Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Blood libel, from Wikipedia...

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU
 
ZombieHorde Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-12-11 09:07 AM
Original message
Blood libel, from Wikipedia...
Blood libel (also blood accusation) refers to a false accusation or claim that religious minorities, almost always Jews, murder children to use their blood in certain aspects of their religious rituals and holidays. Historically, these claims havealongside those of well poisoning and host desecrationbeen a major theme in European persecution of Jews.

The libels typically allege that Jews require human blood for the baking of matzos for Passover. The accusations often assert that the blood of Christian children is especially coveted, and historically blood libel claims have often been made to account for otherwise unexplained deaths of children. In some cases, the alleged victim of human sacrifice has become venerated as a martyr, a holy figure around whom a martyr cult might arise. A few of these have been even canonized as saints.

In Jewish lore, blood libels were the impetus for the creation in the 16th century of the Golem of Prague by Rabbi Judah Loew ben Bezalel. Many popes have either directly or indirectly condemned the blood accusation, and no pope has ever sanctioned it. These libels have persisted among some segments of Christians to the present time, and recently Muslims as well.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blood_libel

The phrase, "blood libel," seems like a really strange choice when we consider Loughner's main target was Jewish. Is Palin using this phrase as a jab, or is she just being weirdly dramatic?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
SteppingRazor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-12-11 09:12 AM
Response to Original message
1. I'm sure she's just being weirdly -- and unbelievably stupidly -- dramatic.
There's no way she knew what she was saying. She still has presidential ambitions, after all. Before this speech, even after all the pushback against her over her crosshairs map, I still believed she was capable of winning the presidential primary in 2012 before being crushed in the general election. Now, I don't even think she can do that. We're watching the complete implosion of one of the guiding forces of the GOP. It'd be a grand thing to see if it wasn't for the horrifying underlying causes. As it is, it's just damned disgusting.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Raven Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-12-11 09:23 AM
Response to Original message
2. Why would you use a phrase like that if you didn't know its meaning?
Are these people that stupid? Did they think blood libel had something to do with the Hatfields and McCoys?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KeepItReal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-12-11 09:36 AM
Response to Reply #2
5. You dont make up a term like "blood libel" out of the blue
Never heard of the phrase until now.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
woodsprite Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-12-11 09:47 AM
Response to Reply #5
8. I heard her say that and wasn't sure what it meant.
I was wondering if was a term that her church used in some of their teachings.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KeepItReal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-12-11 09:55 AM
Response to Reply #8
10. Either she or someone in her camp *knows* that phrase's meaning
It was not used by accident.

Someone may have been trying to pull a Frank Lutz "Death Panel" type of phrasing and we can see the results.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rosa Luxemburg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-12-11 08:20 PM
Response to Reply #10
23. she didn't know the names of any newspapers
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DeschutesRiver Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-12-11 10:58 AM
Response to Reply #5
16. neither had I in 52 years. No, some bimbo from Wasilla didn't say it by accident.
Why on earth would she use such a comparison?

Why on earth does this vapid woman think everything is about her? She is beyond offensive, and has just punched a deeper hole in her sinking boat.

And why is she doing this on video? Oh, right - probably afraid someone is coming after her and is in hiding.

Coward. Always with the whining about how something impacts her, and that everything is always someone else's fault. She won't squirm out of this one by blaming the media, or blaming someone else for doing similar things, which is one of the dumbest things she did on that video. Everyone has done this...yeah, there are lots of crimes that many people commit, Sarah, and only some have to pay for them. Hope you are one of the ones who gets "caught" inciting this stuff via multiple lawsuits, that empty your bank accounts to pennies and blight your future political prospects.

You'll still have Sarah Palin's Alaska to go home to once the courts are done with you. Buh. Bye.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hutzpa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-12-11 10:26 AM
Response to Reply #2
15. Hey, we are talking about Palin here
what do you expect? It's the same camp that said those were not crossairs but surveyor's symbols.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ZombieHorde Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-12-11 03:44 PM
Response to Reply #2
21. You're right, it is a weird phrase to "innocently use."
Hard to tell what is really going on in her head, what was her goal when she used that phrase?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
vaberella Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-12-11 09:33 AM
Response to Original message
3. I went as far as to her being anti-semetic.
She's now the victim in place of the "Jew". Her statements were out of whack and this whole "blood libel" thing is out of the ordinary by any standards.

The woman is always grandstanding and I find this to be intentionally disturbing. There is no show of discretion from her.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
onenote Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-12-11 09:36 AM
Response to Reply #3
4. even more offensive that she paints herself as the victim of a blood libel
given the fact that Gabby is Jewish.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kestrel91316 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-12-11 10:04 AM
Response to Reply #4
12. Exactly. +1 000 000 000
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
vaberella Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-12-11 11:10 AM
Response to Reply #4
19. Exactly. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
harun Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-12-11 11:41 AM
Response to Reply #4
20. She's trying to say she is "the real Jew".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
riverwalker Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-12-11 09:37 AM
Response to Original message
6. blowing the dog whistle
She knows what it means. Her white supremacist, neo-nazi brain dead neanderthal followers know what it means, it's in their literature. She's blowing the dog whistle to her extremists to rally round.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
niceypoo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-12-11 09:39 AM
Response to Original message
7. Sarah the victim
Why did you immediately remove the 'map' from your website Sarah?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Backlash Cometh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-12-11 09:51 AM
Response to Original message
9. Weirdly dramatic.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ZombieHorde Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-12-11 09:33 PM
Response to Reply #9
24. I hope so, but I wonder... nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
era veteran Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-12-11 10:01 AM
Response to Original message
11. My wife & I knew what that meant, Ms era vet-
shrieked when she heard that. Thought it was some of the crap in the Protocols of the elders...etc. If she is ignorant of the phrase, it's just her regular hate. She must have handlers to write for her. Are all of them as stupid as she is? IF they/ her knew what that meant it would be a new low in politics in our country. Appalling
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flpoljunkie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-12-11 10:19 AM
Response to Original message
13. And, yet the media ignores it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
onenote Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-12-11 10:23 AM
Response to Reply #13
14. actually, they are beginning to pick up on it
Its already been flagged as a topic of discussion on Washingtonpost.com and I wouldn't be surprised to see it start gaining further attention.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flpoljunkie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-12-11 11:08 AM
Response to Reply #14
17. Encouraging. Thanks!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
vaberella Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-12-11 11:10 AM
Response to Reply #13
18. No they're on it. So it's good. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nemo137 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-12-11 08:18 PM
Response to Original message
22. "The white man is the Jew of liberal fascism."
From Jonah Goldberg's exercise in obfuscation of the same name: http://www.nationalreview.com/liberal-fascism/203255/wh...

They're really into this shit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
laylah Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-13-11 06:28 AM
Response to Original message
25. I sent this link to my
right-winged nephew, along with others. He responded with the link stating Dershowitz is okay with Palin's wording. I, actually, was stunned. :cry:

Jenn
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ZombieHorde Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-13-11 02:48 PM
Response to Reply #25
26. I guess Palin can do no wrong according to some. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed Apr 23rd 2014, 11:39 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC