[Texas2step]

I'm going to have to continue to disagree with your comments in these last two posts.

Mel Gibson is a Christian man, directing a movie about the Final hours of Jesus Christ.

He is not making a movie about the Holocaust, WWII, Nazi's, or specifically about Jewish people (though Jewish people play prominent roles in most of his movie, it's not a story about "the Jews").

He has never, ever made a statement that can be attributed as "denial" or "revisionist".

He has a father who has made some wild claims and has a wacky stream.

He has been attacked foundlessly and falsely by non-secular Jews who have an agenda and the attacks have been fierce and merciless.

Nothing he can say will change the minds nor tactics of Abe Foxman and his ilk.

Some posters on this web site have decided that they would just as soon attack him, even though the have no basis for doing so. Any answer he could give will not suffice. SO9 wants a one word answer (his words), claudis wants a specifically worded phrase (his words), and I have no idea what you want, but you've mentioned that you want specific numbers.

He was asked a question by Peggy Noonan and he answered it. In fact, we probably don't even have the whole of his answer as all we have read is an article by a 3rd person who quotes portions of the interview. The answer was more than satisfactory to most reasonable people who have read it, regardless.

He loves his father. His faith (and Jewish faith as well) calls for him to honor his father. You evidently want him to trash his father, something that he has no reason for doing as it would not gain him anything. Regardless of his fathers views, they are not Mel's. He has made no reference that would make us believe that Mel shares his fathers views of the Holocaust. It would be presumptuous of us to ask Mel to rebuke his fathers views as it has nothing to do with the movie Mel has made that has caused this entire uproar.

Yes, of course is a straight answer to a straight question. Why you cannot accept that shows that no answer he gives would be acceptable.

You mentioned that his answer reminded you of Bill Clinton. I fail to see the connection. Bill Clinton flat out lied to us. Period. It's undisputible. What part of Mel's answer is untrue? None of it.

[exmarine]

I agree with your last post completely and I COMPLETELY support Mel Gibson in his effort to send out the Gospel of Jesus Christ! May God richly bless Him and His efforts, and I believe God is behind it all the way! I believe this movie is boing to be EARTH SHATTERING in its impact, and that this may be the biggest revival in the history of hte United States of America. It may be America's last chance to repent before a final judgment.

[SJackson]

In fact, we probably don't even have the whole of his answer as all we have read is an article by a 3rd person who quotes portions of the interview.

The whole article is over here if anyone is concerned about the excerpting.

Is the Pope Catholic...Enough? as well at the NYT website.

As I've noted before, Hutton is a public figure in his own right, he's written two books, a newsletter, and speaks publicly. Personally, I think the NYT quotes are enough to identify him as a revisionist, and since you properly note his views aren't necessarily his son's, I'm not sure it makes sense to load the thread with comments from Hutton and his supporters.

[af_vet_1981]

He is not making a movie about the Holocaust, WWII, Nazi's, or specifically about Jewish people (though Jewish people play prominent roles in most of his movie, it's not a story about "the Jews").

It is a story about "the Jews" told from his perspective.

He has never, ever made a statement that can be attributed as "denial" or "revisionist". He has a father who has made some wild claims and has a wacky stream.

Would you characterize his father's claims as "denial" or "revisionist" ?

He was asked a question by Peggy Noonan and he answered it. In fact, we probably don't even have the whole of his answer as all we have read is an article by a 3rd person who quotes portions of the interview.

That is true. He may have said in the interview. I doubt it but I would be happy if he gave a number in the interview. I wouldn't understand why the number would be suppressed though.

His faith (and Jewish faith as well) calls for him to honor his father. You evidently want him to trash his father,

No. I want to hear him distance himself from what his father is reported to have said about the Jews. He apparently won't do that for fear of upsetting his father.

Yes, of course is a straight answer to a straight question. Why you cannot accept that shows that no answer he gives would be acceptable.

No, it was not a straight answer. He gave numbers for the Ukrainians who were killed but not the Jews. His father is reported to have said there were not that many Jews in Europe and it was a conspiracy to get Jews into the Middle East. He has said his father never lied to him. What are we supposed to draw from that answer ?

You mentioned that his answer reminded you of Bill Clinton. I fail to see the connection. Bill Clinton flat out lied to us. Period. It's indisputable. What part of Mel's answer is untrue? None of it.

Clinton argued a technical point of the meaning of the word "is" so as to not give all the information. I would like to know how many Jews Mel thinks were killed in the Holocaust. He knows Math. He proved that with the Ukrainians and the total number for World War Two. What he is doing makes no sense whatsoever.