Comment Reported for: Rule 16 - Identity Attack

Comment Removed for: Rule 12 - Intentional Falsehoods

This comment is closer to disinformation than it is Rule 16.

This is because the author of the very book being cited explicitly states that Ritual Sacrifice didn't happen. And instead he was investigating the culture around blood that German Christians had.

I wish to specify that the principal aim of my research was to investigate the role of the so-called ‘blood culture’ in the German-speaking Jewish community, as in the Christian society that surrounded it. This was a manifold, therapeutic, magical, propitiatory, alchemic role which flouted the strict biblical and rabbinic prohibitions on the consumption of blood....But between this dried blood used in the rite – blood which originated from unknown ‘donors’, alive and well, and mostly belonging to indigent families – and alleged ritual murders there was no relationship whatsoever save in the minds of judges (and not only those of Trent) as they endeavoured to prove the blood accusation against the Jews. Through their tendentious interpretations, the magical, therapeutic, alchemic, propitious or maleficent use of blood served to give plausible support to the deadly blood libel

In another citation of the author:

It is important to state from the very beginning that Jewish ritual murder never took place. Today proving such theories wrong is not the goal of scientific research'.

Cited Toaff, Pasque di sangue 2007 p.225 n.2