Posted on 01/13/2011 7:49:03 AM PST by MsLady
As Sarah Palin has just learned, keeping up with the rules about using phrases that are associated with Jewish history is not as simple as it used to be. I was under the impression that the list of phrases that were considered off limits for general consumption was confined more or less to those associated with the Holocaust. Meaning, for instance, that the use of the word "holocaust" should be confined to discussion of events surrounding the genocide of Jews in Europe between 1933 and 1945. But even that stricture has been hard to enforce. Indeed, when an episode of the TV show The X-Files once referred to the mysterious death of amphibians in a lake as a "frog holocaust," you knew that the word had become more of a metaphor than a specific historical term.
(Excerpt) Read more at jewishworldreview.com ...
In the local schools, you have to teach whatever curriculum they give you. I suppose a good teacher could teach the curriculum and bring in literature that added to it. But, then again maybe not. I'd cringe if I had to teach kids things I knew were lies or half truths. I'd probably be fired before I ever really got started. So many of the school books today have so much omitted. If it doesn't fit the liberal view or isn't PC it's gone. Our the truth is twisted to fit their world view. Many on the left seem delusional to me, when it comes to our history.
Well, here's my follow-up story --
Instead of grad school for history, I went into Library Science. I became a cataloger at a university library (Cambridge, MA) and put in a few years doing that. Very Liberal atmosphere, but I tolerated it. What ended it for me, however, was when a book arrived which told the tale of an African King from Mali who discovered America before Columbus. It seems this King sailed an armada of thousands of ships across the Atlanic in about the year 1400. He taught the Aztecs many things, then sailed back to Africa and told his people of the land he had discovered.
I went to my boss and said "The Library of Congress expects me to catalog this as non-fiction. But it isn't. This didn't happen. No one sailed thousands of ships across the Atlantic in 1400. And the Aztecs were more advanced than the Africans in 1400. They didn't need to be taught anything. I can catalog this as folklore or something similar, but not non-fiction."
She said I had to put it under non-fiction. I applied to grad school for engineering the next week. In some fields, the truth still matters.
This is EXACTLY the sentiment that has driven me to a fervent study of worldviews and logically defending the truth. We [are going to] homeschool, and I didn't want any of the half truths / half liblies to be passed on through me due to my own education in the public school system.
So, I've made it my mission to seek out and destroy those lies in my own view of the world, and to armor up my kids against the lies of the world that will be foisted on them in their lifetimes.
YIKES, that’s terrible but believable. No wonder so many kids coming up today don’t seem to get things. They are told so many lies. How would they know? We watched a show about Ben Franklin one night. I can’t remember whether it was the History Channel or Discover Channel. Anyway, I kept telling my hubby, you have to be careful about these shows, sometimes they really twist the truth. Sure enough near the end some liberal yoyo came on and was talking about the Declaration of Independence and how Ben changed something on it. I wish I could remember exactly what that was. But, his face brightened and he basically said, see we aren’t a Christian nation. I thought I’d throw up.
The people most upset about its usage are people who don't like Palin anyway. Get over it. Language evolves with usage. It is legitimate to use "blood libel" to refer to a libel over having the blood of innocents on your hands.
I think a lot of Jewish liberals freaked out when what they thought was a phrased owned by them, was used against them.
"That's our guy. How dare you make use of our guy?!"
If you are being interviewed by a liberal you have to lie about what you think regarding politics and unions.
Once in there with tenure you can do what you want unless you have to change districts and start from the bottom again.
Bzzzzzzzzzzzzzzt. Wrong. Gwt off the island.
Blood and libel are two words strung together most prominently first applied to the Romans who blood libeled Christians in regards to the Holy Eucharist. Supposedly the evil Christians were using Roman children for the blood component of the Holy Eucharist in the early Second Century AD. Which, of course, predates the Middle Ages and certain Christian blood libeling of Jews.
Ridiculous. The association of the term “blood libel” with the dawn of anti-Semitism in Europe is so well established as to be undeniable by any serious historian. That cannot be changed by googling the term and trumping up a silly counter-argument whereby Christians become the poor victims. To present such an ahistorical and offensive argument is borderline anti-Semitic itself.
The phrase blood libel is not owned by any religion, sect or race. It was applied to the Romans, the Greeks, and Christians alike.
The notion that the use of the phrase is anti-Semitic is insane as is the notion that applying it to the Romans of the second century AD is anti-Semitic.
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.