Posted on 08/05/2006 2:06:47 PM PDT by Hal1950
The Talmud famously says that a man is known in three ways. What he says when he is drunk, what he says when he is angry, and what he spends his money on. On all three counts, it appears that Mel Gibson has sadly shown his true colours.
Upon getting arrested for drunk driving, in his inebriated state, he allegedly said something to the effect that "f---ing Jews are responsible for all the world's wars." In his anger, he asked the arresting deputy if he himself was Jewish. And, of course, he spent $25 million (U.S.) of his own money arguing that the Jews killed Jesus. Well, there you have it. Drink, anger, and money all lead Gibson to alleged acts of anti-Semitism.
Those of us who strongly opposed The Passion of the Christ as defamatory of Jews should feel no sense of vindication now that Gibson has shown what he really thinks of Jews. On the contrary, this story is a tragedy all around. Who would have thought that in Hollywood of all places there could be personalities so filled with Jew-hatred? The tragedy is compounded by the fact that Gibson largely established his career in the role of a white detective who has the warmest possible relationship with his black partner in the Lethal Weapon movies. Turns out that all along good ol' Mel was a bigot.
Not that we should have been all that surprised, given the Holocaust-denying remarks Mel's father has always made publicly, with Mel saying in his defence, "My father never lied to me."
Still, there are a number of things to be learned from this sad event. First, all those who defended The Passion of the Christ as a benign movie about the death of Jesus ought to do some real soul-searching. This defamatory movie repeated the oldest and most destructive lie ever told, that the Jews killed god. Millions of Jews throughout history have been murdered over this lie. And yet, when a modern movie appeared portraying the Jews as bloodthirsty and desperate to see a dead Jesus, it became one of the biggest box office successes of all time.
Worse, so many of our evangelical brothers and sisters promoted the movie as a modern Christian triumph. Churches that normally love and support Israel rushed to show the movie to their flocks, as if doing so were a sacrament. They defended Gibson especially as having made a film that promoted Christianity rather than defamed Jews.
I hope that they will now reconsider their attitude toward the film and stop showing it at churches, as it perpetuates the stereotype of Jews as perfidious Judases.
Likewise, I especially hope that the many Jewish conservatives who defended Gibson and even heavily promoted the movie will rethink their support.
I debated many of my colleagues on television, including my friends Michael Medved and Rabbi Daniel Lapin. I hope they, too, will now reconsider their inexplicable action of highlighting a film that was a grotesque distortion of the true historical record of how Jesus died. I do not write these lines to gloat or say "I told you so."
I have deep respect for both Medved and Lapin and have probably been wrong about far more things than they. Rather, I write this because the idea that committed Jews could have become defenders of Gibson's big-screen hate fest was always a shock and caused a deep and unnecessary division in the Jewish community.
However, Mel Gibson has now twice apologized, and I am a great believer in apologies. So his apologies ought to be accepted, even though he was not courageous enough to apologize to the Jewish community directly. For those who would say that his apology was not even sincere, I would answer that apologies should not be examined as to their sincerity. Rather, if a man apologizes, he should be taken at his word.
I honestly hope that Gibson will find the healing that his body needs from alcoholism and that his soul needs from bigotry. I honestly hold no ill will toward him. He is clearly a troubled man. Why someone that successful would need to hate a whole group for no reason is something that we will probably never understand. And I pity him, just as I pity any man whose inexplicable hatred compromises his humanity.
Having said this, it is proper that Gibson's apology be coupled with action. He should make it up to the Jewish community by re-releasing The Passion of the Christ with an important disclaimer at the very beginning of the film detailing the undisputed historical fact that the Romans killed Jesus, and that any of the Jewish leadership, like Caiaphas the High Priest, who called for Jesus' death were all in the employ of Rome, and indeed served as the Roman police enforcers in Judea.
Because claiming to love Jesus and simultaneously hating Jews are deeply contradictory, since Jesus was not a Catholic or a Christian, but a Jew.
Finally, a word to Gibson: I have long been impressed by your devotion to your father, especially since he appears to have a screw loose. Even so, you stuck by him. But the Commandment that instructs us to honour our parents does not mean that we ought to honour their bigotry. On the contrary, we honour our parents by becoming better people than they and righting their wrongs.
Rabbi Boteach is a talk show host, the author of 15 books and a syndicated columnist.
Boteach has been known to make some pretty horrendous, scurrillous anti-Catholic hate-speech himself. I guess it takes one to know one. Among other things, Boteach unrepentently continues to repeat the lie that Pius XII was in part responsible for the Holocaust because he didn't prevent the Holocaust. And, as is clear from the article, he calumniated Gibson's film by falsely accusing the film of anti-semitism.
Boteach is far worse than Gibson because he's unrepentently filled with hatred for Christians--and he gets to pick which ones--he's the arbiter. It would take a lot to match Boteach's Chutzpah in the art of condescension toward Christians.
If Hollywood did
give the public what it wants
right now they should take
the media pair
Tom Cruise and Mel Gibson and
a really big jar,
put them both inside
and shake up the jar real hard
then film Mel and Tom
fighting to the death.
Then, what the hell, the winner
will be forgiven!
Why should Mel Gibson give a fvck what "these people" think of him?
"These people" who are so critical of HIM can never seem to bring themselves to criticize "Shake" Nasrallah whose avowed goal is to obliterate all Jews - they can't even bring themselves to call him a Terrorist!
This one's easy. To make amends, mel gibson can just stfu already.
We do not know if Mel wrote or even thought those apologies. The second one was to us, the Jewish people. Since it was so personal, I think I will forgive him when he does the things he must to prove he wrote and meant the apology. And not before.
Without people who felt as he does, Hitler would have been thrown out of power. Mel's beliefs can be dangerous. He is in a position to persuade.
I think you are right, sad to say.
The Council of Foreign Relations caused "all wars?" Are you serious? They didn't begin until 1921, by the way. How did they manage to start WW I?
Hang on to your wallet, Mel.
It's clear Mel has "issues" - but he has acknowledged he has a problem and seems to be trying to do something about it. On the other hand, many of those who are pilloring him do far more damage to Jews - such as supporting the enemies of the Jews, bearing false witness against Jews, etc. They are more "refined" in their language, but more harmful in the long run.
Some examples? The media who accept at face value the propaganda of Hizb'Allah and run puff pieces on Nasrallah; the Hollywood leftists; the Democrat Congresspeople, academics, and diplomats who make excuses for anti-Semitic dictators and sneak anti-Semitic canards into their conversation. Since when have these people ever admitted they have a "problem"?
These people are smug, sanctimonious hypocrites. That they should be piling on Mel Gibson is nauseating. They occupy a far lower place in the hierarchy of sinners than Mel Gibson.
Was that comment in this article posted here?
I tend to read fast and admittedly I often miss a few things. It is a flaw that I continue to work on. I can only get better.
If, on the other hand, you are contending that "The Passion of the Christ" was a work designed solely to criticize Jews for profit, then you might consider taking a number while you wait for your case to be dealt with by historians and generations to come.
Meanwhile, you also might consider actually reading what the Gospels have to say about such matters, and then you can engage yourself in an assault mission against the authors of those antisemitic versions of historical occasions which were originally reported by...get ready....Jews!
Mel Gibson may be among the lowest of men in the history of the world. Indeed, still, to my knowledge he has not been busy lobbing ordnance into the backyards and neighborhoods of Israeli citizens indiscriminately.
Get a grip.
Making a movie, is not ordinarily an indictable offense.
Whatever Gibson's beliefs are, or true nature is, he has I read apologized for his rantings.
Woefully, we can't honestly say the same for the German populace at large, or others who were actively complicit in one of the greatest crimes against humanity of all time.
Perhaps I'll later consider chastising America for the arguable support and propping up of despotic regimes. Those regimes which are currently engaged in crimes against humanity. Engaged with impunity, and tolerated solely because they have their hands on the spigots of a natural resource which propels our economy,(and the world's) and is largely responsible for the advent of virtually all modern technologies.
Mel Gibson has sought redemption for sins that probably never should have been made public.
Would you have your words strewn about the Internet each time that you have misspoken?
Didn't Hitlery use the term "F_____ Jew" in public? I seem to recall that from the dark days of slick's presidency.
Yeah but thats ok. She is a democrat.
Notice that I completely ignored it. It's a cheap shot that the author thinks will get people mad. Unfortunately it works very well on FR. I just ignore such things.
From what I can gather, there aren't any normal people in Hollywood, but Hollywood doesn't have the monopoly on jerks. Just look at the trolls we get here :)
He's the one who apologized.
I'm just saying that no verbal apology is going to work.
A nutty Muslim shoots six people in that Seattle Jewish Center and all anoyone seem to rant and rave about is what an actor "said". The MSM still has their priorities straight!! Sickening.
Sorry... no soul searching here.
Don't think it was the Amish that plotted with Judas and Caiaphas to bring Jesus in for questioning.
All Catholics that I know never looked upon the Jewish faithful to place blame of the death of Jesus. He went on his own accord.
The sentence that tries to show that blame was thrust upon the Jews shows absolute ignorance of Christ's redemptive act, and ignorance of the Gospels. The author needs to get a grip.
Enough already.
I don't subscribe to the "what you say when you're drunk is how you really feel" line.
Here's why-
When someone is drunk, they often say what comes to their mind at the moment, and one loses the sense of right and wrong that they normally have. If the premise were true (that drunken rants are what one really feels) then every drunken college guy in America really is in love with that stripper they took home last night.
Why is this still news? Who cares what an ACTOR thinks??
I gotta laugh my @ss off at the notion of Michael Jackson's spiritual advisor making offering advice to anyone on how to "make amends."
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.