Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Gibson's Family: Father Tricked Into Interview
newsmax.com ^ | Feb. 20, 2004 | Carl Limbacher and NewsMax.com Staff

Posted on 02/20/2004 7:04:44 PM PST by westerfield

When Mel Gibson's 85-year-old father, Hutton, told a New York radio interviewer Wednesday that the Holocaust had been exaggerated and that Jews were trying to rule the world, he had no idea he was speaking on the record, let alone being recorded for broadcast, Gibson family sources tell NewsMax.

When WSNR's Steve Feuerstein called Gibson's father in Texas, the family believes he misrepresented himself as a fan of Gibson's, saying he wanted to "congratulate Mel's father" on his son's work. Hutton Gibson says the caller claimed his mother maintained a Web site devoted to "The Passion of the Christ."

Feuerstein allegedly said nothing to Mr. Gibson about a radio interview.

With no idea that his comments were being taped, Gibson's father made no attempt to disguise his views. He told Feuerstein that the number of Jews killed in the Holocaust had been fabricated.

"It's all - maybe not all fiction - but most of it is," he told the radio interviewer.

According to the account obtained by NewsMax, the elderly Gibson talked to Feuerstein for almost an hour before asking for further identification. The talk host promised to call back with more details, but never did.

Feuerstein did not return calls for comment.

So far, Hutton Gibson has not publicly apologized for the explosive remarks. But in previous interviews, first with the Wall Street Journal's Peggy Noonan, Mel Gibson noted he didn't share his father's revisionist views on the Holocaust. The actor-director said he had friends who had survived the death camps.

"Do I believe that there were concentration camps where defenseless and innocent Jews died cruelly under the Nazi regime? Of course I do, absolutely," Gibson told ABC's Diane sawyer. "It was an atrocity of monumental proportion."

Asked about an earlier interview where Gibson senior offered similarly offensive views, the Hollywood star complained: "Their whole agenda here, my detractors, is to drive a wedge between me and my father. And it's not going to happen. I love him. He's my father."

Gibson's father's comments were the topic Thursday night of Alan Colmes' national radio show.

James Hirsen, a NewsMax columnist, was interviewed and said that Hutton Gibson's "statement is indefensible, but it is also irrelevant. Mel's dad didn't make the movie; Mel Gibson did."

Rabbi James Rudin of American Jewish Committee, who also was on the show, agreed with Hirsen's point.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: huttongibson; melgibson
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-117 next last

1 posted on 02/20/2004 7:04:45 PM PST by westerfield
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: westerfield
Well, the ends justify the means, right?
2 posted on 02/20/2004 7:05:50 PM PST by Guillermo (It's tough being a Miami Dolphins fan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: westerfield
Oh please... on or off record his father is a loon to be ignored.
3 posted on 02/20/2004 7:06:27 PM PST by cyborg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: westerfield
In many states, recording someone without their knowledge is a crime. Any experts on those laws here?
4 posted on 02/20/2004 7:08:04 PM PST by per loin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cyborg
A loon to be ignored. Exactly.
5 posted on 02/20/2004 7:09:51 PM PST by wimpycat ("Black holes are where God divided by zero.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: westerfield
The fact is, he still said/thinks it. However, it is more than a little ironic that the people, who had a big problem with one particular line in the film, are trying to take the "sins" of the father and apply them to the son.

It is even more ironic that they are up in the air about Mel's father denying the Holocaust when they are trying to deny that some, not all, Jews played a part in the Crucifixion.

6 posted on 02/20/2004 7:11:29 PM PST by Paul Atreides (Is it really so difficult to post the entire article?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: per loin
I believe in Txas and New York only oneee party to the conversation needs to be aware that the call is being taped. It varies by state.

http://www.rcfp.org/taping/
7 posted on 02/20/2004 7:13:10 PM PST by westerfield
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: cyborg
Oh please... on or off record his father is a loon to be ignored.

Exactly. The problem is that people insist on not ignoring him.

He's a crazy old man who apparently has never harmed anybody except for some Japanese during WWII.

8 posted on 02/20/2004 7:13:26 PM PST by Tribune7 (Vote Toomey April 27)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: cyborg
But it still doesn't look good, baiting some 85-year old man into making some stupid comment so you can try to discredit his son.
9 posted on 02/20/2004 7:14:20 PM PST by Always Right
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: westerfield
I thought the story was that Hutton Gibson called INTO a radio station, not that someone called HIM and recorded their conversation. How hard could it be to get the story straight?
10 posted on 02/20/2004 7:14:45 PM PST by my_pointy_head_is_sharp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wimpycat
A loon to be ignored. Exactly.

Maybe so, but remember he's an old man. My dad is the same age and doesn't agree with anything I say. If I was famous, I can see him doing the same thing.

11 posted on 02/20/2004 7:14:59 PM PST by RightWingMama
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Always Right
Connie Chung knows all about that.
12 posted on 02/20/2004 7:15:01 PM PST by Paul Atreides (Is it really so difficult to post the entire article?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Paul Atreides; wimpycat; cyborg
Hutton Gibson might be a nut, but still it's pretty sleazy to deceive an 85 y/o man like that in order to do a hit piece against his son.
13 posted on 02/20/2004 7:17:06 PM PST by westerfield
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: westerfield
Oh, I agree. I'm just addressing the fact that saying "he didn't know he was being recorded," doesn't change the fact that he said this stuff, and thinks it, which he is free to do. If they have a problem with Mel, they should keep their focus on Mel.
14 posted on 02/20/2004 7:19:17 PM PST by Paul Atreides (Is it really so difficult to post the entire article?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Tribune7; wimpycat
If the detractors ignore him, then they are left to deal with the content of the movie itself. The movie is about Christ and a lot of these detractors hate Christ, hate anything related to Christ which would also be biblical Judaism which has always preached the ten commandments. I don't think Christ would approve of this open sodom and gomorrah marriage free for all going on so I'm not surprised.
15 posted on 02/20/2004 7:20:31 PM PST by cyborg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: cyborg
Ignored yes, but a loon? that is a stretch. Would we consider Ronald Reagan a loon if he rambled on today about WWII? No, we would chalk it up to Alzheimer's.

Mel's father is rambling, but I'm giving him credit for raising a son so devout! We can only hope so many loons are present in Hollywood!
16 posted on 02/20/2004 7:21:46 PM PST by CruisinAround
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: westerfield
I wonder if anyone has reserved the URL www.mediacreeps.com ?
17 posted on 02/20/2004 7:21:52 PM PST by GeronL (http://www.ArmorforCongress.com......................Send a Freeper to Congress!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cyborg
Notice how the left loves to indict all of Christianity for the Crusades.
18 posted on 02/20/2004 7:22:42 PM PST by Paul Atreides (Is it really so difficult to post the entire article?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: CruisinAround
It's a shame that Mel's father didn't make a documentary against gun-ownership; Follywood would give him an Oscar, regardless of this offbeat theories.
19 posted on 02/20/2004 7:25:30 PM PST by Paul Atreides (Is it really so difficult to post the entire article?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: westerfield
IMHO, For those with faith in Christ, all the attacks upon Mel's dad merely reinforces the obvious. Mel Gibson has produced something of divine good while in fellowship with God. Since Mel is unassailable, the adversary will attack all and any domains surrounding Mel like a raging lion.

So if Mel ever reads this, merely remain steadfast in His will and any cursing brought upon Mel will merely be returned by a blessing in eternity.

God bless Mel.
20 posted on 02/20/2004 7:27:25 PM PST by Cvengr (;^))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CruisinAround
He's a holocaust revisionist loon. Anyone who says what he says gives me the creeps and needs to go visit Auschwitz or something. Mel Gibson is devout but I'm glad he didn't inherit his father's nutty ideas about Jews.
21 posted on 02/20/2004 7:31:15 PM PST by cyborg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Paul Atreides
Yes, and forget about the other side.
22 posted on 02/20/2004 7:31:52 PM PST by cyborg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: westerfield; Dataman; dead; AppyPappy; JohnHuang2; Caleb1411
I've just been struck by a Deep Thought. Tell me if you agree. I'll phrase it as a pair of questions:

Why is it OK to go after Mel Gibson for his father's views, even to the point of hoodwinking an 85-year-old private man...

...but it isn't fair even to discuss whether Jews were involved in the death of Christ, two thousand years ago?

In one case, there is guilt by association with an ancestor; in the other, it is not even allowed to discuss the actions of ancestors.

How does that work?

Dan

(FOR THE RECORD: (1) If I need to say this, I don't think the actions or views of ancestors justify mistreating the descendants in either case; and (2) I think tricking an old man is low, low, low.)

23 posted on 02/20/2004 7:32:22 PM PST by BibChr ("...behold, they have rejected the word of the LORD, so what wisdom is in them?" [Jer. 8:9])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: westerfield
Hutton Gibson might be a nut, but still it's pretty sleazy to deceive an 85 y/o man like that in order to do a hit piece against his son.

Amen. It's disgraceful and low.

24 posted on 02/20/2004 7:33:58 PM PST by BibChr ("...behold, they have rejected the word of the LORD, so what wisdom is in them?" [Jer. 8:9])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: BibChr
Looks like this guy took a page out of Abe Foxman's book.
25 posted on 02/20/2004 7:34:02 PM PST by cyborg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: BibChr
The lower they go, the more glorious is the humble behavior of Mel in making the movie in the face of adversity,
26 posted on 02/20/2004 7:34:56 PM PST by Cvengr (;^))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Cvengr
My dearly loved Dad died at 86. I can't hardly imagine the blind, volcanic rage I'd feel if someone took after him because he had a beef with me. I'd... I'd have had to study up on jail ministries, I guess. From inside.

Dan
27 posted on 02/20/2004 7:37:32 PM PST by BibChr ("...behold, they have rejected the word of the LORD, so what wisdom is in them?" [Jer. 8:9])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: BibChr
Don't ask me, I still haven't figured out why Abe Foxman is making such a fuss over this movie. The reasons he has provided so far seem ludicrous to me. He's either using this controversy as a fund raising vehicle for the ADL, or perhaps he is just simply an anti-Christian bigot.
28 posted on 02/20/2004 7:42:04 PM PST by westerfield
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

Comment #29 Removed by Moderator

To: westerfield

I still haven't figured out why Abe Foxman is making such a fuss over this movie.

1. Foxman and Co. make their money by scaring Jews into believing that everyone on the right is anti-Semitic.

2. Historical results of Passion Plays throughout European history.

3. Foxman and Co. are in the employ of Mr. Gibson to generate publicity for the movie. Granted, a bit far-fetched, but given the rather predictable results of Foxman's whining, some consideration should be given to this theory.

The reasons he has provided so far seem ludicrous to me.

Explain what seems ludicrous. Maybe I can help you understand something you don't.

He's either using this controversy as a fund raising vehicle for the ADL, or perhaps he is just simply an anti-Christian bigot.

Foxman is first and foremost a liberal with their innate distast for Judeo-Christian values and traditions. His personal history (he survived the Holocaust being hidden by a Christian family and then had to be "rescued" from that family by his father who "deprogrammed" him) might have something to do with his views.

30 posted on 02/20/2004 8:04:21 PM PST by h.a. cherev
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: per loin
In many states, recording someone without their knowledge is a crime. Any experts on those laws here?

My understanding: you can tape it provided one of the two parties involved knows that they are being taped.

However, broadcasting or even disseminating the contents of such a conversation usually is illegal.

31 posted on 02/20/2004 8:11:14 PM PST by ikka
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Paul Atreides
However, it is more than a little ironic that the people, who had a big problem with one particular line in the film, are trying to take the "sins" of the father and apply them to the son.

I don't see the connection.

More to the point, Jewish (and by extension, Christian) theology teaches that G-D will visit the sins of the father upon the off-spring...I'm not exactly sure of the quotation but I believe it is to the "third generation". The meaning of the verse, of course, is not to punish children for the sins of the father, but to portray how a father's evil influence will affect his children and grandchildren.

Please note that I am (so far) speaking generally, not specifically about the elder Gibson or his son.

It is even more ironic that they are up in the air about Mel's father denying the Holocaust when they are trying to deny that some, not all, Jews played a part in the Crucifixion.

I didn't see that denial. What I saw was that they were saying the movie "blames the Jews" for the crucifixion (sp?).

Be that as it may, are you under the mistaken impression that Jews believe in any part of the so-called, "New Testament"?

32 posted on 02/20/2004 8:13:40 PM PST by h.a. cherev
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: BibChr; Poundstone
Dan, I'm using your post to ping Poundstone to this thread. Last night, she(?) was demanding that Mel Gibson tell his father to shut up and demanding he completely disavow his father. Apparently, she(?) thinks the majority of FReepers feel the way she(?) does. Just wanted her to know...

FReegards,

Judy
33 posted on 02/20/2004 8:14:39 PM PST by Judith Anne (Is life a paradox? Well, yes and no...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: BibChr
Nothng wrong with going after criminals. Seems like those going after Mel's father have criminal intent, IMHO.
34 posted on 02/20/2004 8:17:52 PM PST by Cvengr (;^))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: h.a. cherev
and then had to be "rescued" from that family by his father who "deprogrammed" him

Never heard that part of the story - it would explain alot about him though.

35 posted on 02/20/2004 8:20:57 PM PST by westerfield
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Judith Anne
ROFLMAO. Don't be an idiot.
36 posted on 02/20/2004 8:21:18 PM PST by Poundstone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Poundstone
What are you talking about? What are you laughing at?
37 posted on 02/20/2004 8:26:42 PM PST by BibChr ("...behold, they have rejected the word of the LORD, so what wisdom is in them?" [Jer. 8:9])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: westerfield
Political correctness trumps the truth in these times. Truth can be awfully uncomfy, especially truth about unpleasant actions by mobs of persons of particular ethnicities. (Despite what you might wish, I'm not implying anything about the Crucifiction as I don't know shiite about it and don't give a hoot about this controversy.) Think when was the last time you heard the truth about the Los Angeles riots following the Rodney King verdict.

Books of history are re-written, unpleasant facts suppressed. why can't we all get along, all people everywhere are the same, etc, etc, Kumbaya, we are the world! That's what it's all about and not about some silly movie and the silly father of a silly actor...

38 posted on 02/20/2004 8:28:33 PM PST by Revolting cat! ("In the end, nothing explains anything!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: per loin
In many states, recording someone without their knowledge is a crime. Any experts on those laws here?

There is a federal law that forbids broacasting any telephone call where both parties are not aware of the recording or broadcasting. Some states allow recording of phone conversations with only one person's knowledge, but the FCC says you can't broadcast it without the knowledge of all parties.
This is not to defend the comments of Mr. Gibson. Now if Mel's dad were a Satlinist, Mel would be given an Oscar before the movie was released.

39 posted on 02/20/2004 8:30:16 PM PST by feedback doctor (Anyone who walks out of THE PASSIONS neutral has made one of two possible choices.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: BibChr; Poundstone
I told Poundstone that there have been at least a thousand posts on the subject of Mel Gibson's father over the last few weeks, and that most were sympathetic to Mr. Gibson.

Ms(?)Poundstone took exception. So, I have pinged him/her to two threads today on this very issue. *Sigh* Poundstone finds this amusing, but feels free to make demands of Mr. Gibson with reference to his father.

Dan, I apologize for using you.

FReegards,

Judy
40 posted on 02/20/2004 8:40:44 PM PST by Judith Anne (Is life a paradox? Well, yes and no...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: westerfield
Mr. Foxman sounds like a guy named Saul that lived in the 1st century and went around trying to stamp out this Jewish movement that believed that Yeshuah was the Messiah. Of course we know what happened to this guy, I read his letters quite often. So, do you think it's possible that one day soon Mr. Foxman may have the same thing happen to him. He won't be converting to something, he'll be embracing the faith of his forefathers, Abraham, Issac, Jacob, Moses, David, and Solomon. He'll be acknowledging that the prophets were correct, that the messiah must suffer and die, the messiah would become the ultimate sacrificial lamb. That he would rise; that he would be called Wonderful, Counselor, Prince of Peace, the Mighty God, Everlasting Father. Yes, Mr. Foxman, that's who Jesus was. I converted to trust the promises made to you forefathers. I believe all that was promised to them, and to you.
41 posted on 02/20/2004 8:43:11 PM PST by feedback doctor (Anyone who walks out of THE PASSIONS neutral has made one of two possible choices.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: BibChr
I am not sure to what extent Hutton Gibson was decieved, if any, but I don't see what difference it makes as to his views on the subject. I have no reason to doubt that he believes what he says. Also, his age is not relevent. I have met whip smart 90 year olds and stupid 40 year olds.

As to Jewish involmentment, the discussion is fair I guess but what evidence do you have in the account's historically accuracy other than your own faith?
42 posted on 02/20/2004 8:46:45 PM PST by Poison Pill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: RightWingMama
Maybe so, but remember he's an old man.

That's precisely why he should be ignored. "Left alone" would be a better way to put it. I'm not taking away at all from the nuttiness of what he said, but it doesn't excuse the deceitful way in which the man got the old guy to talk.

43 posted on 02/20/2004 8:47:42 PM PST by wimpycat ("Black holes are where God divided by zero.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: BibChr
Why is it OK to go after Mel Gibson for his father's views, even to the point of hoodwinking an 85-year-old private man...

I am working under the assumption that, whatever you think of the method of obtaining Gibson Sr.'s views, you do not agree with them.

The question becomes, does the end justify the means? I think the answer depends on the situation. There was an episode of M*A*S*H where a racist Major was tricked into revealing his racist views while a Black man, posing as an Major (he was really a Captain), was waiting nearby and overheard. The racist was then tricked into resigning his commission.

I know there are big differences between the two situations, but I feel better knowing that the elder Gibson's views are public. I now know him for what he is. And while other's on this thread are content to dismiss him as a "crazy loon" or make other excuses for him or focus on how his views were obtained, I think it's important to know who these people are in our society. Get them out from under their rocks, so to speak.

...but it isn't fair even to discuss whether Jews were involved in the death of Christ, two thousand years ago?

I am at a bit of a loss as to where you saw this. Can you provide some sort of evidence that "it's not fair to discuss it."

In one case, there is guilt by association with an ancestor; in the other, it is not even allowed to discuss the actions of ancestors.

How does that work?

Well, in the first case the relationship is not strictly "ancestral", but that of a father and son. The assumption, right or wrong, is that a father's beliefs and behaviors influences the son. Since we all learn from our parents to some extent I don't think this is a stretch. The influence is somewhat greater than one's ancestors who passed away over 2000 years ago, wouldn't you agree?

Be that as it may, there is little to discuss regarding the Jewish "ancestors" because there is no single point of reference. I assume you believe in the truth of your Bible, correct? But I, as a Jew, must reject the entire document. Simply put, my belief system doesn't believe the events portrayed in your bible ever occurred. Hence, what is there to discuss? Your beliefs? How can I possibly comment intelligently on that?

Bear in mind that I haven't said one word about Mel Gibson or his film. Does Mel share his father's views? On the contrary, he has repudiated the views while still embracing the man. It is difficult for some to understand this. I, on the other hand, can understand it. Also, having no evidence that he has lied, I have to take Mel at his word, that he does not share the father's views about the Holocaust.

As to his movie, I am tickled pink that Mel made the movie and it is receiving all this attention. Putting aside my loathing of Foxman and his liberal "Jewish" cohorts, I enjoy seeing Christians celebrate their faith. Christianity is under attack and has had some rather nasty affronts in the last few years...."The Last Temptation of Christ" and the exhibit in the Brooklyn Museum a few years ago...it's good to see a movie which is positive about Christianity for a change.

44 posted on 02/20/2004 8:51:46 PM PST by h.a. cherev
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: westerfield
I've always maintained that Foxman is so good at detecting right-wing anti-Semitism that he can see it even when it isn't there. Of course, as we all know, left-wing anti-Semitism is non-existent which is why Foxman never detects it.
45 posted on 02/20/2004 8:55:58 PM PST by h.a. cherev
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Poison Pill
...but what evidence do you have in the account's historically accuracy other than your own faith?

The same question could be asked of many other events in the Bible that both Christians and Jews believe. And the answer would be the same for both Christians and Jews. We don't believe in our faith because of what archaeologists say, or what scholars say, even when they happen to support the Scriptures (as they often do), because that isn't the nature of faith.

46 posted on 02/20/2004 9:00:36 PM PST by wimpycat ("Black holes are where God divided by zero.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: wimpycat
My point is that much has been made of Jewish guilt on this subject. The movie deals with this at least in a round about way. The poster wondered why we could not discuss this. Well, we can but the discussion would have to have some point of reference. If you take it just as a matter of faith then you just believe and no discussion is needed. Personally I happen to come down on the faith side but I don't think it can be had both ways.
47 posted on 02/20/2004 9:09:03 PM PST by Poison Pill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: westerfield
A deceitful Christian-hater. Surprised?
48 posted on 02/20/2004 9:28:54 PM PST by Finalapproach29er ("Don't shoot Mongo, you'll only make him mad.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: h.a. cherev
Personally as a convert to Judaism (previously Catholic) I find claims of Deicide against Jews to be shallow and born either of hate or ignorance; such claims definitely can not come from Christians that believe in the dogma that is Christ:

If you believe that the death of Christ was for the purpose of atonement for mankind (if not, you are hardly a Christian) then YOU MUST believe that whatever group (be they Jewish; Roman; or just one, two, a handful, or a mob of unidentifiable people) that was "responsible" for the act of crucifixion, was serving G-d's purpose.

Therefore, as His tool, they were "chosen" to fulfill the greatest act of Christian dogma enabling the ultimate resurrection.

In other words, SOMEBODY had to betray Jesus for the desired outcome to occur. Even those closest to Jesus were foretold to fail before him and with the exception of Judas, the ultimate pawn in G-d's plan, no individual disciple is held accountable for the resulting downfall.
My conclusions:

(a) The Jewish people have suffered the greatest attack against any people for G-d's decision to create this place for them in Christian history; Perhaps the hardships we have survuived were given to us precisely because G-d knew that we as a people were capable of surviving them and still maintain our praise of G-d.

(b) I perceive any attacks or accusations against Jews for deicide are due to the aforementioned ignorance or less-than-veiled antisemitism for failure to accept Jesus as an embodiment of the G-d that we all believe in.

I look forward for an opportunity to view this film, and accept that it is a dark and difficult time in Jewish history with respect to our relationship with Christians. LETS DEAL WITH IT - NOT DENY IT.

From an optimistic perspective this film could very well open a channel of communication that allows Jewish fears and Christian attitudes to be resolved in accordance with my previous thoughts.
49 posted on 02/20/2004 9:38:22 PM PST by Optimist (I think I'm beginning to see a pattern here.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Poison Pill
My point is that much has been made of Jewish guilt on this subject.

PING

50 posted on 02/20/2004 9:40:52 PM PST by Optimist (I think I'm beginning to see a pattern here.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-117 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson