"The Jews" got upset at Gibson's portrayal of them in the film, because it
perpetuates what is at best a myth and at worst a slander that's been going
on for 2000 years. Do yourself a favour and read James Carroll's
"Constantine's Sword" a book that shows just how much "the Jews" owe to
Constantine and the Nicean Creed that was born under his jurisdiction.
The Catholic Church is now beginning to openly display some sort of
appreciation of Chrisianity's Jewish roots. But at the time, Constantine
and his folks were in the business of turning Judaism - the religion of
Jesus (or Yehoshua) - upside down; whatever "the Jews" did, the early
church did the opposite. In other words, they made a decision to promote
early Christianity based on a hatred of "the other" - "the Jews").
It's gotten to the point now, or should I say, again, that every criticism
of these slanders against "the Jews" is portrayed by people like you - and
you can fill in the blanks here - as "smears." But of course "smearing"
"the Jews" is ok, because, well... they deserve it, right?
Gotta go now; just going into my underground bunker to take stock of the
millions of gold bars we've accumulated, and to find out how many Christian
babies we need in order to bake our next year's batch of matzoh... the same
matzoh that Jesus used to eat...
P.
At 05:29 AM 11/12/2006 -0800, you wrote:
--- Jones Beene <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[**Mel Gibson's anti-Semitic rant caused
uproar...because of this very lame defense... that
criticism for 'The Passion Of The Christ' was the real
problem.
In all his hero-themed movies...even Mad Max, the
Patriot, Braveheart, and so on - he is playing the
hero of a group who were wronged by a dominating
majority. There are surely lots of Brits who didn't
like the inferences... **]
[**but Mel didn't rant on the many Brits who
criticized that movie.
That says volumes about this silly defense of having
been "smeared". Where is this so-called smear, other
than in a racist (juvenile) mentality?**]
There was an unrelenting campaign, lasting for months,
by the ADL and other Jewish organizations to paint the
movie, and, therefore, Gibson, as anti-semitic. You
can go to any search engine and find references.
Naturally, the smear included mention of his father's
dislike of Jews.
Yet you pretend that the criticisms by Brits of
Braveheart, if they really exist, are comparable to
the shit that Jews threw at Gibson for months, simply
because he had the gall to make a movie about the
founder of his religion.
His rant against Jews is quite understandable given
their smears against him.
[**...some of this paternal garbage has got
to rub off on any kid - but it is no excuse at age 50
to have not "gotten over it".**]
No doubt you have never met Gibson and can only guess
about the kind of man he is and about how he was
formed. Certainly, nobody completely 'gets over' the
experiences of childhood, good or bad, but not getting
over it isn't 'juvenile' and it is ludicrous to say
that it is.
You decided to casually smear Gibson by referring to
him as juvenile, and now try to justify it by further
smearing him as a child of his father, somewhat like
the situation in Stalinist Russia, where the children
of an 'enemy of the people' were treated like
second-class citizens, if they themselves didn't end
up in the gulag.
[**and owe most of your considerable wealth and
success to the very Jewish-named businessmen who
control some of the movie industry...**]
It's obvious that Gibson owes his wealth and success
to his own abilities.
By the way, what is it with 'Jewish-named' and
'control some'? What a strange view of reality you
seem to have. Why not just say that Jews control the
movie industry? Even Jews say it.
____________________________________________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail.
http://new.mail.yahoo.com
