Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

On "blood libel"

Go down

On "blood libel" Empty On "blood libel"

Post  Brad Fri Jan 14, 2011 11:58 am

Following is an essay I saw on the Atlanta Freethinkers board describing one person's understanding - somebody named Fred or Federico - of the term "blood libel" as recently so very tactfully employed by our national idiot, Ms. Palin.
I knew of some of the history mentioned, but not all. I've made bold a couple of interesting bits, the last for humor's sake. Anyone care to comment on the essay's historical accuracy or otherwise?

Dear Friends,
Sometimes a crude expression becomes entirely appropriate to an occasion ˆ that's part of the miracle of language. Sarah Palin has stuck her foot in her mouth ˆ well, not one foot, but both feet. I have just watched a video that she released. A lot of it was "preachy" and quite boring, but I suffered her all the way to the end.
One foot that she put into her mouth was the use of the term "blood libel" to describe the media's "attack" against her, a sure sign that she never studied history. She never studied anything, because during the 2008 campaign, she couldn't respond to a question about the Supreme Court, nor did she have any idea what the "Bush Doctrine" was when her interviewer asked her about it. Along with naming herself a victim of "blood libel" by the media, she portrayed herself to be the victim of the massacre in Arizona ˆ apparently more so than those who were actually shot, at least in terms of the relative time she devoted to them and to herself during her video presentation. Poor Sarah. I mean, what are a few bullets aimed at other people, when she is the victim of "blood libel" from the media?
The persecution of Jews in Christian Europe was based on the belief (call it "faith") that the Jews had murdered Jesus, and the guilt for the crime had been inherited by subsequent generations. The Catholic Church taught for centuries that all Jews who are currently living are responsible for Jesus' death. They further taught that God has rejected Jews because they murdered Jesus. From the very beginnings of organized Christianity, there are records of this. For example, in the 3rd century: "The blood of Jesus falls not only on the Jews of that time, but on all generations of Jews up to the end of the world."
Because the Jews committed such a crime, and carried such tribal guilt, they were blamed for many other things. During the Black Death (1347 - 1352) they were accused of poisoning the water wells, never mind that they themselves were dying from the plague. In some places, e.g., Strasbourg, they were thrown alive into pits filled with burning logs.
A rumor began in the 1100s that Jews kidnapped Christian boys and took them to a synagogue to be circumcised and tortured, and finally, crowned with thorns and nailed to a cross. The Jews caught the blood dripping from the genitals and wounds from the hands and feet. They used this blood to make matzo bread for their religious celebrations. After some time on the cross, the Jews thrust a sword through the boy's heart and laid him down and began a ritual of black magic. This rumor lasted for centuries. It was called "blood libel." Some alleged victims were even canonized and made saints. Hundreds and hundreds of Jews were accused of "blood libel" through the centuries, tortured into confessions, and then executed. The Church did not officially reverse this belief in the guilt of the Jews until the Second Vatican Council in 1965. Even so, relations between the Vatican and Israel remain strained to this day.
Remarkably, Glenn Beck blamed the Jews for Jesus' death on his Fox News program. And Beck is not even Catholic ˆ he is of the Mormon cult. He was making extended remarks about religion in which he attacked such concepts as social justice and liberation theology (and Jeremiah Wright) as being Marxist, all of which present the poor as victims of injustice. Beck said:
"This is kind of complex, because Jesus did identify with the victims. But Jesus was not a victim. He was a conqueror .... Jesus conquered death .... If he was a victim, then Jesus would've come back from the dead and made the Jews pay for what they did." (I guess, kind of like throwing living Jews into pits of burning logs.)
Of course, Roman soldiers had nothing to do with the death of Jesus, even though one of them thrust a sword into Jesus' side. Anyway, that's the deal, if you can make any sense of it, according to the eminent theologian and historian Glenn Beck.
Sarah Palin dug herself into a hole, and as the metaphor goes, she only dug it deeper. She had targeted Gabrielle Giffords in the crosshairs of a gun sight. She used the words "Don't retreat. Reload and take aim." At the time, Giffords was concerned and said, "The thing is, the way that she has it depicted ˆ the crosshairs of a gun sight over our district ˆ when people do that, they've got to realize that there are consequences for that action." Amen. Then along came assassin Jared Loughner. Of course, he's mentally ill and susceptible to "voices." But Sheriff Clarence Dupnik laid it squarely on the shoulders of our overheated political rhetoric. He has a point. A South Carolina gun company is advertising an assault rifle that honors Congressman Joe Wilson's shouted interruption of President Obama's State of the Union address: "You Lie!" Yes, "You Lie" is engraved on the rifle. The announcement reads: "Palmetto State Armory would like to honor our esteemed congressman Joe Wilson with the release of our new 'You Lie' AR-15 assault rifle. Only 999 of these will be produced, get yours before they are gone!"
It's axiomatic in American politics that one cannot win public office if the all powerful Zionist lobby is in opposition to a candidate. Zionist reaction to Palin was swift:
J Street, a liberal Jewish organization: "When Governor Palin learns that many Jews are pained by and take offense at the use of the term, we are sure that she will choose to retract her comment, apologize and make a less inflammatory choice of words."
Jewish Funds for Justice: "According to Ms. Palin's logic, Rep. Giffords' statement was a blood libel against the Fox News host. The fact that Rep. Giffords is Jewish and Ms. Palin is Christian makes the accusation even more grotesque."
Jewish Anti-Defamation League: "... we wish that Palin had used another phrase, instead of one so fraught with pain in Jewish history."
National Jewish Democratic Council: "This is of course a particularly heinous term for American Jews, given that the repeated fiction of blood libels are directly responsible for the murder of so many Jews across centuries ˆ and given that blood libels are so directly intertwined with deeply ingrained anti-Semitism around the globe, even today."
Han Sheinkopf, Jewish political consultant: "This will forever link her to the events in Tucson. It deepens the hole she's already dug for herself .... It's absolutely inappropriate."
Of course, many gentiles, including all the political establishment, will sympathize with the Jewish umbrage. Sarah Palin has narrowed her following to a smaller base. However loud it may be, it has grown smaller.
But I mentioned two feet in her mouth. The other foot was Palin's spending so much time defending herself and portraying herself as the victim in all this. That does not sit well with most of us. Even Speaker John Boehner, in the House session today, focused on the tragedy of the shooting victims, and not on himself. He did so with his habitual sobbing, but at least he was sobbing about others, not about himself.
A few weeks ago I watched a YouTube video from Sarah Palin's Alaska. It was of a caribou that had wandered up a hill and then stood there, curiously watching Sarah Palin and her film crew below. It just stood there, looking, while Palin raised her rifle with its scope, and fired. Then the video showed the caribou dropping dead. "Mama Grizzly?" I don't think so. It reminded me of somebody I know in Texas who went deer hunting. Of all things, he found a young buck entangled in a wire fence and shot it. I think Palin's caribou was probably a tame animal in a park that did not understand it was about to be sacrificed for somebody's political ambition.
Of course, Sarah Palin is not the only politician who never studied history. Even though George Bush has a "degree" in history, he referred to our "war against terrorism" as a crusade. He was unaware of the historical weight of that word. The Holy Crusades against the Islamic world have not been forgotten by Muslims, even though George Bush was ignorant of it.
Sarah Palin had better devote the next couple of years to constant apologies and proclamations of her undying love and devotion to the holy state of Israel. On the other hand, Eretz Israel is now so complete, with the Occupied Territories and Jerusalem, that the Rapture may come before 2012, and her campaign efforts will become a moot issue. As an Assembly of God Church member, and one who has been protected from witchcraft by an African preacher, Palin will be lifted into Heaven when the Rapture comes, and she will put presidential ambitions behind her.
Looking to that time, I become curious. Will Sarah Palin walk by foot on streets paved with gold? Or will she avail herself of the wings of an angel and fly around listening to the godly strains of a harp. And that invites other questions. If Sarah flies with the wings of an angel, are there boundaries beyond which God will forbid her to fly? And will her wings depend on an actual atmosphere, or will they flap on some kind of spiritual substance? As an atheist, I acknowledge that my future of nothingness looks bleak by comparison.

Posts : 51
Join date : 2009-09-09
Location : traveling

Back to top Go down

Back to top

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum