Monday, January 17, 2011

What’s Wrong With Sarah Palin Using the Term Blood Libel? - Big Journalism



While it is true that blood libel is a uniquely Jewish experience it is not nearly as raw in the hearts and minds of modern Jews in the U.S. it is not even on the same planet! The reason for the difference is threefold. 

First all, for most Jews, the Holocaust is a more recent event .Thankfully many Holocaust survivors are still with us, are the children who grew up seeing a number tattooed on the forearm of parent, grandparent or some relative or family friend as a constant reminder. 

Secondly the Holocaust is associated with one event. The blood libel is a venomous tactic used against Jews as part of other events, be it the Inquisition, the Russian pogroms, or Crusades just to name a very few examples. (the Crusaders didn't want their families to be subject to the influence of the Jews so they killed man, women and child before they went off to fight the Muslims in the holy land). 

The third reason may be because the Holocaust was a much more concentrated event visa viz the blood libel that we have face ever since Moses left Egypt with the Children of Israel.

....

When it comes to Governor Palin's use of the term blood libel, it was totally justified. The progressive media created a lie about Palin causing the death of a child, Christina Taylor Greene. Their charge was blood libel just the same way as the media spreading the al Durah myth, or the way the media spread bogus charges of Israeli massacres during the recent war with Hamas in Gaza (or in the case of Reuters falsified pictures). 
Allow me to suggest that the media should not try to push their progressive bias by assuming the role of policing the worldwide use of the term blood libel. They would be much better served trying to ensure that they do not become the conduits for the spread of blood libels, either be it directed toward Israeli soldiers, or conservatives in the United States.

No comments: