Download the MP3 to listen. (5.2 MB - 30 min 23 sec)

WASHINGTON (June 10, 2010)--They are the voiceless victims whose horror in many ways mirrors what children in concentration-camp "experiments" suffered during the Holocaust. But the mastermind behind such horrid crimes of sexual abuse and rape of children--some as young as 6-months-old--touts a legacy that's lauded, lionized, bankrolled and celebrated in literature, science, industry and the arts.

Still, the perpetrator escapes even the scorn heaped on pedophile priests--though his work provides direct cover to the abusers.

So charges a shocking new book by an author who's never allowed her critics' tactics of ridicule and blackballing to silence her from exposing the darkest secrets of Alfred Kinsey's sexual "research." Dr. Judith Reisman's relentless commitment to revealing Kinsey's documented--yet studiously whitewashed--methodology will culminate July 20 with the publishing of WND Books' latest, Sexual Sabotage: How One Mad Scientist Unleashed a Plague of Corruption and Contagion on America.

Kinsey's career, asserts Reisman, was founded on such unfathomable crimes against innocent children that its true nature must no longer remain unknown to the masses. Reisman aims straight for Kinsey's watershed work--Sexual Behavior in the Human Male. Released 52 years ago, Sexual Behavior in the Human Male attained academic acclaim and sparked mass shock and intrigue, selling 200,000 copies in its first two months of release.

"Sexual Behavior in the Human Male and Sexual Behavior in the Human Female provide abundant evidence of child sexual torture by Kinsey's 'researchers,' who engaged in brutal, sexual experiments on children," Reisman reports. "'Kinsey says 'the only 'abnormal' sex is no sex; that the 'human animal' needs orgasms; and that the earlier boys and girls have orgasms, the better for them.'"

While many pinpoint the nation's seismic morality shift to the 1960s, Reisman presents different origins. Youthful rebellion, the rise of the counterculture and the Sexual Revolution remain mere symptoms of the cynicism that sprouted from the Kinsey Reports. The "Greatest Generation," Reisman maintains, absorbed a slander so damaging no jury could calculate the costs, as it inspired Boomers to see their parents as perverted hypocrites.

"The World War II generation was trained to honor God, country, and family--and was thus trained to build a secure life for their children and, indeed, for us all," she writes. "Kinsey ... reported that nearly all American men--our 'better angels'--were actually sex offenders, though he also claimed that no women or children were harmed by rape or incest."

With attention lavished on Kinsey's salacious charges of seldom-discussed sexual behavior as the closeted norm, few paused to ponder just how Kinsey drew such definitive conclusions about the sexual behaviors of children. Few except Reisman.

"Sexual Behavior in the Human Male reports data "on 214 male children," Sexual Sabotage reports, "the youngest only one year old. .. Kinsey asserted, 'Of the 214 cases . . . all but 14 were subsequently observed in orgasm.' Observed?! Who 'subsequently observed' (defined as 'occurring or coming later or after') these infants and boys being--yes--sexually tortured, timed, and recorded? Who, of Kinsey's team, did this under his direction? The youngest boy tested to 'climax' is '2 mon.' old."

The pervasiveness of Kinsey's research is pandemic, Reisman states, and even informs key advisors to the Catholic Church on matters of child sex abuse. One such advisor, Fred Berlin, MD, co-founded the celebrated Johns Hopkins Sexual Disorders Clinic, with his mentor, John Money, PhD.

Money, "a dedicated Kinsey disciple" who mentored an early Kinsey Institute director, reports Sexual Sabotage, "said that their clinic was designed to offer 'leeway to judges' to free convicted child molesters."

Tellingly, the Rev. Michael Peterson, founder of St. Luke's Institute, warned clergy that they "should avoid potential abuse suits by following the well-qualified Money and Berlin."

About the Author

Dr. Judith Reisman is a consultant and former president of The Institute for Media Education, and is the scientific advisor for the California Protective Parents Association. While her research and testimony prompted 7-Eleven to stop stocking Playboy and Penthouse magazines, she's endured numerous attempts--including three congressional investigations--to squelch her findings on the dangers of pornography.

A sought-after expert in the field of Media Forensics, Reisman served as a consultant to four U.S. Department of Justice administrations. Having been interviewed on countless major media outlets, she's also authored or co-authored several titles, including:

• Kinsey, Sex and Fraud: The Indoctrination of a People
• Kinsey: Crimes and Consequences
• Soft Porn Plays Hardball: Its Tragic Effects on Women, Children and the Family.

To interview Judith Reisman or to receive review copies, please contact Tricia Erickson at 910-270-8966 or email media@wnd.com.

(source: WND) A recent AP article, "Porn offers window into Iraq's chaotic politics," chuckles that "the nude women on the DVD cover in a Baghdad street stall say it all: Change ... is afoot in Iraq."

Ah, change. We get an Arab mosque near Ground Zero and Iraqis get American pornography in Baghdad. The Associate Press story winks at porn pusher "Hanoun's ... impish grin" as he sells Hollywood blockbusters like "King Kong" and "pornographic DVDs" of non-Arab women in every painful, demeaning act required by pornographers.

After 2003 when Saddam Hussein was ousted, "anything goes" erupted in Iraq until 2008 when violent militias roamed the streets of Baghdad. Today's open street sales of "spicy videos" "stacked elbow-deep," reports the AP, means "security has improved."

"[I]mpish" Hanoun says porn signals "jubilation and hope ... about the new Iraq."

After the American invasion, "restaurants did brisk business, nightclubs pulsated with the beat of Arabic music." "Children touted [porn] in the Green Zone" near the U.S. Embassy and outside hotels filled with "international media." The amused AP correspondent notes a collection titled, "Girls of the Interior Ministry."

The films include bestiality and "The Rape of the Coeds," suggesting, says the international media reporter, the "psychological effects the years of indiscriminate violence have had on Iraqis."

Good point. What are the effects of viewing the rapes of white "coeds"? How do Hanoun and other Arab men engage in "free expression" of their angry lust for the blonde Americans who smile gaily while being filmed in cruel, debasing sadosexual acts?

Dr. Nawal El Saadawi says millions of men like Hanoun are "sex-starved male[s]" who inflict their angry lusts onto multiple wives and "little girls."

The complete subjugation of Arab women was vividly experienced by Dr. Saadawi who described her own barbaric clitorodectomy at age 6. Clitorodectomy is the mutilation and carving of the clitoris, allegedly the only way to control women's insatiable lust.

In clitorodectomy, says Arab resister, Sara Wajid, little girls are routinely "sexually abused by and mutilated by their mothers in the name of Allah." Indeed, women are too conditioned by the dominant cultural mores.

A recent study found over 60 percent of 1,554 Iraqi females were genital mutilation (FGM) victims. While uncut women are viewed as especially dangerous, all women must be veiled and they'd best be squired by a male relative in public.

Iraqi women in human-rights work, government service or businesses (like pharmacist-activist Zeena Al-Qushtaini, who did not wear the abaya) have been kidnapped, tortured and murdered. The United Nations humanitarian news service reports decapitated female corpses tagged with warnings about their disobedience.

Dr. Katrin Michael, the heroic Iraqi activist for women's rights in the Middle East, reported that under Iraqi Shariah, or Islamic law, polygamy and wife battery are legal, women must obey all male relatives and are defined as half a man in courts that determine inheritance, marriage, divorce, child custody and similar matters.

Iraqi female activists struggle for the basic rights of a free person - freedom of movement study, work, monogamy and an end to killing of rape victims as well as "honor killings."

In the midst of war-torn Iraq, pornography emerges as yet another brutal domestic attack on these powerless women and children.

The AP reporter hee-haws at the retail of female hate propaganda (pornography) by savvy young Iraqi bestial pushers. If Arab buyers find blondes too expensive, Hanoun offers "Cheap Meat." What is that? Why, "Syrian, Egyptian, Lebanese girls ... all the Arabs." He also sells "movies of amateur Arab couples."

Really?

In his pioneering book, "Daughters of Sin: the Sexual Tragedy of Arab Women," reporter Youssef El Masry pointed out the obvious: Even in private, male lust holds little joy and much pain for genitally mutilated women.

Do Hanoun's "cheap films" of "Arab couples" show non mutilated women who freely chose to be shown in pornographic videos sold throughout Baghdad?

Is this the "freedom" envisioned by our Founding Fathers?

Since Muslim women are objectively enslaved already legally, the open, mass availability of pornography in Iraq is equivalent to pouring gasoline on an open fire. Now, about that celebratory Arab mosque near Ground Zero.

• the obstruction of the Reece Committee investigation into the Kinsey research
• watch the interview with Norman Dodd
  
• read this article, includes links to the committee's full report
  
• increasingly early onset of puberty, vaccinating kids against an STD
  
• the increase in homosexuality and its downside
• impotence as result of pornography consumption
• explicit sex education for children
  
• Dr. Reisman's new book Sexual Sabotage
• legal victory against Playboy
  

(source: WND) From "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" to same-sex "marriage" to conservative leaders wrapping themselves in the rainbow flag, defenders of Judeo-Christian traditions appear to be priming for some demoralizing culture-war defeats, says an author whose shocking new book retraces the contemporary origins of the sexual revolution. The battles are lost, says Judith Reisman, author of "Sexual Sabotage: How One Mad Scientist Unleashed a Plague of Corruption and Contagion on America," if those fighting them keep failing to address the pink elephant hovering over each case - Alfred Kinsey. A failure to understand the findings of Kinsey - and observe the documentation of how he "intentionally and nefariously conducted and skewed his research to present the most debased portrait possible of human sexual behavior" - is epic, says Reisman. An "ignorance of Kinsey renders impotent any hope of a successful courtroom counter to the consequences of these grossly damaging precedents."

For exhibit A, Reisman delves into key courtroom dynamics during the overturning of Proposition 8 and the "ruling that draws its justification almost entirely from Kinsey's conclusions."

"That's their academic citation, their scholarship, their science," says Reisman. "The heart of the matter is always science - and the science is based on a treasonous, sexual psychopath."

While she lauds the recent congressional resolution opposing the overturning of the overwhelmingly voter-approved California ban on same-sex "marriage," she warns that in the court of public opinion, "well-meaning supporters of Judeo-Christian traditions are fighting deep in occupied territory," said Reisman, "where the enemy's language, strategies and worldview reign."

She cites recent coverage in LifeSiteNews.com, where a point-by-point rebuttal of Judge Vaughn Walker's sharp pronouncements equating heterosexual and homosexual unions "misses the point."

"Arguing about the sexperts misses the basic point," says Reisman. "Who trained them? Who are they citing in their dissertations, etc.?"

Litigation, argues Reisman, provides the best platform to expose "the insidious influence of Kinsey's work." As "Sexual Sabotage" documents how Kinsey surrounded himself with "homosexual lovers and pornography stars, sex procurers, panderers and predators, each with his own deviance," and he "required (them) to look like sober, sensible professionals in suits and ties, with short hair."

The illusion of buttoned-down normalcy allowed Kinsey's seminal work to present clearly criminal findings with nominal outrage, said Reisman.

As "Sexual Sabotage" reports: "'Sexual Behavior in the Human Male' reports data 'on 214 male children' ... Kinsey asserted, 'Of the 214 cases ... all but 14 were subsequently observed in orgasm.' Observed?! Who 'subsequently observed' (defined as 'occurring or coming later or after') these infants and boys being - yes - sexually tortured, timed and recorded? Who, of Kinsey's team, did this under his direction? The youngest boy tested to 'climax' is '2 mon.' old."

Still, in the courtroom, where "knowledge of the sodomy lobby's founding father is essential," says Reisman, "our lawyers have been off on a long cricket break."

She cites the backgrounds of the "sexperts" in the Perry v. Schwarzenegger case who testified on behalf of overturning Prop 8. Mat Staver of Liberty Counsel said he had concerns about the adequacy of the Prop 8 defense. Reisman says its accusers weren't "adequately confronted."

"Only one graduate school in America - The Institute for the Advanced Study of Human Sexuality - is approved to train various academicians to be sexuality 'experts,'" says Reisman.

Sexual Sabotage reports this institute sold child pornography to Hustler magazine and advocates legalized pedophilia, child pornography/prostitution.

"Wardell Pomeroy, IASHS's academic dean and Kinsey's co-author, boy toy," says Reisman, "requested funds from the 'adult' business to film child pornography (Happy Day v. Kentucky, 1980)."

Such criminal behavior is "germane to the bias of the sexperts," says Reisman. "As sexology is the field that trains forensic sexperts for all sexually related cases, their fraud-child sex crime based foundation should always be exposed at trial. Will Liberty Counsel challenge the training of such witnesses in their planned amicus brief?"

(O. R. Adams Jr., source: American Traditions) Children are being sexually abused in this country, and in others around the world, in ways that are unbelievable to those who do not keep up with such things. I will refer to several online articles. I encourage you to read the articles. They contain much more than I recount in this short article. They may be accessed by clicking on the footnote references.

The Sex Information and Education Council of the United States is a high sounding name chosen by the Kinsey group to indoctrinate children and young people with their perverted ideas on sexuality. It is not an institution of our federal government. "In 1964, the Sex Information and Education Council of the United States (SIECUS) was launched by the Kinsey Institute. Its objective was to teach Kinseyan ideology as sex education in our schools. SIECUS (which now calls itself the Sexuality Information and Education Council of the United States) imprinted the new Kinsey variant standard on almost all sex education curricula. It advocates homosexuality, same-sex marriage, and presents many kinds of perverted sexual activity as normal, and without censor as being wrong - even between small children. It presents "masturbation, either alone or with a partner," as an acceptable practice for children. The SIECUS sex education material is designed for presentation to all children, from kindergarten to grade 12. It has gained wide acceptance around the country in public schools and has even been accepted in many homosexual "affirming" church schools. Dr. Reisman writes extensively about SIECUS in her book, Kinsey: Crimes and Consequences, Second Edition (1998, 2000), by Judith A. Reisman, Ph.D.

For brevity, I am only going to use three specific instances of the abuse of children. The most common forms are "sex education" of children, and it is going on in a great number of our schools around the country. Early in the homosexual movement, homosexualists infiltrated the largest teachers' union in the country - the National Education Association (NEA), and over the years it has had one or more homosexual organizations as a part of the NEA. That is a primary factor behind all of this homosexual and pedophile slanted "education." Much of it has been done under the guise of "protecting" homosexual children from bullying and mistreatment. The true and primary purpose is the promotion of homosexuality and one of its closely related perversions, pedophilia.

An interesting and disgusting situation has recently come to light in British Columbia, Canada. The article, B. C. stops sex tests for young sexual offenders,[2] states in part:

The penile plethysmography tests, or "phallometry," require boys as young as 13 in sex offence treatment programs to view pictures of nude and semi-clad children and listen to audio descriptions of forced sexual scenarios while their arousal levels are measured.

Commonly reported methods of the testing involve measuring the circumference of the penis with a rubber strain gauge or the volume of the genitals with an airtight cylinder and inflatable cuff.

The decision to suspend the treatment comes after the BC Civil Liberties Association and the group Justice for Girls raised concerns over the testing.

The British Columbia "research" is strikingly similar to the child abuse called research conducted by Kinsey and his cohorts in their criminal abuse of children. The following is from page 133 of the book, Kinsey: Crimes and Consequences:

Kinsey asserted that "erotic arousal could ... be subjected to precise instrumental measurement if objectivity among scientists and public respect for scientific research allowed such laboratory investigation." He and his team did, in fact, conduct what he called "scientific research" on children involving the "precise instrumental measurement" of what he interpreted as "erotic arousal" in infants, toddlers, and children. Whether "public respect" is due his "laboratory investigation" is for you, the reader, to decide.

Common sense should tell anyone that this kind of sexualization and mistreatment of children is very traumatic to them and can well lead to abnormal and perverted sexual development. It is a depravity that should not be allowed in any decent society.

Recently, sex education in Montana was in the news. The following is from the article, Montana School System Wants Sex Education for Kindergarten[3], by Bruce Walker:

Jeff Laszloffy, president of the Montana Family Council, has expressed outrage at a plan being considered by the Helena Public School System to have sex education begin in kindergarten.

These young children will [be] taught the meaning of terms like nipple, penis, uterus, and scrotum. The next year, first-graders would be taught that homosexual attraction is normal. By the time the students are ten, they would be taught that "sexual intercourse includes but is not limited to vaginal, oral, or anal penetration." ...

Second-graders are taught to "Understand that calling people gay ... is disrespectful and hurtful." Language used to describe homosexuality is consciously controlled by the schools. Third-graders are taught: "The media often presents an unrealistic image of what it means to be male or female." Children are also taught in that grade that moral values are not universal. The Helena Public School intends to re-educate young children about what being boys or girls means and to deconstruct the moral values these children have learned.

In an interview on the Montana sex education, Dr. Judith A. Reisman  states[4]:

Montana is seeking to impose an unscientific, Kinseyan ideological model of pathological sexual instruction on the undeveloped, immature brains of vulnerable children.  I would argue that the exposure of children to the kinds of sexual stimuli proposed by Montana's education mavens reflects unmitigated ignorance, malevolence or both. Their imposition of sexplicit and indeed deviant forms of sexual conduct on captive schoolchildren is institutional child sexual abuse. Were a man or woman to stop a child on the street and whisper the same information teachers will force on these school children, he or she could be arrested for child molestation. Thus yes, the sexual stimuli "education" planned is unmonitored, untested, not validated and on the evidence provably traumatic for normal child development. ...

Well, just what makes these sexperts sexperts? How do they get their training, where? Since sex education only existed as "hygiene" before 1950, (cleanliness habits and instruction to wait until marriage for sex unless one wanted to get VD) all sex ed had to come from some "expert." That "expert" was Alfred Kinsey and his books Sexual Behavior in the Human Male (1948) and Sexual Behavior in the Human Female (1953) launched the "field" and the sex ed curricula the Montana folks would like to bring to classrooms today. Since all of the Kinsey data were lies, based on sex abuse of hundreds, even thousands of children (young as 2 months) the entire "field" is based on lies and crimes against children. And the field denies it--so ask where they were trained, by whom--their sexperts will all come down to being Kinseyans. This is the biggest con job on American education in history

In the recent news we learned some of the details on sex education in Massachusetts. Dr. Reisman, in the article, Massachusetts Schools are Giving First Grade Children Condoms, Why Exactly?[5], had this to say:

Copying the pedophile model, Massachusetts schools are giving first grade children condoms, violating parental protections.

In 1977 the pedophile CHILDHOOD SENSUALITY CIRCLE (CSC) published a "Child's Sexual Bill of Rights" -- truly a "Pedophile's Bill of Rights."

CSC pedophiles write, "Every child has the right to loving relationships, including sexual, with a parent, sibling or other responsible adult or child and shall be protected and aided in doing so by "contraceptives and aids to prevent venereal disease" and schools copy the pedophile model. [Note how even incest is advocated by the CSC.]

Which leads one to cynically ask which closet pedophiles run Massachusetts sex education? ...

CSC pedophiles write, children are sexual "at any age," "frustrated, anti-social" and "potential [sic] criminal" without sex. CSC pedophiles demand sexual "re-education of the citizenry in every part of the United States "school child or adult," and schools copy the pedophile model.

CSC pedophiles write, "sexual rights" should be legalized "regardless of age," and schools copy the pedophile model. http://www.drjudithreisman.com/  ...

In many places around the country, and in all places where the NEA and their other homosexualist collaborators have sufficient influence, children are being brainwashed with this homosexual pedophile trash. Children are even exposed to demonstrations on how to use condoms.

An Article by David Thorsted, on the homosexual North American Man/Boy Love Association (NAMBLA) website states:

Pederasty [men having sex with boys] is the main form that male homosexuality has acquired throughout Western civilization - and not only in the West![6]

Pedophilia has always been an important part of the homosexual agenda.[7] From the inception of the homosexual movement, homosexualists have also successfully lobbied for the reduction of age of consent laws, so that children will be legal prey for pedophiles at younger and younger ages. The real goal, as the CSC advocates, is no age limit at all. What is our world coming to? And the real blame lies with the people who stand idly by and allow these things to continue. As Abraham Lincoln said, "To sin by silence when they should protest makes cowards of men."

[7] See the articles on this website: How Homosexualists Redefine Homosexual Child Molesting, The Depraved Excesses of Homosexual Lifestyles, The Sodomizing of Our Churches.

Sodomy Decision Based On Fraudulent 'Science'

Too often, bogus research findings become "fashionable" as scientists and society embrace a revolutionary new paradigm based on deceptive "scientific findings." Consider the "science" of "phrenology," so popular a century ago, which specifically linked intelligence and character traits to skull shape and cranial size.

Lawrence v. Texas is a flagrant, indeed chilling, example of just such a bogus "scientific" revolution, one in which the U.S. Supreme Court is driving the junk science bandwagon, marching America and the world into snake-infested swamps.

For many reasons, any revisionist investigation of history brings to mind Thomas Jefferson, who warned, "If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be."

Rick Perlstein noted this ignorance in his ecstatic essay for the Washington Post, "What Gay Studies Taught the Court." Perlstein observed, "commentators may have skipped their homework in reporting on the historical foundations of the majority's decision," for, although Lawrence was a "momentous" shift in America's moral economy, "[w]hat hasn't been explained is the basis for Kennedy's landmark ruling."

He was correct up to there. The Court based its disastrous sodomy ruling on fraudulent scholarship that deceived six justices. Their ignorance of junk "sex science" and junk history led directly to a grotesque decision that will further promote sex acts that sicken and kill countless people.

Perlstein offered an insider's awareness that conservative lawyers or pundits seldom grasp. The justices, too, "skipped their homework" in considering "the foundations of the majority's decision." Inconceivably, the Court brazenly cited only secondary "scientific" authorities for their sodomy ruling.

In fact, tracing Kennedy's opinion back to its origin reveals that the majority relied on only one sex "science" resource as the Court's primary authority on sex and sodomy--namely, the bi/homosexual, sadomasochistic, proven fraud, Prof. Alfred C. Kinsey.

The evidence shows that Justice Kennedy genuflected to "facts" about sodomy as documented by the American Law Institute's Model Penal Code (ALIMPC) of 1955. Yet the primary source for the sodomy "data" codified as "fact" by the Court in the ALIMPC was Kinsey alone.

Actually, not only did the majority rely on Kinsey as its primary sex science authority, but the "gay studies" historical revisionists the majority cited also relied on Kinsey as their primary sex science resource. But let's go back to the ALIMPC. Kennedy opined:

"In 1955 the American Law Institute promulgated the Model Penal Code and made clear that it did not recommend or provide for 'criminal penalties for consensual sexual relations conducted in private.' It justified its decision on three grounds: (1) The prohibitions undermined respect for the law by penalizing conduct many people engaged in; (2) the statutes regulated private conduct not harmful to others; and (3) the laws were arbitrarily enforced and thus invited the danger of blackmail." [Emphasis added.]

In his Lawrence v. Texas Amicus Curiae brief to the Court, Kentucky lawyer Ronald E. Ray reported:

'Regarding homosexuality, [ALI Reporter] Schwartz cited the Kinsey Reports as evidence of the frequency of homosexual activity and the senselessness of trying to control it.' Indeed, upon the Kinsey 'research,' many state sodomy laws have been changed or overturned."

Experts? Hardly. Meticulous scholarly study reveals that all of ALIMPC's assertions about the "right" to sodomy came from one alleged "expert"--Kinsey--in Sexual Behavior in the Human Male (1948) and Sexual Behavior in the Human Female (1953).

Chapter 8 of my book, Kinsey: Crimes & Consequences (1998, 2000, 2003) fully documents Kinsey's total domination of the "Sex Offenses" section of the 1955 ALIMPC.

But on June 26, 2003, the U.S. Supreme Court enshrined Kinsey's fraudulent data as the revolutionary moral law of our land, even though it derived from crimes of sexual torture inflicted on at least 317 and as many as 2,035 infants and children, who "convulsed," "fainted" and tried to escape their abusers. The "expert" Prof. Kinsey, who himself was a barbaric sadomasochist, reported that the little victims "enjoyed" being sexually tortured (Male, see esp. pp. 160-161 and p. 180).

Although Kinsey was cited throughout the "Sex Offenses" section of the 1955 ALIMPC six times in 12 pages, the eight pages on "Sodomy and Related Offenses" quoted extensively from Kinsey's Male volume, with 19 of the 21 quotations in "Frequency of Sexual Deviation" taken from Kinsey. His sex science data on sodomy are the only ones cited.

The ALIMPC writers quoted Kinsey's junk science in order to overthrow the Judeo-Christian sexual morality of The Greatest Generation and replace it with Kinsey's ideology of sexual anarchy. Kinsey falsely stated in his 1948 book (quoted in the ALIMPC) that 72% of males practice oral sex, 40-50% of farm boys have sex with animals, and that "37% of the total male population has at least some overt homosexual experience to the point of orgasm between adolescence and old age. This accounts for nearly 2 males out of every 5 that one may meet."

And where did Kinsey get these "data" that the illustrious Model Penal Code authors and six U.S. Supreme Court justices so willingly took at face value? It turns out that Kinsey, famed for his sexual "statistics," knew nothing about statistics, simply making up what he needed, while passing his young boyfriend off as his "statistician."

In fact, roughly 86% of Kinsey's total male subjects were sexually, criminally or mentally aberrant. For example, Wardell Pomeroy, co-author (with Kinsey) of the Male volume, stated:

"By the end of 1940 [Kinsey] had recorded more than 450 homosexual histories . . . . His Chicago and St. Louis contacts began to spread . . .like the branches of a tree. With 700 histories recorded at this point, his tabulations, curves and correlation charts began to be impressive . . . . In autumn of 1940 he describes his prison work: 'I have 110 histories from inmates there and can get as many hundreds more as I want.'"

Moreover, the Court's reliance on foreign laws to justify its demolishing our own laws had roots in the 1955 ALIMPC's citation of "Foreign Countries" (p. 162). Among many other ALIMPC references to experts who relied on Kinsey we find an emergent plea to replace the penitentiary with psychotherapy.

Kennedy also stated, for the Court:

"In 1961 Illinois changed its laws to conform to the Model Penal Code. Other States soon followed . . . .The sweeping references by Chief Justice Burger to the history of Western civilization and to Judeo-Christian moral and ethical standards did not take account of other authorities pointing in an opposite direction. A committee advising the British Parliament recommended in 1957 repeal of laws punishing homosexual conduct. The Wolfenden Report . . . .Parliament enacted the substance of those recommendations 10 years later." [Emphasis added.]

Kinsey made a hush-hush trip to England to serve as sex science advisor for the Wolfenden Report (even though he is absent from the Wolfenden "Witnesses" list), which extolled The Kinsey Reports on its book jacket and quoted his false homosexual data throughout. The ALIMPC and Wolfenden were the key sex/sodomy authorities that Kennedy cited for the Court.

Justice Scalia noted the importance of the ALIMPC: "In relying, for evidence of an 'emerging recognition,' upon the American Law Institute's 1955 recommendation not to criminalize 'consensual sexual relations conducted in private,' ante, at 11, the Court ignores the fact that this recommendation was 'a point of resistance in most of the states that considered adopting the Model Penal Code.'"

The Court needs to revisit this decision in the light of new facts displacing our ignorance: the knowledge that a duplicitous sexual deviant was the primary source used by the United States Supreme Court as their "sex science" authority in Lawrence v. Texas.

Jonathan Gathorne-Hardy, one of Kinsey's recent hagiographers, writes in Sex, The Measure of All Things (1998) that "The American Law Institute's Model Penal Code of 1955 is virtually a Kinsey document!"

The Dubious Origins of 'Gay Studies'

Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy based his pro-sodomy majority opinion in Lawrence v. Texas on legal sources that relied on the proven fraud, Prof. Alfred C. Kinsey. Kennedy has company. Citing Kinsey's phony "data" is standard procedure in the legal profession--and in the academic "scholarship" that jurists use to support their rulings.

Part one in this series exposed the Court's "scientific understanding" in Lawrence as turning on the 1955 American Law Institute Model Penal Code (ALIMPC) and the 1957 (British) Wolfenden Report. Both relied on Kinsey's bogus "findings" in his Sexual Behavior in the Human Male (1948) and Sexual Behavior in the Human Female (1953).

In part two, we'll scrutinize more Kinsey-worshiping--the sort of "scientific subject matter" that persuaded six Supreme Court justices in Lawrence that outlawing "homosexual sodomy furthers no legitimate state interest."

In his powerful dissent from Lawrence, Justice Antonin Scalia warned, "[s]tate laws against bigamy, same-sex marriage, adult incest, prostitution, masturbation, adultery, fornication, bestiality, and obscenity . . . [are all] called into question by today's decision."

In addition, he chided the academic "law-profession culture" for relying on everything but the Constitution.

Academia's Sexual Ideology

Justice Scalia is right; the "law-profession culture" is on record as subscribing to Kinsey's sexual ideology. Consider that over a 16-year period, from 1982 to 1998, at least 1,000 major law school journal articles quoted Kinsey as their sex science authority. And the critically important American Association of Law Schools commands total submission to its homosexual "equity" ethic.

But it's not just the law schools. One survey (American Enterprise, 2002) confirms the anecdotal observation that almost 100% of those teaching history, women's and "gay studies" in our major universities are self-identified as leftists. This means academia is blacklisting traditionalist scholars. That is bad science--and, as seen in Lawrence, it produces bad law.

Kinsey disciples also dominate the social sciences. The Science Citation & Social Science Citation Indices from 1948 to 1997 yielded 5,796 academic publications that quoted Kinsey, far more than the next "sexuality" contender, Masters & Johnson, at 3,716.

Instead of objectively searching for truth, scholars are accepting Kinseyan sexuality uncritically because they like his fake "findings."

As University of Michigan English Professor David Halperin wrote in 1996, "lesbian and gay studies . . . expresses an uncompromising political militancy . . . [triggering] a far-reaching intellectual transformation in the disciplines of the humanities, arts and social sciences as well as in the social life of American universities and in the professional culture of American academe."

In "What Gay Studies Taught the Court," Rick Perlstein, a Washington Post reporter, notes that "gay studies . . . history professors" have helped demolish America's anti-sodomy laws by legitimizing what were formerly viewed as "political correctness" and "special interest studies." He says the Supreme Court has made "gay studies . . . scholarship . . . bedrock . . . for settling the law of the land."

In Lawrence, the Court endorsed the sexual research by name of "gay studies" figures, along with Richard Posner, Chief Justice of the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals.

The ALIMPC, as well as all of the Court's academic experts that follow, trace their "pioneering" origin to Kinsey. Yet none condemns--or even admits--his sexual psychopathic and sadistic "orientation" and his employment of pedophiles to sodomize infants and children. The "orgasm" tests (see Table 34), timed by stopwatch, are reproduced from Kinsey's 1948 volume.

First, consider the Court's cite to Posner's Overcoming Law. Here Posner says, "Kinsey's scale . . . from zero to six . . . represent[s] the range of homosexual preferences," invoking Kinsey's made-up homosexual index as if it reflected reality. Posner repeats Kinsey's fraudulent "findings" on pure faith and praises his supposed sexual wisdom, but conveniently ignores Kinsey collaborators' wicked "orgasm" torture "experiments" on children--even on babies less than a year old. The psychopathic Kinsey is Posner's sex authority . . . and Posner is the Court's sex authority.

Next, the Court names Intimate Matters, by Estelle Freedman and John D'Emilio, well-funded professors of History, Women's and Gay Studies. They devote a full 20 of their text's 428 pages to quoting Kinsey's claims. Kinsey made, they say, "the strongest assault on sexual reticence in the public realm" and helped sway Supreme Court decisions on "obscenity."

The "new history" typically uses Kinsey's fraud to sabotage marital fidelity and chastity. Freedman and D'Emilio hide the truth that so few normal women would talk to Kinsey that he had to define a wife as someone who merely lived "at least a year" with a man. By casting prostitutes and other aberrant women as spouses, Kinsey created high rates of female premarital promiscuity, adultery and abortion that these "historians" told the Court were true.

The authors point out that "Kinsey's estimates dwarfed all previous calculations" of homosexuality, but they cover up data which disprove Kinsey's ideology-driven claims that homosexuality is "benign." Kinsey is Freedman and D'Emilio's sex authority and they are the court's sex authority.

Lastly, the court quotes from "gay studies historian" Jonathan Katz's book, The Invention of Heterosexuality, which promotes Kinsey's frauds. Katz argues elsewhere that ever since "Kinsey's scale," the notion of "an erotic continuum has become a popular mainstay of a liberal sexual pluralism," adding that "serious" writing about sex has been designed . . . to give a bastard subject legitimacy."

In its citations of Kinsey-worshipping academics, the U.S. Supreme Court left out a few awkward facts about Kinsey as sexual "authority." For instance, Kinsey hid his own bisexual, homosexual, pornographic, sadomasochistic and pedophile "interests."

Even friendly biographer James Jones documented Kinsey's sexual harassment of males, his masturbation compulsion and the violent sex rituals that led to his untimely death. Jones confirmed that Kinsey disguised himself as a staid, middle-American family man and scholar in order to promote his legal and socio-sexual agenda.

Kinsey is at once the most powerful, and the weakest, link in the liberals' chain as they incessantly subvert American health and welfare.

Congress Should Probe and Defund the Kinseyites

In the first two parts of this series, we uncovered how Lawrence v. Texas, the U.S. Supreme Court's recent unconstitutional pro-sodomy ruling, cited academic and legal sources that rely on false data--the debunked 1948 and 1953 "findings" of sex deviate Prof. Alfred C. Kinsey.

This twisted, unsupportable Lawrence decision was bad enough. But worse, Kinsey's many disciples are going to keep on using his bogus sexual "findings" to pervert U.S. law, education, culture and society. That is, unless Congress finally takes notice and does something about it.

One of the worst facets of the Kinseyization of American life is the direct harm it does to our children and youth. The Kinseyites' central lies--that "everybody's doing it," "children are sexual from birth," "school kids need K-12 sex immersion," and "children can make their own decisions"--have made it open season on our kids for an ever-growing cesspool of victimizers.

The truth is: Alfred Kinsey's cold, dead hands are clamped tightly around America's children, and the fault lies largely with his apologists in academia, who include even enablers of pedophilia. This is unacceptable. It has to change. And Congress can change it.

How? First, here's a refresher in recent history. Kinsey is the "father of the sexual revolution," thanks to his widely ballyhooed works on sexual behavior in men (1948) and women (1953). They formed the basis for the American Law Institute's Model Penal Code (1955), which misled state and federal authorities into reducing and even killing penalties for many sex crimes.

Yet Kinsey's influence didn't stop there. His books remain entrenched in academic mythology-- even though this author and her colleagues "demolished the foundation of the two [Kinsey] reports," as an article in the British medical journal The Lancet attested back in 1990.

Kinsey managed to undermine America's Biblical/classical sexual morality by creating a phony new academic field, the study of "sexuality," now complete with all the scholarly touches of professors, textbooks, research papers, journals, conferences, curricula--and government grants.

This new "scientific" community unscientifically blacklists everyone who would present the facts that expose Kinsey as a fraud and sexual psychopath. That conveniently leaves the Kinseyites free to continue inflicting their baseless and injurious pro-deviance message on American society.

These scholars' blind resistance to facts is not atypical, as late MIT philosopher of science Thomas S. Kuhn pointed out in his book, The Structure of Scientific Revolution. He found that scholars "whose research is based on shared paradigms are committed to the same rules and standards . . . predicated on the assumption that the scientific community knows what the world is like." Scientists, Kuhn said, "defend that assumption, if necessary at considerable cost" and often "suppress fundamental [data] . . . subversive of its basic commitments."

So if the Kinseyite dinosaurs, largely taxpayer-funded, refuse to change, they need to be made extinct. An excellent way for Congress to do just that is to revive a House bill from 1995, the Child Protection and Ethics in Education Act.

In its initial stage, that explosive bill mandated a congressional investigation "to determine if Alfred Kinsey's Sexual Behavior in the Human Male and/or Sexual Behavior in the Human Female are the result of any fraud or criminal wrongdoing." If the answer was yes, all past or present tax dollars for propagandistic Kinseyite sex education and similar programs could be eliminated and all Kinseyite professors, textbooks and so on would be evaluated based on the "tainted nature of the Kinsey reports."

This is powerful stuff. At the mere thought of such congressional scrutiny, Indiana University nearly padlocked its campus guest, the Kinsey Institute, for so-called budgetary reasons. Unfortunately, though, the money-laden, powerful Ford and Rockefeller foundations weighed in and the Child Protection legislation ended up on a back burner.

Nevertheless, the proposed congressional investigation received worldwide publicity, and that prompted the making of a major British documentary, "Secret History: Kinsey's Paedophiles." That Yorkshire television film, produced by award-winning director Tim Tate, was screened throughout England on Aug. 10, 1998, to widespread acclaim and BBC kudos.

The film documented that Kinsey was aided by scores of brutal pedophiles as well as a German Nazi, Dr. Friz von Balluseck later arrested in 1955 for a child sex murder--with Balluseck egged on by Kinsey at Indiana University. In 1998, John Bancroft, then the Kinsey Institute director, told Kinseyites in San Francisco that he "pray[ed]" Americans would never get to see the film.

The Kinsey Institute has done more than "pray." Despite the critical acclaim for Tate's documentary, no American station has ever broadcast it.

The institute is open to comrades only, but it receives major federal and state funds for "science" such as pro-pedophile lecturers and measurements of peoples' sexual arousal. In 1998, Indiana University republished Kinsey's fraudulent "research" but hid the truth about his false data and his child sex abuse "methodology." It even launched a year-long mass media campaign to bury Kinsey's history as the pioneer of Nazi-style "scientific" sexual atrocities against children.

That was the barbaric "orgasm" experimentation by Kinsey and/or Kinsey-trained rapists on infants as young as two months, using stopwatches while the little victims convulsed, fainted, screamed, wept and pleaded to be released, only to be "tested" and sometimes filmed again.

Somehow it comes as no surprise that Hollywood is making Kinsey, a biopic that will glorify this monster and omit the sordid reality that he was a self-abusing, bisexual sadomasochist pornography addict--and probably a pedophile.

Nor is the movie likely to admit that Kinsey solicited child sex abuse "data" from von Balluseck and from the pioneers of the North American Man-Boy Love Association. By the way, NAMBLA's website calls Kinsey its hero "in the struggle we fight today."

The Kinseyites are riding high, but we can stop them. Tell your congressman and senators they must revive and pass the Child Protection and Ethics Act of 1995 so the Kinsey Institute and its pro-pedophilia minions throughout academia can be investigated, exposed and defunded.

The safety and the souls of America's children are at stake, and we cannot fail to act.

Copyright © 2003 HUMAN EVENTS. All Rights Reserved.

(source: WND) Stunning images of explicit nudity and overt sexuality splashed across the Sears website, (yes, you read that right) amount to "deliberate brain damage," and "the intentional advance of perversion [that] warrants legal action," says the author of new book on the origins of the sexual revolution.

WorldNetDaily reported the Sears site features, "four couples with arms and legs intertwined who appear to be wearing nothing but each other and some foamy waves lapping at their ankles. The poster image is highlighted by the theme: 'Safe sex is hot sex.' Another reveals two topless women embracing, wearing only the skimpiest of shorts, (and) a model who appears to be wearing some water and a small sponge."

As a former Justice Department official whose research on the detriments of pornography led 7-Eleven to stop stocking Penthouse and Playboy, Judith Reisman, author of the newly released, "Sexual Sabotage: How One Mad Scientist Unleashed a Plague of Corruption and Contagion on America," has studied extensively how pornography impacts the brain.

"Decades of hard science confirm millennia of observation that despite our individual genes, what we see - like how what we eat and drink shape our bodies - affects our brains and our physical and mental health," Reisman said.

Find out who launched the sexual 'devolution,' and opened the door to the abyss

Reisman's research isn't alone in those conclusions. Dr. Donald Hilton recently reported "pornography is a visual pheromone, a powerful, $100 billion per year brain drug."

Sexually graphic images, said Hilton, disrupt "pre-mating communication" via high doses of dopamine, a "brain drug, in the pleasure/reward system in the brain."

Dr. Nora Volkow, director of the National Institute on Drug Abuse, used the results of imaging studies in 2007 to posit that pornography is a brain addiction.

Consumer backlash apparently didn't faze Sears, WND reports, as the American Family Association, "which monitors and lobbies corporations to clean up their product lines," couldn't even get a return call back from the company long known for selling everything from tools and appliances to clothing and school supplies.

"Sears' management clearly agreed that pornography would conscript children and vulnerable adults as consumers," said Reisman. "The Sears pornography adverts had to survive multiple administrative debates, redrafts and societal cost-benefit analyses before they got the green light (recall Ford's decision to pay future Pinto explosion victims rather than recall their defective cars)."

Mainstreaming of pornography isn't just the goal of "sexual anarchists," says Reisman, but "goes much higher." Her research points to Big Pharma and Big Porn - emboldened by the academic cover provided by the work of Alfred Kinsey, who "Sexual Sabotage" exposes criminally manipulating his findings, presided over the sexual abuse of children for his "studies" and seeking "to undermine every benefit of America traditions around marriage, sex and stable family environments."

Kinsey's works strengthens Big Pharma and Big Porn, said Reisman, in saturating society in images of perversion, creating debased addictions that soon render men impotent, then marketing to them anti-impotency prescriptions.

The "intrusion of Big Porn" mirror the "rapid growth of the porn addict's habit," said Reisman, who advocates a large-scale class-action lawsuit - like those against Big Tobacco - that bring the evidence of pornography's "actionable damages" before a jury.

The Kinsey legacy of "pornography and perversion," said Reisman, "is no longer content to fill the luxury hotel rooms, the Internet and most of television, it's moved on even to the Sears [website]."

"Children cannot buy alcohol because their bodies and brains are corrupted by its toxins," she added. "Similarly, Sears' reckless distribution of pornography, of 'erototoxins' in the public space should be charged with deliberate brain damage - bringing the role of dopamine as a 'natural drug' to an American jury. Let the scientific challenge begin!"

Sears also declined to respond to WND requests for comment on the issue.

WND's earlier report noted the effort by the the American Family Association to alert its supporters to the situation.

The group has documented the images on a link from its website, behind a series of three warning screens, for those who insist on tracking them down.

But they are images that cannot be used on the WND site.

Copying the pedophile model, Massachusetts schools are giving first grade children condoms, violating parental protections.

In 1977 the pedophile CHILDHOOD SENSUALITY CIRCLE (CSC)'s published a "Child's Sexual Bill of Rights" -- truly a "Pedophile's Bill of Rights."

CSC pedophiles write, "Every child has the right to loving relationships, including sexual, with a parent, sibling or other responsible adult or child and shall be protected and aided in doing so by ....contraceptives and aids to prevent venereal disease" and schools copy the pedophile model.

Which leads one to cynically ask which closet pedophiles run Massachusetts sex education?

CSC pedophiles want Kiddie condoms and contraception--like modern STD vaccines--not to protect children from harm but to protect pedophiles from disease, and evidence of assaults, like impregnating minors, thus from jail. And same-age and same gender sex opens the door to dispersant age sex with hetero/homosexual adults.

CSC pedophiles write, children are sexual "at any age," "frustrated, anti-social" and "potential [sic] criminal" without sex. CSC pedophiles demand sexual "re-education of the citizenry in every part of the United States....school child or adult," and schools copy the pedophile model.

CSC pedophiles write, "sexual rights" should be legalized "regardless of age," and schools copy the pedophile model.

CSC pedophiles write, "Each child has the right to be protected from any form of sex suppression at home or in society," and schools copy the pedophile model.

CSC pedophiles write, "Children should have the opportunity to acknowledge what they know and feel about their sexuality," despite their parents, and schools copy the pedophile model.

CSC pedophiles write, "regardless of age" or "tradition," children may have sex with whomever they wish, of any sex or age, and schools copy the pedophile model.

In short, Massachusetts, and similar schools have adopted Kinsey's Pedophile Programs, neutering parents, and suggesting an organized pedophile state and school lobby. Tiny condoms and child STD vaccines wound children and expose them to a lifetime of physical and emotional trauma--but they do protect child predators.

The recent Provincetown decision to pander to pedophiles by eroticizing even First Grade students with Kiddie condoms is reportedly already school policy in over two dozen Massachusetts school districts.

Since the late 1960s children have been eroticized and their innocence bludgeoned by sexually deviant and/or foolish school officials. However, the press reports Massachusetts a kiddie condom pioneer! In 1990 its Cambridge Rindge & Latin School health center dispersed condoms and by 1991 Falmouth had condom vending machines in school bathrooms.

Since smaller kiddies often cannot read or write, do school nurses provide the "safer sex" demonstration of orifices to use and how with the cute rubber balloons? As Massachusetts pushes lesbian, gay, transgender and "undecided" rights groups, (old and young) 'kiddie condom' experimental opportunities are legion.

Is condom "erotic play" explored in the playground or at lunchtime after eating peanut and jelly sandwiches? Are condoms for the cloak rooms? Do children get extra physical education credit for sex? Do girls get equal access to dental dams? Can Massachusetts students submit erotic films or papers for credit?

What is the protocol? So much to learn!

These school sex programs recall Aldoux Huxley's Brave New World when a little boy was sent for therapy when he didn't play erotic games with others.

Massachusetts Democratic Governor Davel Patrick protested to Provincetown's school superintendent Beth Singer. He is running for reelection.

Comrade Singer explained to the press that "The intent is to protect kids....We know that sexual experimentation is not limited to an age, so how does one put an age on it?"

How indeed? Is Singer invested in Kiddie condoms?

Britain's Mail Online enthuses, "Extra small condoms for boys as young as 12 could soon be on our shelves. The Hotshot condoms are going on sale in Switzerland."

Huxley would ask who profits from baby condoms? The answer is certainly not children. As noted, pedophiles have always advocated "safe" school sex-ed, condoms and STD vaccines for their tiny victims.

So watch for "Hotshot" Kiddie condoms coming to a school near you. And when they distribute Barbie "dental dams" ask who's benefiting from eroticizing children as demanded by the pedophile lobby? And of course, I say, sue these schools, top to bottom.

Dr. Judith Reisman, author of the new book, Sexual Sabotage, is sought worldwide to speak, lecture, testify and counsel individuals, organizations, professionals and governments in Media Forensics, the scientific analysis of images, pictures, cartoons, illustrations, pornography and text in sexual harassment of women and children in the workplace, schools and homes. Her media forensic expertise has been successful in child custody cases, examining "pseudo-child" and "virtual-child" pornography, as well as in judicial and legislative decisions about fraudulent sex science, sex education and the way in which media images restructure human brain, mind, memory, and conduct by hijacking rationality. The special emphasis of her research continues to be the scientific documentation of the difference between public and private space human erotic displays, and the subversion of informed consent via exposure to supranormal visual stimuli. Dr. Judith Reisman is a consultant and former president of The Institute for Media Education, and is the scientific advisor for the California Protective Parents Association. A sought-after expert in the field of Media Forensics, Dr. Reisman is also an author and has been a consultant to four U.S. Department of Justice administrations.

She's authored or co-authored several titles, which can be found here:

• wndbooks.wnd.com/sexual-sabotage/
• www.drjudithreisman.com

Note provided with press release: "Please be patient with this provocative topic. Though it is uncomfortable to read and address, it may be necessary to report on this material. Judith Reisman, PhD has been known for many years as an official expert on these hard topics regarding protecting our young and innocent. While it is a challenge to know just how far to go in reporting on Dr. Reisman's research and factual material, it may be a necessary inconvenient topic to cover in order to connect the dots regarding where and how these outrageous theories and practices have run amuck to the point where our educators feel it necessary to exploit our young for the sake of a most disturbing agenda. Hang on to your hat on this one. Feel free to use the delete button. However, the following information is true and we all need to pull together to protect the innocence of our children."