Posted on 07/31/2006 12:29:38 PM PDT by veronica
Edited on 07/31/2006 1:43:28 PM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
I was just in the middle of writing a long and tedious essay, about how to tell a real anti-Semite from a person who too-loudly rejects the charge of anti-Semitism, when a near-perfect real-life example came to hand. That bad actor and worse director Mel Gibson, pulled over for the alleged offense of speeding and the further alleged offense of speeding under the influence, decided that he needed to demand of the arresting officer whether he was or was not Jewish and that he furthermore needed to impart the information that all the world's wars are begun by those of Semitic extraction.
Call me thin-skinned if you must, but I think that this qualifies. I also think that the difference between the blood-alcohol levels—and indeed the speed limits—that occasioned the booking are insufficient to explain the expletives (as Gibson has since claimed in a typically self-pitying and verbose statement put out by his publicist). One does not abruptly decide, between the first and second vodka, or the ticks of the indicator of velocity, that the Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion are valid after all.
There's a lot to dislike about Gibson. He is given to furious tirades against homosexuals of the sort that make one wonder if he has some kind of subliminal or "unaddressed" problem. His vulgar and nasty movies, which also feature this prejudice, are additionally replete with the cheapest caricatures of the English.
M'kay. Not sure why you felt the need to remind me of that, but okay.
Always interesting when someone practices selective quotation for the purposes of mischaracterizing what was actually said.
You forgot my last sentence in your selective quote: "At least then we'd be able to keep an eye on what such people do, and we could more easily refute what they say." That's very nearly identical in intent to what you said.
Nothing. What is PC is hounding someone (and I'm not just referring to Gibson here) over and over because their speech is offensive.
I never see these kinds of posts when we come down on drunken Kennedys or stars who advocate the gay agenda.
Then you haven't been paying attention.
Am I being PC for denoucning anti-semitism? Fine, I'll take the label, considering the motives of those who are labelling me.
That's right. No one can disagree with you on any terms without having their motives not-so-slyly impuned as...what?...you put the name to it. Let's get your own prejudices out in the open.
Wonder what his wife has to say after he's read through the scripts for the female parts in movies.
The Nazis caused the Holocaust. In FR we generally, as a rule, DO NOT BLAME VICTIMS.
A large part of what's driving this outpouring of outrage is that people who had defended Gibson of accusations of anti-Semitism in the past now feel that he played them for saps and fools. Naturally, they're ticked off about that.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1674127/posts?page=395#395
The deputy became alarmed as Gibson's tirade escalated, and called ahead for a sergeant to meet them when they arrived at the station. When they arrived, a sergeant began videotaping Gibson, who noticed the camera and then said, "What the f*** do you think you're doing?"
Yeah, he's been houded over and over--for how many months now have we been denouncing him? Oh, right--a few days.
When it's anti-semitism, though, as soon as one person complains, they're "hounding" someone.
"I never see these kinds of posts when we come down on drunken Kennedys or stars who advocate the gay agenda." Then you haven't been paying attention.
Yes, how silly of me--those threads are clogged with posts saying "Hey, lay off the Kennedys" and "You know, we should just sit back and not talk about those pushing the gay agenda." Yeah, the place is overflowing with those.
That's right. No one can disagree with you on any terms without having their motives not-so-slyly impuned as...what?...you put the name to it. Let's get your own prejudices out in the open.
What a freakin crybaby--yeah, I said no one can disagree with me...which no one has stopped you from doing, LOL!
I don't have to put a name to what is so blindingly obvious to anyone with eyesight slightly better than Helen Keller's.
I'll just let the irony of you complaining about my selective quotation (not an issue when one click can bring anyone back to your entire original post) while YOU selectively quoted my post give us all a good laugh.
The above are your words, not mine. I responded to YOU by saying "then you haven't been paying attention." Yet you come back with the following?
Yes, how silly of me--those threads are clogged with posts saying "Hey, lay off the Kennedys" and "You know, we should just sit back and not talk about those pushing the gay agenda." Yeah, the place is overflowing with those.
You're nuts!
William Donahue is turning into a joke. He even appeared on the Opie and Anthony radio show to prove that he had "forgiven them"!!!!
"Insurgents"? I call them TERRORISTS. People who pretend they are distributing candy to children and then blow them up are TERRORISTS. The word "insurgents" gives them a dignity which they do not deserve.
I am happy to agree that anyone using such tactics should be blown into the smallest possible pieces. Of course, they often do that for themselves.
What I was referring to are those who, quite contrary to the experience of all counter-insurgency history, believe that we would be more effective against the terrorists if we were much more ruthless against the general population. The problem is that in insurgent and counter-insurgent warfare the field of battle, and the prize, is indeed the hearts and minds of the population. Initiating our own indiscriminate counter-terror would be satisfying in some ways, but quite undoubtedly counter-productive in the long run.
Insurgent is a general term referring to who a group is fighting against. Terrorist refers to particular tactics used by some insurgents.
so, "Jew hating" is ok and should get the stamp of approval?
No. I know it's hard for many around here to walk and chew gum at the same time, but it really is possible to despise political correctness without tilting over the edge to say bigotry of any kind is OK.
I consider the Iraqi "insurgents" to be terrorists. Period.
What Gibson said was bigotry. If he had spouted the "N" word what would you reaction have been? That is a really brilliant move: you are stopped for drunken driving and you insult the ethnicity of the police officer - way to go, Mel. That will really make sure he doesn't haul your tush to jail.
John 8:7 If any one of you is without sin, let him be the first to throw a stone.
Perhaps we are not in a position to judge the evil in men's hearts.
John 8:7 If any one of you is without sin, let him be the first to throw a stone.
Perhaps we are not in a position to judge the evil in men's hearts.
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.