The term “blood libel” has taken on a broad metaphorical meaning in public discourse. Although its historical origins were in theologically based false accusations against the Jews and the Jewish People,its current usage is far broader. I myself have used it to describe false accusations against the State of Israel by the Goldstone Report. There is nothing improper and certainly nothing anti-Semitic in Sarah Palin using the term to characterize what she reasonably believes are false accusations that her words or images may have caused a mentally disturbed individual to kill and maim. The fact that two of the victims are Jewish is utterly irrelevant to the propriety of using this widely used term.
Thank you for citing the Dershster! I think some on here will object that he is simply not Jewish enough to defend Palin, however.
It looks like the “liberal” Jew, Deshowits and the “conservative” Jew, Mark Levin strongly disagree with wtc911 and melas and Palin’s use of “blood libel”.
If wtc911 and melas don’t like Palin, so be it. It’s a free country, but they SHOULD NOT use democratic/MSM talking points to support their positions here on Free Republic. It’s disgusting. It’s offensive.