Posted on 01/12/2011 10:51:31 AM PST by markomalley
Das OffenJuden are kvetching in unison.
;-(
If you think you own the language let's see your receipt for it. As you yourself admit it is part of the English parlance. ie it has been a common figure of speech for centuries.
Yes I saw Jonah on Fox today. He was on with that resident Dummie Toady.
He let rip and I found myself saying YES JONAH. the response from the Toady was well classic. She was so tongue tied by Jonah and finally she came up with some pathetic Dum talking point. Even Megyn (I think) was disgusted by her response.
That's PRE CHRISTIAN.
The next literary reference concerned a Jew who accused Christians of killing Jewish children to use their blood in making Communion wafers.
Just so you know it has a really precise historic origin!
You can find the guy's reference by reading around through the several other threads on this topic.
I still think it's something that probably dates back before Judaism.
The idea undoubtedly draws on the original propaganda which goes "Remember, in all cases, people who are strangers ~ not of our kind ~ nor our nation ~ simply don't love their children like we do. Right? And if they don't love their own children imagine what they think of ours ~ just sheep for the slaughter".
Wait until Jonah finds out the Post is misquoting him. He’ll bring down fire from Heaven on their tails.
What happened, I missed that. No wonder he was Po’d
Missed this post.
Loved it!
Brilliant.
Yep. That's what I said in my post you replied to: "Blood libel, OTOH, has a very precise, historical definition. Blood libel historically has to do with claims of Jews, and later Christians and others, using a child's blood for their own religious beliefs. The Romans also accused Christians of using a child's blood in their communion ceremony.
But that's what I meant when I wrote the term's meaning has been deluded over time, and now often means something different. It was this contemporary use that Sarah Palin took advantage of.
Now that right there makes a truly major change in what you wanted to say.
The accusation of the practice derives from an older piece of propaganda that the enemy nation's adults don't love their children like we do ~ therefore, imagine how brutal they'll be to our kids ~ so fight for king, country and the chillun'.
This has gotta' go back to probably the last Interglacial over 100,000 years ago.
Hansel and Gretle go into the woods and are found by the wicked witch who wants to bake them into cookies.
That gets us into the area of the more modern definition ~ to wit, the Leftwingtards are telling us that Sarah Palin is so evil she would act through a madman to kill a 9 year old little girl just to make a political point.
It's a blood libel on her to make that charge.
It also invites true believers on the other side to murder Sarah!
My point was the "Jewish" part isn't all that precise and is not necessary to an understanding of the practice of using "blood libel".
I think we should turn our attention to what should be done to people who use that particular libel?
Maybe we should punish them the same way we do others who fire up a mob to incite them to murder.
If you’d like to be on or off, please FR mail me.
..................
Palin knows that much of the emotion directed against her is owing to her choice NOT to abort her Down’s Syndrome child. It does not help her cause that the Republican Party was the pro-abortion party up to the time of Reagan. Even so, it is significant that the Presidential wives: Nancy Reagan, Barbara Bush, and Laura Bush are all pro-choice. Even as the pro-life cause has begun to win over public opinion, the Republican elite continue to give no more than lip service to the cause. The new Speaker is the one who has been most forthright in his support of the pro-life cause. It is interesting that the candidates favored by the Establishment, Daniels and Romney, are uninterested to advancing the cause.
As you well know, there is a kind of Jew who hates Christians who support Israel, because they do so for theological reasons. Fact is that evangelical Christians have always been supporters of Jews and Zionism, as Barbara Tuchman has told us, ever since Cromwell allowed the Jews to return to English. It was this impulse that produced the Balfour Declaration.
1) Negative Event Occurs.
2) Immediately blame Sarah Palin.
3) Events unfold showing Sarah Palin not at fault, or even involved.
4) Blame Sarah Palin harder.
5) IF SARAH PALIN DOES NOT RESPOND: Declare her out-of-touch and non-Presidential.
CHRONOLOGY OF ANY EVENT:
1) Negative Event Occurs.
2) Immediately blame Sarah Palin.
3) Events unfold showing Sarah Palin not at fault, or even involved.
4) Blame Sarah Palin harder.
5) IF SARAH PALIN DOES NOT RESPOND: Declare her out-of-touch and non-Presidential.
6) IF SARAH PALIN RESPONDS MILDLY: Declare her wishy-washy and incapable of leadership.
7) IF SARAH PALIN RESPONDS FORCEFULLY: Declare her too provocative and incendiary.
Don’t believe I’ve heard/read anything the Gov say that wasn’t supportive our our Israeli allies either.
Heard something on the radio this morning about the Jewish Anti-Defamation League’s ‘concern’ over Sara Palin’s use of the term “Blood libel”; they decry the use of a term so “fraught with pain”. I got to thinking and well, WIKIPEDIA defines “Blood libel” (or Blood Accusation) as a “…false accusation or claim that religious minorities, usually Jews, murder children to use their blood in certain aspects of their religious rituals and holidays.”
The Liberals (or Progressives) have made a false accusation or claim that Conservatives in general and Sara Palin in particular murdered (or caused to be murdered) 6 people (including one 9 year old girl) in Tucson, AZ on January 8th. Information that has been coming to light indicates that the shooter was insane; he was NOT a Liberal or a Conservative – he did not listen to Talk Radio (of ANY KIND), he did not listen to Television or pay any attention to the Internet. His closest “friends” and associates all reveal a socially inept loner who asked questions “that made no sense” AND YET Liberal Blggers, Pundits, and their Sychophants in the Major News Media INSIST on trying to say it (the spilling of the “Blood” of these ‘innocents’) was all Sara Palin’s fault (well, “mostly” her fault; they also want to reserve some blame for the Tea Party Movement too).
I’m sorry if the term “Blood Libel” hurts or offends the Jewish Anti-Defamation League’s Sense of Propriety but I think the term (as “UGLY” as it is) Fits! The Liberals are attempting to Blame Sara and the Tea Party Movement for the killing of these innocent people (to include one Child) when the ONLY one to blame has been identified. The Blame can ONLY be laid at the feet of one psychotic, deranged murderer! The term “Blook libel” is ACCURATE and it is APPROPRIATE and it is the TRUTH!
LEARN TO LIVE WITH IT!!!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.