[Qwinn]

He has stated outright, on dozens of occassions, that he's not an anti-semite. Many Jews he knows personally have come forward and said he has never behaved in such a manner his entire life. He has, COUNTLESS times, stated outright that anti-semitism is absolutely and utterly against the precepts of his faith.

But that's not enough? You require that he publically condemn his own father?

I can tell you one thing. My father could have done the nastiest, most repugnant thing in the world, and you could go pound sand for the rest of your life before you'd ever bully me into getting up in public and condemn him.

You're demanding that he create a rift with his father, to attack him in public. By stating his outright opposition to anti-semitism in no uncertain terms, he's satisfied any legitimate requirements you can make of him. Period.

Qwinn

[BlazingArizona]

You're demanding that he create a rift with his father, to attack him in public. By stating his outright opposition to anti-semitism in no uncertain terms, he's satisfied any legitimate requirements you can make of him. Period.

No, only that Mel make it plain how his IDEAS on Jewry differ from those of Hutton. If he has really done that, I'm satisfied.

[dwills]

there's a lot of things my father could do that would provoke my public condemnation (thankfully he hasn't), but I agree that no senile ranting at age 85 would do it

those using this 'wedge issue' between the gibson need to conisder the context: even hutton isn't clinically senile, bigots born that long ago can probably only be cured by the grave