have more of an interest in non-degrading vomiting, there seems to be a thrill associated with the convulsive, orgasm-like contractions of vomiting, followed by the relative calm after emptying out. There are some emetophiles who hate nausea and prefer gagging with a stomach full of drinking water.

Another common factor seems to be a desire to take care of, or be taken care of, during and/or after vomiting.

One of the best places to learn about how unusual sexual interests appeal to those who have them is http://www.deviantdesires.com/ It offers a number of resources, including discussion forums (fora?).

I would guess that puke porn is made mainly as a novelty item and not with the hope of significant sales to the emetophilic community, though it may have some appeal to those who seek images of degradation.

Luke Gets Mail

Chaim writes: I wonder why the ultra orthodox don't put their teffilim on both arms, one with a clockwise spiral and the other with a counter-clockwise spiral, just to be sure.

Rumdar: Luke Obviously you have been so moved by the Lieberman nomination that prayer was in order. I must say you cut a dashing figure in your religious shawl. They kinda resemble the garments worn by Jackie Chan in those Kung Fu movies. It appears that praying must be an arduous undertaking. You are sweating throughout.

Marc: some inspiring thoughts regarding your reawakening on the prayer tip. i hope that you're able to keep up the pace ... it can inspire me to get back into some daily spiritual shape, too, in advance of the high holydays. a much better use of your site than the masturbation diary.

another law is that, if you masturbate, you can redeem yourself by offering to hold the baby on your lap during a bris. i will be attending two such events later this week. should i volunteer?

Goddess writes: Geez, Chris, a tad touchy, aren't we? One comment and I'm suddenly trying to eliminate "every trace of sexism from the planet". I was simply trying to point out that there are a lot of people on the page one might consider obnoxious, but that's the whole point of the page---to let *everyone* have a chance to present their views. I only mentioned Lynne because she seems to be taking the brunt of it. And I do *not* slog through the whole column. Trust me, the minute I see some people's name, I scroll as fast as I can!!

Charley Frey writes: DefianceHaven is a whore house. Not a feature dance booking.

K-Man writes: luke dude, first of all, IMHO Lauren Clark looks tore up, yuck! second of all, you're my friend and all Luke, but for hecks sake, GIVE UP THE f---ING PREACHING already, no one gives a rat's ass what kind of praying you are doing, nor does anyone care to see pictures of you praying, did it ever occur to you that YOU are the only person in the adult biz that pushes pictures of himself praying and pushes religion on his visitors? Dude, I know you said you don't like or condone porn, you just write about it, but s--- brutha, you practically preach a whole sermon on your column every day, just strung throughout the stories you write about!

Bert writes: I saw a film by a Kris Kramski, called An American Girl in Paris. I loved it, especially the lead, Brooke April. I had never heard of her before and have tried to find out more about her, especially a filmography. Sadly, no luck. Except for a -very poor quality- picture of her through Yahoo, I wasn't able to find anything on her on the internet. Do you know anything whatsoever about her, or where I might reach her or find anything on her. Again, I know absolutely nothing about this girl so ANYTHING will be most welcome.

Luke's Homoeroticism = Less Than Zero

Curious writes: The "Apricot Sky" clips were interesting, but obscure. From the photos it looks like the protagonist, an innocent young man, goes to the big city to eat at an outdoor cafe in the nude. BTW that shot of you with your mullet hairdo and undefined chest explains why that Falcon Video contract boy deal never came through for you.

Small Actors

McGza) wrote on RAME: Also, can anyone think of a movie (any period) in which a women is unsatisfied with her lover/husband/etc. because of small size, and goes out looking for someone bigger?

Torris: A move entitled "Ed Powers: The Earlly Years" should fit your bill.

Rob: All Max Hardcore films feature Max's Mini-Meat. He makes a sixth grader feel hung.

I'm Down With Satan

Rick writes Brittany O'Connell: DEAR BRIT, I HAVEN'T HEARD s--- FROM YOU IN A WHILE. DID SOMETHING I SAID STRIKE A NERVE??? ARE YOU MAD AT ME FOR SOME REASON??? HEY....LISTEN....I'M DOWN WITH SATAN. YOU AIN'T DOWN WITH HIM....SO WHAT'S THE DEALIO??? HEY LOOK....YOU'RE STILL COOL. YOU'RE STILL MY GODDESS. I JUST THINK SATAN IS PRETTY COOL. HE HATES FAGGOTS AND ALL THAT. I HATE FAGGOTS AND ALL THAT. DOES THAT BOTHER YOU??? HEY....

I GOT NEWS FOR YOU. MOST OF YOUR FANS HATE FAGGOTS. AND I THINK YOU KNOW THAT. THE THINGS I DO....I DO IN THE NAME OF THE DARK CARNIVAL.... AND SATAN. I REMEMBER ONE TIME YOU TOLD ME THAT IT PISSES YOU OFF IN THE NAME OF GOD. WELL....DOES IT PISS YOU OFF THAT I DO THINGS IN THE NAME OF SATAN??? WELL....DOES IT??? NO ANSWER HUH??? I DIDN'T THINK YOU WOULD WANT TO VOICE YOUR OPINION. ANYWAY....WHEN'S MY VIDEO COMING??? I'VE BEEN WAITING FOR QUITE A WHILE NOW. LET KNOW AT LEAST THAT IF ANTHING ELSE. DON'T WORRY BRIT....I STILL LOVE YOU....EVEN IF YOU DON'T LOVE "THE MAN DOWNSTAIRS". LATER. RICK

Steve Neece writes Luke: Once again,you have stimulated my brain.Porners & porn lovers need to be interested in the coming presidential election.If Vince Mc Mahon can threaten to mobilize his voting age wrestling fans why can't the porners do the same with voting age porn addicts?Do you think that if,for a minute,either politico thought of them as a viable voting bloc they would not be wooed and catered to?Could you see Bush,Cheney,Gore and even Leiberman kissing porner ass big time!!??After all,could Leiberman turn his back on so many fellow Jews,secular or not?Could you see Leiberman shmoozing with Al Goldstein,Gloria Leonard etc. at gala fundraisers?Even more fun to imagine Bush & Cheney having to suck up to the porn crowd!Believe me,for 5 million votes,or even 1 million in a tight election ,they would.Could you see Bush panting after all the best known porn stars and reigniting his coke Jones?Though you seem to hate Nina Hartley with a special passion (atheist,communist ,feminist & porn star) I think she may be one of the few that would have the integrity not to suck up to politicians she despised . In my opinion she is clearly your moral superior,Luke.

Next case.Rick,I don't pretend to be an authority on satanism,but why would he hate Gays?I thought he was for all the oppressed deviants.Actually,when you think of it god and satan are one in the same.If according to Christians god made everything then he is responsible for satan and satan exists by his sufferance.Please explain to me why satan would be down on Gays.Sounds like you are fashioning a supernatural being to fit your own predjudices.I often wondered how many porners were satan worshippers.Do you know of any ? I can picture Rob Black and Tom Byron etc. as coven masters.

Midget Porn Stars Documentary

I am a film student. I have an idea for a documentary, based around midget porno stars...I'm at a loss on how to contact them, or even find them. If you have any suggestions please email, or feel free to forward my address to any midget performers you know - Pablo email me MADDOG2169@aol.com

Hard Life of a Porn Fan

Skweez writes on RAME: When I was in college, I worked part-time at a "mom & pop" video rental store. We rented/sold mainstream movies from G-rated to R, but of course we had the ole' "back room". The funniest s--- I've ever seen or heard (coworkers and I used to laugh our butts off):

1. How ladies run pass-patterns better than any NFL wide-out to get into the "back room" without being detected, then STEALTHLY come out with a couple of vids.

2. The overused "I'm renting this for a party" excuse. As if to say, I'd NEVER rent a porno under normal circumstances. After all, I'm a "lady". Or, "I need to pay late fees on this FOR MY HUSBAND".....we're thinking---sUUUUUUre

[Spaceman: Please...the men use this lame excuse way more than the girls...and we get lots of girls. usually when they're getting the most expensive fake vagina in the store...Yes, I'd like to buy this $150 Jen Teal molded vibrating vagina, please...It's a gag for a bachelor party." Right, buddy. "Yeah....this copy of 'Girls who Butt-ball Guys'...is that for sale as well? It's my um....friend's birthday this week and I know he'll get a kick out of it." Sure dude...whatever.]

3. The ole' drop and run: That's where all you hear is the THUNK of a movie dropping in the return box, then the pattering of female feet running out of the store. When you check-in the movie, the title reads "White Sluts Who Suck Huge Black Cocks" or something. It was especially funny to recognize the name in the computer--.teacher, neighbor, or the hottie who usually rents "Terms of Endearment" type s--- when she comes through your line.

4. And my ALL time favorite: The female video clerk we had who made guys turn fire-engine red. She knew more about f--- flicks than any of us ever will. She'd check out a male customer and say "oh yeah...this is a GREAT movie. Wait until you see the anal in the 2nd scene. Most guys' jaws would drop to the floor.

Any former or current video store workers? Hell, I'm thinking about opening my OWN store ;-)

Spaceman: Hehehe....our female clerk gets followed all around the store....until they see her husband, a martial arts expert who once fought his way through 10 gang members, and won. Then they tend to stay away from the store for a few weeks :-)

MrMarcus.com Highlights

A Bald Jew writes on Mr. Marcus message board: "How do you keep your hat on while f---ing? Static electricity? Rubber cement? Velcro? Toupee tape? I can barely keep my head yarmulke on in shul! Thanks."

On: 8/19/100 19:53 Mr.Marcus wrote: Actually it's pure kinetic energy inspired by the pussy. Ever experience that? do you f--- with your yarmulke on? that must be some crazy s---.

On: 8/19/100 21:46 A Bald Jew wrote: I only wear it during sex on the Sabbath and I wear my prayer shawl too. Chicks dig it! Try it Marcus.

On 8/16/100 14:43 Pashen wrote: When the cameras are rolling you have to be the man. But do you moan? When you get your joint sucked like chocolate ice cream on a hot summer day, Baby do you moan? When she rides you like a new jag on an empty highway,Honey do you moan? When you drop your warm velvet lotion on a hot fat ass OOOOh Daddy, Do you moan? When you stroke the hottest wet pussy of a lover f--- Baby can we moan?

On: 8/19/100 10:15 Lex wrote: Sheeeit! Marcus only moans when the producer's check bounces. Right Marcus?

On 8/18/100 15:23 Jimmie Walker wrote: Ain't nut'in a brother loves more than a BOFA

On 8/18/100 17:21 Stink Bug wrote: Big Ole Fat Ass?

On: 8/18/100 17:53 Mr.Marcus wrote: or Bitch Outside f---in A man named Marcus. I mean that could work.

Rob: Apparently the Lieberman VP slot has NOT tied up the Jegro vote.

On 8/19/100 11:23 Al Sharpton wrote: > Who you votin' for? We brothas need your expert guidance?

On: 8/19/100 19:55 Mr.Marcus wrote: if it was up to me it would have been Colin Powell. He's got much respect from me.

The Abiding Ignorance of Porn Cinematography

Milktiger writes on RAME: This is not a new point, but I find myself in such a state of annoyance I simply must restate it.

What is the f---ing problem? What is the *f---ing* problem? Do you think you are artists? Geniuses? Do you cameramen, directors, editors, producers - do you really believe that your absolutely inane efforts to improve on the basic gorgeousness of a female human body are necessary to make porn interesting? Do you think swooping around a woman with your camera, lingering on five square inches of lookalike body part, hovering around admittedly interesting but *by themselves indistinguishable* zones - do you somehow believe this is preferable to camera angles in which the graceful, divine, devilish, infinitely communicative, irresistibly hot simplicity of a complete female body is depicted calmly, lovingly and respectfully for male eyes to savor and worship? It is the height of conceit to presume to improve on this simplicity, and it absolutely cannot be done. Are you all a bunch of frustrated artists? You have no idea what frustration you regularly visit on a viewer like me with your busy and utterly unnecessarily distracted camerawork. CALM THE f--- DOWN! There is no place for your moronic ideas of what is titilating in the presence of even the least exceptional female form; you and your self-absorbed methods are no match - no match at all - for what God has put on earth in the presence of female beauty. And it is nothing to be ashamed of.

(I like hair, I like scowling lips, I like arched backs, strained clavicles, sweaty shoulders, pierced belly-buttons, firm stomachs, soft stomachs, dimpled butts, viselike thighs, flexed calves, pointed feet - I like all of this, and why the hell not all at once?)

What is to be ashamed of is the vast quantities of potential gorgeous eroticism that is put to waste on a daily basis by the world pornography industry through the sin of pridefulness.

Big Johnson: Gosh I hate it when there's a woman with an extremly cute body and you never see more than ten inches of it on screen at a time. You can't make out what your looking at half the time because the camera is too damned close to it. We'd like to "see" the woman. Pull the damn camera back and absorb some of the beauty of the female body. And when they do get the whole body shots they don't last three seconds. Who are these idiots anyway? Is this a cruel joke?

Ace: I also agree with this. What the f--- are these movie makers thinking about? I cannot tell you how many times I decide on a movie to rent because the cover has a beautiful girl with a stunning body in a nice sexy pose and when I"m viewing the movie I can't see s---! So many times on the way home I'm thinking "Cool. This is gonna be a good flick" and then here come the extreme close ups. Stop this insanity now. I want to see arched backs and full curvy body shots and also I like to see when they change positions. Lots of times they just jump to them f---ing in a different position. I'm interested in how they got there.

Airhendrix: If there are going to be all these extreme close ups and disjointed scenes concluding Vince Voyeur and Mark Davis grimacing as they jerk off then tell me this: What's the point of employing young attractive women at all? We're not going to see them in all their glory anyway -- the smut makers could throw in over the hill starlets like Amber Lynn in all the flicks and we'd hardly know the difference.

Taliesin: Not a new point but a good one. The same techniques of direction and cinematography that apply to mainstream movies apply to porn. Few directors and cameramen know this, however. I've begun writing a series called Lessons in "X" that covers some of the techniques and skills required to make good porn. Parts 1 and 2 in the series are up on my website now. (I'm working on part 3.) I'm adapting these from my lecture titled The Art and Science of Erotic Storytelling.

The thing is, you have to get your complaint to the people who can do something about it; and that's something we've also talked about here in RAME before. I suggest you e-mail your post to every producer, director and cameraman whose e-mail address you can find. And send it also to the production companies and the adult video stores. If you're not happy with what the porn makers are creating, tell them.

A Pre-History Of X

Dudley Moore writes: Luke, here's the most dramatic parallel yet in the animal world for my claim that captive/regressive lesbian breeding is the best model for today's sex industry, and that such regressive lesbian breeding must ultimately have been out-competed by heterosexual monogamy in order for the modern-day family and society to successfully evolve. I quote world-renowned primatologist Frans de Waal, Director of the Living Links Center, in Chapter 5, Bonobos and Us, of his 1997 book Bonobo: The Forgotten Ape. As you read, keep in mind that you what you are actually reading about below are the true, primate origins of the modern sex industry, as paralleled within the society of our closest living primate relatives. What he's talking about, even though he doesn't know it, is the evolution of the lesbian breeding model for the sex industry:

"The defining moment in the social evolution of the bonobo probably took place when females began to have more frequent and longer-lasting genital swellings. This reduced competition among males, obscured paternity, and promoted sociosexual relations in all particular combinations, particularly among the females. The end result was that females formed a secondary sisterhood, gained the upper hand in society, and thereby freed themselves from the curse of infanticide.

"The original function of sex is reproduction, which implies adult heterosexual relationships. Since female mammals almost never dominate adult males of their species, it is safe to assume that bonobos started out with male dominance. Consequently, females gained from the extension of sexual receptivity. Conceivably, the role of sex as the cement of society spread from the heterosexual domain to other domains. Homosexual activity became a way of tying males and females together in larger aggregations:

"For female relationships, the progression was that Prolonged sexual attractiveness->Genital-Genital Rubbing->Female alliances->Female dominance. The corresponding effect on males was that Reduced competition->Reduced Alliances->Obscured Paternity->Reduced infanticide.

"The scenario depicted in the above scheme has plausible subcomponents. The central ones are:

1)Extended female receptivity dilutes competition among males. The presence of so many attractive females, and the impossibility of pinpointing their fertile days, makes it less worthwhile for males to risk injury over a mating.

2)Given that male alliances in other primates are mostly instruments to keep competitors away form a highly contested female, the reason for such cooperation is eliminated if multiple females are sexually attractive at once.

3)An every-male-for-himself system paves the way for a collective power takeover by females.

4)Sociosexual behavior and bonding among females translates into alliances that allow them to monopolize food and protect their offspring against infanticidal males.

5)Extended receptivity and frequent sex confuse paternity to such a degree that infanticide becomes counterproductive: males have trouble exempting progeny."

Luke, here's the current status of my theory, and the breakdown by group, so you can see why absolutely nobody is excited by my conclusions that the sex industry is based on the regressive lesbian breeding model:

1. Sex industry experts don't find it relevant or even interesting that the women of the sex industry are overwhelmingly bi/lesbians. Their male audiences already know this, and since most sex industry experts were originally authors, journalists and outsiders to the industry, they aren't interested in any underlying dynamics or psychology, only people and politics, controversy, and what plays well in popular books and in the media.

2. The media and news magazines don't care about the bi/lesbianism that defines the sex industry, because they aren't sociologists, they just sell stories to the mainstream public. That's why most of the media features on the sex industry today are about isolated "working moms" trying their best to survive and support their families as dancers and prostitutes, or equally isolated female heterosexual entrepreneurs making their careers on the Internet.

3. Male sex consumers consider lesbianism in the sex industry to be their hottest fantasy, their own best little secret, and the fulfilment of their wildest fantasies. They actually want women who can't pursue relationships, as most are married men anyhow. Most of these men are addicted to the anonymous sex, and don't care to understand their own underlying behavioral motivations, nor those of the women.

4. The bi/lesbians of the sex industry also have no interest in coming out on the record as lesbians, as they fear they would lose their male audiences.

5. Pornographers profit by the bi/lesbianism, and they know it's what their customers want, after all. In fact, they even reassure hesitant new starlets that no one will ever find out, even though these ladies are having lesbian sex on film.

6. Sociologists, social anthropologists, primatologists and other academics are total outsiders to the sex industry, and so have no personal knowledge of it. Modern day psychoanalysts, on the other hand, have already acknowledged that female sex workers are unconsciously motivated by a desire to come out as bi/lesbians.

Political Conventions

Wayne Gordon writes: Luke.... You wrote..."I have not watched a minute of either political convention." Lucky bastard. Being a political junkie, I watched most of both.

I found the Democratic confab much more interesting than the Republican one. Being a Texan, I know Bush pretty well, what he stands for and how he'll try to govern if elected. Gore, on the other hand, has been living in Clinton's shadow for eight years. How does he see his mission now that he's on his own?

The theme of Gore's speech was "people vs. powerful interests", drawing on a long history of populism in American politics. I half expected Gore to start talking of a "cross of gold" ala William Jennings Bryan vs. William McKinley.

But the gold standard is dead as an issue these days, and instead Gore set out his overall belief in people as victims. Victims of big oil, HMOs, insurance companies,pharmaceutical companies, big tobacco, etc. ad nauseum. Al Gore wants to be regulator-in-chief of the U.S. economy. For Gore, life is a zero-sum game, and he'll fight to make sure the little guy gets his fair share.

Bush, on the other hand, is a conservative. Government is a necessary evil, and the less of it the better. People can do better for themselves than can government.

So, as both candidates have said, the country has a very clear choice to make this fall. On all the key issues - health, education, social security and taxes - Gore offers government-driven solutions and Bush offers market-driven ones. Gore wants new government mandated and run health programs, absolutey abhors the idea of school vouchers, will never let a citizen control any of his or her social security money, and loves taxes (how else to fund all this government activity?).

The result? Gore loses big. Why? Clinton really stands for all the same things as Gore, but is a much better politician. In '92, Clinton ran with much the same agenda, but was able to offset his policies with carefully crafted gestures to assure the middle. He criticized Sista Souljah, executed Ricky Ray Rector, and promised a middle class tax cut. The economy was recovering from a mild recession at the time and folks were tired of the Reagan/Bush years. Today they're tired of Clinton, but see Bush as more middle-of-the-road than Gore.

Gore's populist themes will not play as well in these fat economic times, and the American people are more entrepreneurial than ever before. Everybody wants to repeal the marriage penalty, but Gore would "target" such relief. Charter schools and vouchers appeal to voters, especially the poor stuck in bad schools, but Gore says no. With the boom in the stock market, folks see the wisdom of investment, and would like to invest their own social security money. Gore says no.

In short, Gore would be much better off with his themes if he were running from the party out of power, in tough times, when his message of class warfare and resentment would have a chance of success. As it is, folks see Bush as more atttuned to their own thinking and he will get the nod.

Crime and Punishment

Russell writes: Chaim, I concede your point that the prison population does not support an argument that blacks predominate there *just* because of non-violent drug offenses. But as usual, I think the truth is less clear-cut than either you or Jesse Jackson (to whom I do not generally listen) would have us believe.

Checking the site you mentioned, I mostly found what I expected to find:

1. Federal prison populations are smaller but significant; they show a different profile (most prisoners are there for drug offenses).

2. The rate of *increase* has been greatest in drug offenses (in both state and federal prison). But as you noted (and as I was frankly surprised to learn), nonetheless, most new state prisoners are there for violent offenses.

3. The much larger cited number of blacks "involved with the justice system" (probation, parole, etc.) is mostly drug offenses.

4. #3 is hardly surprising. Despite your (true) statement about drugs' relationship to violence, it is not the case that people convicted or on probation for small amounts of drugs are also guilty of violent crimes. If they were, they'd be doing longer sentences for harder crimes.

5. Blacks are much more likely to be arrested and to serve longer jail time for possession of the same amount of the same drug (yes, I'm including the difference between powder and crack cocaine here).

Dr William Pierce On Joe Lieberman And Judaism

Luke: Dr William Pierce is a Nazi who'd like to see the world free of all Jews, blacks, hispanics and other undesirables. I publish his thoughts for many reasons. Among them, I find him funny (in a tragic way). It's hard to believe there are truly people who believe this stuff.

Dr. Pierce wrote "The Turner Diaries" which contained detailed directions for creating explosives. There's a straight line from "The Turner Diaries" to the Oklahoma City bombing of a federal building which killed dozens of innocent people.

I am so proud as a Jew that evil people like Dr. Pierce hate us. Dennis Prager notes that Jews act as the world's miners canary. Miners take canaries into mine shafts because they are more sensitive to noxious fumes. If the canary dies, the miner knows he must either fight the fumes or get out. Jews are more morally sensitive to noxious moral fumes like Dr. Pierce. When we're attacked as a group, simply for being Jewish, it signals that there's great evil around which must be fought.

The greatest evils in this century have focused on the Jews - Nazism, communism, Idi Amin (the Ugandan dictator cannibal butcherer) and the present Arab-Islamic world.

In his broadcast this week from Natvan.com, Dr Pierce says:

As you know, we spoke about the Jews last week, and so I really didn't plan to talk with you about the Jews again this week, but so many listeners have written to me about Al Gore's Orthodox Jewish running mate, Joseph Isadore Lieberman, that I guess we're obliged to deal once more with this very unsavory subject.

I should say first that I do not share the alarm expressed by most of the listeners who have asked me to speak about the Lieberman nomination. The Democratic Party has been so thoroughly in the hands of the Jews for decades now that I believe it's a good thing for them to be out front where they can be seen instead of continuing to pull the strings from backstage. It would be wonderful if George Bush, in his disgusting scramble to be inclusive, had chosen Elie Wiesel or some other high-profile Jew as a running mate too. How about Massachusetts Congressman Barney Frank? That would be really inclusive, someone who is both a Jew and an open homosexual -- but, then Frank would have to change his party affiliation from Tweedledum to Tweedledee.

Anyway, throughout the coming presidential campaign you'll be able to observe the amusing spectacle of the Republicans trying to find a way to attack the Democrats without saying anything bad about Joe Lieberman, from fear of offending the Jews. Actually, if you believe the information put out by the mainstream media about Lieberman since he became Gore's running mate, there's nothing bad the Republicans could say about him. Both Newsweek and Time magazines this week are full of fawning praise for him. They call him "the conscience of the Senate" and hold him up as a paragon of virtue. Is that because Lieberman was one of the few Democrats who had the nerve to criticize Clinton for subjecting us all to the Bill and Monica show? No, criticizing Clinton was no display of morality. It was a display of the fact that Lieberman was one of the few Democrats who wasn't afraid of retribution from Clinton. Lieberman belongs to a more powerful gang than Clinton does.

Lieberman is not just a nominal Jew; he is an "observant" Orthodox Jew, a synagogue-going Jew who actually hires a "sabbath Gentile," a shabbos goy, to do the things a Jew is not permitted by the Jewish religion to do on Saturday. Lieberman is a Talmud-Torah sort of Jew who takes the Jewish scriptures quite seriously. His biographical sketch in the August 8 issue of the New York Times lists "studying the Torah" as one of his principal interests. So what does that mean? What does the Torah command him to do besides not open any doors or flip any light switches on the Jewish sabbath?

Well, you know, I'm not a Talmud-Torah scholar myself, but I have a book in front of me which was written last year by two Jewish professors, one of whom has spent the last 40 years living in Jerusalem and becoming acquainted with such matters. The book is Jewish Fundamentalism in Israel, and the authors are Israel Shahak and Norton Mezvinsky. Their book is not so much about the details of the Torah and the Talmud as it is about the way Judaism actually governs the lives and influences the attitudes of religious Jews, of Orthodox Jews, in Israel.

It's pretty bizarre reading, with many examples of Jewish behavior, dictated by religion, that would be considered quite scandalous if generally known by non-Jews. There are several underlying themes to the behavior and attitudes of religious Jews. The most fundamental theme is that the Jews have been chosen by their tribal god, Yahweh, or Jehovah, depending on how you want to pronounce it, to own and rule the earth. One can see a quite explicit statement of this theme in the book of the Jewish "prophet" Isaiah. In the 60th and 61st chapters of Isaiah, the "prophet" raves that eventually all the wealth of the Gentiles shall be delivered to the Jews, that the Jews shall -- quote -- "suck the milk of the Gentiles" and -- quote -- "eat the wealth of the Gentiles," while the Gentiles all become servants of the Jews -- or to use Isaiah's quaint mode of expression, the Gentiles shall -- quote -- "stand and feed your flocks" and -- quote -- "be your plowmen and your vinedressers."

The Talmud is full of elaboration and explication of this theme of the special nature and status of the Jews, of their being chosen to be the owners and rulers of the earth. It is the Torah, of course, the first five books of the Old Testament, which contains the basic Jewish doctrines -- the doctrine of chosenness, for example, but it is the Talmud which explains exactly how the Torah is to be interpreted. And the Talmud's interpretation often is quite different from the bland and inoffensive interpretation accepted by those Christians, primarily fundamentalist Protestants, who also accept the Jewish Old Testament as holy writ.

When the Great Reformer, Martin Luther, decided to produce a translation of the Bible into German in the 16th century, he wanted to be sure that he got it right, so he consulted the Talmud and was horrified by what he found there. He could not bring himself simply to reject the Jewish Bible altogether, so he clung to the traditional Christian interpretations and denounced the Jews in the strongest possible terms for their chauvinistic and hate-filled interpretations. In his book The Jews and Their Lies Luther wrote, and I quote: "The sun never did shine on a more bloodthirsty and revengeful people than the Jews, who imagine themselves to be the people of God, and who believe that they should murder and crush the Gentiles. . . . Do not their Talmud and their rabbis say that it is no sin to kill if a Jew kills a Gentile, but it is a sin if he kills a fellow Jew? It is no sin if he does not keep his oath to a Gentile; therefore, to steal from a Gentile (as they do with their moneylending) is a divine service. . . . And they are the masters of the world, and we are their servants -- indeed, their cattle!" -- end quote --

Today the leaders of the Lutheran Church, who are as much under the influence of the Jews as the leaders of all the other mainstream Christian churches, ignore the writings of their founder on the subject of the Jews and react with embarrassment when reminded of them. They pretend that Martin Luther didn't really mean what he wrote about the Jews and Judaism. That was nearly 500 years ago, and Luther was merely reflecting the prejudice of his times, they say. But, in fact, the Talmud and the Torah today are exactly what they were 500 years ago. The Talmud and Torah that Joseph Lieberman studies today are the same Talmud and Torah that horrified Martin Luther at the beginning of the 16th century.

The Lutheran officials may be afraid to admit that, but Professors Shahak and Mezvinsky aren't. They cite specific instances of the way in which the same Jewish teachings which Martin Luther preached against 500 years ago govern the lives of Orthodox Jews in Israel today. An outstanding example is that of Dr. Baruch Goldstein. Goldstein, a physician born and raised in the United States, was an Orthodox Jew. He immigrated to Israel and joined the Israeli army as a medical officer. In the army he announced to his superiors that he would not treat wounded Gentiles. In 1985, after an Israeli soldier shot a Palestinian in the legs, the wounded Palestinian was brought to an army clinic in Hebron, where Goldstein was on duty. Goldstein refused to provide medical assistance to the Palestinian, and he issued a statement in which he said, and I quote: "I am not willing to treat any non-Jew."

Goldstein's refusal to do anything to save the life of a Gentile was not a personal quirk; it was based on an injunction in the Talmud, and Jewish religious authorities prevented the army from punishing Goldstein for his disobedience to orders. Specifically, Jewish religious law permits a Jewish physician to provide treatment to a Gentile only when refusal to do so might cause harm to Jews: for example, by alerting Gentiles to the Jews' true feelings toward them. Despite his refusal to provide medical assistance to Gentiles, Goldstein was permitted to remain in the army as a medical officer, with the rank of captain -- and in fact, he later was scheduled for promotion to major.

On February 25, 1994, the day of the Jews' annual Purim festival, when each year they celebrate a massacre of 75,000 Persians which they organized more than 2,500 years ago, as related in the Old Testament book of Esther, Captain Goldstein entered a mosque in Hebron and murdered 29 Muslims who were kneeling in prayer, shooting them in the back with his army assault rifle. While he was reloading his assault rifle, surviving worshippers seized him and beat him to death. The Israeli government was not able to keep the massacre hushed up, and a major debate erupted in Israel which continues to this day. On one side are the Orthodox Jews, who consider Goldstein a martyr and have made a shrine of his grave. On the other side are the non-religious Jews, such as Shahak, who are embarrassed by Goldstein's behavior and are worried about the Gentile reaction if the Gentiles ever figure out what the attitude of the religious Jews is.

Immediately after the massacre one very prominent Orthodox leader, Rabbi Moshe Levinger, told a writer for Israel's largest newspaper, Yediot Ahronot, that he was sorry for the 29 Palestinians murdered by Goldstein in the same way that he would be sorry for the killing of 29 flies. Another prominent Israeli religious leader, Rabbi Dov Lior, announced, and I quote: "Since Goldstein did what he did in God's own name, he is to be regarded as a righteous man." There was a huge funeral procession for Goldstein, and the Israeli army provided a guard of honor at his grave. Jewish children wore buttons with the slogan "Dr. Goldstein cured Israel's ills."

On the day of Goldstein's funeral, one of the eulogists, Rabbi Israel Ariel said, and I quote: "The holy martyr, Baruch Goldstein, is from now on our intercessor in heaven. Goldstein did not act as an individual; he heard the cry of the land of Israel, which is being stolen from us day after day by the Muslims. He acted to relieve that cry of the land."

A year after the massacre, the Israeli government issued a permit to Goldstein's admirers to build a large monument at the site of his grave. Today, six years after the massacre, Goldstein's grave is one of the most popular sites in Israel for religious Jewish tourists, especially those from the United States. Goldstein already has acquired the status of a saint.

There are other examples in the book by Shahak and Mezvinsky illustrating what Orthodox Jews really believe and how they actually behave. One especially valuable point the authors make is that Jews habitually deceive Gentiles by having a different meaning in mind for the words they use than the meaning understood by Gentiles. When Orthodox Jewish writers use the term "human beings," for example, they are referring only to Jews, because the Talmud specifies that only Jews are "human beings," while Gentiles, not having souls, are non-human animals. But the average Gentile doesn't realize this, and when he hears someone like Lieberman speaking of his "compassion for his fellow human beings" he is fooled into believing that Lieberman is a man who has compassion for Gentiles as well as for Jews.

It's really not possible to overemphasize the importance of this point. The Jews, in order to exercise their influence, must move among us and be regarded as more or less similar to us, whether they are religious or not. There are some exceptions to this: in New York, for example, there are communities of religious Jews who want to have nothing to do with Gentiles -- except, of course, to take our money, sell us harmful drugs, and abuse our women through their involvement in the White slave trade: things which are perfectly in line with their religion. But as I said, some of them want to minimize their contact with us, and they deliberately distinguish themselves from Gentiles through their manner of dress and grooming -- wearing long beards and sidelocks and fur hats, dressing only in black, and so on. To us they look weird; they give us the creeps. We are not surprised to see them spit three times whenever they pass a Christian church or to give us cold, hard stares whenever we wander into one of their neighborhoods by mistake.

But other religious Jews understand that they must mix with us in order to control us, and the ones who mix must disguise their beliefs and their purpose. So they pretend to be like us. They talk about ball games, they smile at us, they dress like us, they make jokes that we will laugh at, they come to our cocktail parties, and they lie to us about the nature of their religious beliefs. They behave like Joe Lieberman. But beneath the deceptive surface they are the same as the greasiest sidelocked, black-clad kikes of New York's Orthodox neighborhoods -- which is to say, they have the same religious beliefs, and those religious beliefs dominate their thinking and their behavior. There is only one Torah and only one Talmud -- not a harsh, hate-filled Talmud for the Jews with sidelocks and a gentler, kinder Talmud for Jews like Lieberman. Various groups of Orthodox Jews may wear different types of hats, but they all have the same religion. They all believe in the chosenness of the Jews. They all believe that Jews have been promised dominion over the earth and its inhabitants by their tribal god. That's what Joseph Isadore Lieberman really believes.

Both Shahak and Mezvinsky are non-religious Jews, and their book reflects the very real struggle in Israel between religious Jews -- Lieberman-type Jews -- and non-religious Jews The non-religious Jews really are worried that it will be bad for Israel if the behavior of the Orthodox Jews or their hateful and murderous attitudes become generally known. It certainly would be a mistake, however, for us to assume that the non-religious Jews in general are less deceitful or less a danger to us than religious Jews such as Lieberman. Shahak and Mezvinsky really represent only an extremely tiny minority of non-religious Jews. Marx and Trotsky and Kaganovich and all of the other Jewish-communist butchers who killed millions of our people in Europe were non-religious.

And more to the point now, most of the media bosses in the United States are non-religious Jews, but that hardly makes them less deceitful. Have you heard or read any media commentary in the United States about the Goldstein massacre or the cult of Goldstein worshippers in Israel? Have you seen any discussion at all of the significance of Goldstein's choosing the Jews' Purim festival for his massacre? Compare this nearly total lack of coverage of the Goldstein phenomenon with, say, the famous Kristalnacht of November 1938 in Germany. After a Jew murdered a German official at the German embassy in Paris, Germans went on a rampage of retribution, smashing the windows of Jewish shops in Berlin and setting fire to synagogues. A total of 36 Jews were killed in the disorders, a figure not too different from the number of Palestinians slaughtered by Goldstein. Now, Kristalnacht was 62 years ago, and yet every American school child still hears about it every year. It is our non-religious Jewish media bosses who are responsible for this gross distortion of the image of the world and of history, this vast overemphasis of some news and nearly total blackout of other news. That is really much more harmful to us than all of the Talmud-based hatred of the Orthodox Jews.

It is good for our people to understand the nature of Judaism, to understand the beliefs of Orthodox Jews such as Lieberman. The best source for this sort of understanding is the Talmud, but for that very reason the Jews keep it out of sight as much as they can. And unless you are able to read Hebrew you will find only bowdlerized editions, with the most revealing passages left out or deliberately mistranslated. That's why rare Jews such as Israel Shahak, who are willing for their own reasons, to spill the beans on their fellow Jews, are so valuable to us. But we really must go beyond Judaism and understand that even those Jews who reject the Torah and the Talmud -- the non-religious Jews -- are our deadly enemies, although not our deadliest enemies.

Our deadliest enemies are the traitors among our people. Our deadliest enemies are those of our own people who knowingly and deliberately collaborate with the Jews. Our deadliest enemies are the leaders of the Lutheran Church who conceal from their own people Luther's teachings about the Jews. Our deadliest enemies are the few remaining Gentile media bosses -- Ted Turner, for example, or Rupert Murdoch -- who, understanding what the Jews are like and what they are trying to do, nevertheless collaborate with them. Our deadliest enemies are the Gentile political leaders, such as Albert Gore and George Bush, without whose conscious and willing collaboration Jews such as Joseph Lieberman could pose no threat at all to us.

Additional Reading: Israel Shahak and Norton Mezvinsky, Jewish Fundamentalism in Israel (Pluto Press, 1999 -- available from National Vanguard Books, $21.95 postpaid)

Israel Shahak, Jewish History, Jewish Religion (Pluto Press, 1994 -- available from National Vanguard Books, $19.95 postpaid)

Johnathan Kurtzman, a Yale graduate, replies: By far Dr. Pierce's most reasoned rant to date. The murderer Baruch Goldstein is revered by some segments of Israeli society, exactly as they revere the murderer of Yitzhak Rabin. They hate anyone associated with the peace movement, whether Jew, Muslim or Christian. Exactly why is a tough issue.

The entire use of the word "chosen" an interesting, largely Christian point of view, mostly promulgated over the centuries to attack Judaism as being opposed to Christianity and as rejecting those people who follow Jesus as the Messiah. In the Torah, the words mean - as you know - say "You shall be a Holy People" and that has been taken over the years to mean chosen by God to be a Holy People. Nothing says Jews are the only Holy People, but Christian belief is exclusive and it imposes that exclusivity on Judaism. Christianity, alone of the major religions, believes that only its followers go to heaven and it sets up Judaism as its competitor, which it is not. Judaism isn't concerned with other religions - partly because it predates them.

Many Jews have adopted the Christian use of "chosen", but the context is interesting. First, Jews are few in number so it's natural to have some sort of reason to keep together. In a hostile world, being chosen to be Jewish is an important realization. It has nothing to do with other people, but with the obligations you as a Jew undertake solely because you are Jewish. Second, being chosen is an ethnic joke; every Jew jokes about how it would be nice if God would choose some other people every once in a while.

For reasons rooted in their own exclusivist view of salvation, Christians have trouble accepting that when Jews refer to chosen, they refer to themselves and not Christianity. Prayer in the sabbath service thanks God for making "me" a Jew and not sharing in the portion allotted to the other nations of the world. That is as "nativist" and chauvinistic as Judaism gets. I'm not crazy about the words, but on the other hand - in the vein of Hillel - if you're incapable of being proud of who you are, then who are you? Christians see words like this as some sort of threat, but they conveniently ignore the wholly exclusive which completely fills their services. Only through Jesus. Only through this church. Only Christians can be saved. Jews don't say that kind of thing. Only Christians do and, of course, they're blind to the plank sticking in their own eye. Christians seem to expect that Jews will grovel and pray for thanks to Jesus that Christians allow them to exist.

There are many forms of Christianity and some of them are bigoted and others not. Dr. Pierce uses an old Christian form of argument in which he takes the actions of a few and even the beliefs of a few and applies them to all. Giving the idiot far more credit than he deserves, very few Jews are comfortable with the haredim - those who don't like to be called ultra-orthodox. This group is not the modern orthodox, which is what Joe Lieberman is.

Judaism clearly has two strains. One is that prayer is spiritual and a way of engaging creation, while another is more folk-based. Out of the centuries in Eastern Europe have grown traditions of rabbinic infallibility, of messiahs - Jews have had more messiahs than any other religion - and of a different relationship between God and man than the mainstream Jew understands. The ideas are rooted in the concepts of community relating to God and these Jews believe that following ritual - the whole Halakic list - essentially makes a contract between God and the community.

WWII killed mostly the orthodox - perhaps 80% of the Jews killed were orthodox. That has created a great problem because the people murdered were the most ritualistic, including nearly all the religious students. The rabbis, contrary to belief, weren't gifted with vision of the future. Contrary to belief, God did not intervene.

To show exactly how nuts Dr. Pierce is, Jews turn against Jews on this subject, not against Christians. Some haredim blame the secular or mainstream Jews for the Holocaust because their failure to adhere to halakah doomed the rest of the community. Think about that for a moment: even in the worst events since 1492's expulsions, Jews look inward at the Jewish community for answers, not at Christianity at all. It was Christians who did the killing, but these Jews, the very ones that Dr. Pierce points to as evil, are interested in how other Jews failed and not in what Christians actually did.

Perhaps this hits the real point. Jews don't give a hoot about Christianity and that just kills Christians because they see themselves as the exclusive and only saved people on the planet. We don't get it. We refuse to get it, so we're called "obstinate" and "stiff-necked". There has to be a reason, so Christians say we're the other claimants to exclusivity, that we're the real bad guys. I don't imagine that many Christians, immersed in the self-defined message of how they "love" everyone, think about how they are actually condemning everyone but themselves.

I did, btw, enjoy Dr. Pierce's twisting of the Purim story. It's a story, not part of the scripture and a weird holiday. As you know, the story really says that Haman, a big cheese advisor, wanted to kill the Jews but that Esther, a wife of the Persian King, managed to get the King's attention and Haman was killed instead. I think this is an interesting story because it doesn't actually have God coming down from the mountain, spitting fire and death, but instead uses people. The guy who saves the Jews is not a Jew. He's a King who decides that Jews are just citizens of his realm and that killing them would be wrong. The King doesn't then convert to Judaism along with the rest of his empire. No, the Jews just go on living their lives. If Purim were a Christian holiday, everyone would have converted, the old books would have been burnt and the unbelievers consigned to the fires.

I suspect that the real fire in the hatred we see in Dr. Pierce is fear. The essential message of Christianity is that Christ died for our sins and that acceptance of that is the ONLY way to perfection in this world and beyond. The existence of Judaism implies the possibility that the message is wrong. After all, Jesus and all the disciples were Jews and all the disciples - Paul was not one - continued to live as Jews. An uncomfortable thing to deal with if your whole world view and hope of salvation is based on the supplanting of Judaism by Christianity.

But then you know my view, that Paul created this version of Jesus and that Peter and James, the lead disciples who actually knew Jesus, did not agree with him. I see no way that a person could continue to live as Jew if he believed what Paul says Jesus means. Paul says that he got his Jesus by revelation and not by the hand of man, meaning actually from Jesus. That's an odd way of saying that his revelation came from God, but not from the man Jesus. In the old Church, that would have been a meaningful distinction because Jesus' nature was under discussion. In the modern Church, though Jesus is described as human, he is treated as an avatar of perfection. Obviously, if Jesus were that kind of avatar, then what he taught his disciples wouldn't be "worse" than what Paul got as revelation.

It's interesting to read Christian books on the Paul/Peter dispute. Most try to paper it over completely and the rest generally describe Paul as rightly "chastising" Peter. I suspect that kind of intellectual dishonesty also flows from the inherent fear that being wrong about salvation is a huge, f---ing mistake. I guess one way to describe Christianity's success is that it has harnessed the incredible power of human defensiveness; the best way to prove you're not wrong is to convert everyone and attack those who refuse.