Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Speaking of code words...let's fry up some anti semitism
#1
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/256...h-goldberg

Even the editor of the National Review says using the phrase "blood libel" ain't the smartest move around.

{Cue Dakota to come in here and say that Jonah Goldberg is just another Republican that liberals now love}
Reply
#2
Liberal who doesn't love Jonah Goldberg here, but he's certainly correct.

Gabby Giffords is Jewish.

Where the hell did Palin even come up with the term "blood libel?" Can anyone find other examples of that term in public language? Does she even know what it means, and if she does, why would she use it?

"The blood libel refers specifically to perhaps the most notorious verse in the Bible: Matthew 27:25, which has been used by some Christians to persecute Jews for nearly 2,000 years. That it should be used by an avowedly Christian politician about a Jewish one just takes crassness and insensitivity to a new level.

One can only hope that Palin, or her advisers, did not appreciate the context, or the history. The verse in Matthew refers to the scene during Christ's trial before Pontius Pilate, before his execution, where the Roman governor, not being able to find fault with the accused man, publicly washed his hands of his fate, saying the crowd bore responsibility for his death.

The Gospel says the crowd shouted back: "His blood be on us and on our children," a phrase taken by Christians for centuries to indicate that the Jewish people as a whole and for perpetuity bore direct responsibility for the crucifixion and were therefore fair game for persecution and extermination.

It has been used to justify pogroms, expulsions and discrimination and has fed Christian myths, such as those circulating in the middle ages, that Jews kidnapped and sacrificed Christian children to use their blood during Passover commemorations.

It took until the post-Holocaust period for organisations such as the Roman Catholic church to acknowledge the sensitivity of the phrase. Only in recent years has the famous Oberammergau passion play in southern Germany cut the words."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/jan...in-arizona
Reply
#3
Apparently it started with the Wall Street Journal:

"It is not at all clear that Palin intended to use the term "blood libel" in its full historical context. The phrase refers to a centuries-old anti-Semitic slander - the false charge that Jews use the blood of Christian children for rituals - that has been used as an excuse for persecution. The phrase was first used in connection with response to the Arizona shootings in an opinion piece in Monday's Wall Street Journal and has been picked up by others on the right."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/con...id=topnews
Reply
#4
I think the phrase offends worshipers of Baal... :biggrin:

Man. Some people will go to huge lengths to invoke Godwin's law.

It's important to also remember that this little diatribe is sourced from "The Guardian", an arch-liberal rag (Previously the Manchester Guardian) which is the anti-UPS Driver of newspapers... they always seem to turn to the left. (Grace.... it's always easier to get a source when the material is fresh.)
Reply
#5
The term is short and sweet and paints the right as victims. It's perfect.

Perfectly dreadful.
Reply
#6
Now that gunsight, bullseye and talk radio fell flat let's trump up "blood libel".
Reply
#7
cbelt3 wrote:
I think the phrase offends worshipers of Baal... :biggrin:

Man. Some people will go to huge lengths to invoke Godwin's law.

It's important to also remember that this little diatribe is sourced from "The Guardian", an arch-liberal rag (Previously the Manchester Guardian) which is the anti-UPS Driver of newspapers... they always seem to turn to the left. (Grace.... it's always easier to get a source when the material is fresh.)

What from the piece are you arguing with? Are you not aware of what it means and how it's been used, for THOUSANDS of years? You actually think that using the phrase "blood libel" in the context of an assassination attempt against a Jewish congresswoman is even remotely reasonable? I'd love the hear the excuse for that.
Reply
#8
Gabby Giffords gets shot (not to mention a Federal judge and five other people killed), and somehow it's all about our Sarah.

And "the Left" is as much to blame for that as she is, if not more: it was they who immediately started throwing the "gun-sight map" around like it mattered.

It's no wonder she is defensive.
Reply
#9
Used in 2006 by a writer named Tony Blankley:
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2006...0r/?page=1

It's an amazing use in that not only does it cheapen its true use/meaning -- it doesn't even make sense because "blood libel" refers to the perverted use of the sentence in the Bible: "His blood be on us and on our children". Who in the aftermath of this event has actually threatened anybody on the right OR the left with a curse which will tarnish them and all their ensuing generations?
Reply
#10
cbelt3 wrote: Man. Some people will go to huge lengths to invoke Godwin's law.

Blood libel was used for hundreds of years before Hitler showed up. It is the foundation upon which anti-Semitism is built.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)