in the wrong era. Soundly refuting
liberals online since 2000. :)
| Guardian | ROP: Woolwich killing: universities crack down on the preachers of hate |
0 |
| Ryan Lizza | Disturbing: How Prosecutors Fought to Keep Rosen’s Warrant Secret |
0 |
| NJ Online | Ick: Rubbing alcohol as scotch? N.J. officials release details of ‘Operation Swill’ |
0 |
| Kim Strassel | 0 | |
| WaPo | 0 |
Audacity of Truth
Move Along:
""The whole issue of this - of talking points, frankly, throughout this process has been a sideshow. The whole thing defies logic. And the fact that this keeps on getting churned out, frankly, has a lot to do with political motivations."
Pres. Obama on GOP demands for Benghazi answers, 5/13/2013
Michael Medved on Mel Gibson’s arrest
A few readers yesterday disagreed with my reaction to the story of Mel Gibson’s arrest and the anti-Semitic comments he made during the arrest.
Michael Medved today has written a piece that I think we can all find some common ground on, in particular:
4. At a time of surging Jew-hatred around the world, Gibson’s drunken, after-midnight remarks to arresting officers on a lonely stretch of Malibu highway represent a less serious threat to the Jewish people than the very public anti-Semitic and anti-Israel comments by numerous celebrities, academics, UN officials and politicians. In April of 1996, for instance, the Oscar-winning actor Marlon Brando declared on Larry King Live: “Hollywood is run by Jews, owned by Jews, and they should have greater sensitivity about the issue of people who are suffering. Because they have exploited….We’ve seen everything but we never saw the Kike.” The Anti-Defamation League criticized Brando, of course, but never suggested that he should be ostracized and boycotted, as they recently demanded in Gibson’s case. Meanwhile, Gibson had already attempted a public apology for his loathesome private remarks, declaring that “I acted like a person who was completely out of control when I was arrested and said things that I do not believe to be true and which are despicable.I am deeply ashamed of everything I said.” Compare this contrition to the unapologetic, and ceaselessly repeated attacks on Israel by another controversial Hollywood director, Michael Moore, who declared in Liverpool (quoted in the New York Times, June 26, 2004) that the embattled Jewish state represented one of the modern world’s centers of evil: “It’s all part of the same ball of wax, right? The oil companies, Israel, Halliburton.” Ironically, Michael Moore’s agent, Ari Emanuel (brother of a Democratic Congressman from Illinois), is one of the entertainment industry figures leading the charge to demand that the show biz establishment blacklist Gibson.
That’s a point I made in more general terms on yesterday’s Allman and Smash show: Yes, the issue of Gibson’s comments needed to be discussed, but what should really be cause for alarm are statements that have the potential to undermine Israel’s very existence that come from people who are in positions of influence (like UN officials, the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee, Jimmy Carter and Ed Peck, Islamic scholars, etc).
5. The “Mad Mel” Moment in Malibu may change the way we perceive the dark hatred that lurks within Gibson’s heart but it alters nothing about the images and messages he put on screen in “The Passion of the Christ.” It’s still the same movie, frame for frame, line for Aramaic-and-Latin line, that it was before his tirade and arrest. The tens of millions of people who felt overpowered and inspired and uplifted by a remarkable piece of cinema need not now apologize because they responded in good faith to the work of a deeply flawed, bigoted filmmaker. Mel Gibson’s personal disgrace makes me feel pity for his family but it does nothing to force my reconsideration of my critical admiration of his movie. At the time of its release, I argued vehemently against hysterical charges (many of them emanating from people who hadn’t even seen the film) that “The Passion” represented some vicious, anti-Semitic screed, and I also decried dire predictions (“He’ll have blood on his hands,” thundered one commentator in The New Republic) that the movie would inspire anti-Jewish incidents around the world. I tell the story of my high profile involvement in this dispute in my recent book RIGHT TURNS (everyone should read it!), and in the aftermath of Mel’s meltdown and arrest I wouldn’t change a word of it. The fact remains that all the predictions of pogroms in Pittsburgh proved preposterous: while earning some 1 billion dollars in movie theatres and on DVD, “The Passion” inspired no anti-Semitic incidents anywhere in the world. In fact, several surveys of audience attitudes showed that anti-Jewish sentiments actually decreased when movie-goers saw the film. The worst part of this latest controversy is that Gibson’s revolting statements give people like Abe Foxman of the Anti-Defamation League a juicy, retroactive excuse to say “I told you so” — long after the benign and warm-hearted worldwide reaction to the movie had utterly undermined all the smug denunciations claiming that this wildly popular entertainment would foment implacable hate.
6. Once again, the most visible leaders of the Jewish community are in the process of horribly mishandling this latest incident with their indignant denunciations of Gibson’s initial attempts to apologize, and their profoundly ill-considered calls for ostracism and banishment of one of today’s most influential and successful filmmakers. After Gibson’s comments on the incident (which included the abject line “I disgraced myself and my family with my behavior and for that I am truly sorry”) Abe Foxman of the ADL officiallly categorized this apology as “unremorseful and insufficient.” Aside from obvious questions about who appointed Foxman as the ultimate judge of Gibson’s damnation and possible redemption, doesn’t it seem patently unfair to describe a statement that includes the words “I disgraced myself” as “unremorseful.”? Even worse, Foxman concludes the official ADL statement with the words: “We would hope that Hollywood now would realize the bigot in their midst and that they will distance themselves from the anti-Semite.” Super-agent Ari Emanuel calls even more unequivocally for a new industry blacklist that focuses, for now, on Mel Gibson alone: “People in the entertainment community, whether Jew or gentile, need to demonstrate that they understand how much is at stake in this by professionally shunning Mel Gibson and refusing to work with him, even if it means a sacrifice to their bottom line.” The most ill-considered aspect of such calls for “distancing” and “shunning” is that they stand no chance of eliminating Gibson’s ability to make movies (he has enough money to pay for his projects himself for the rest of his life, just as he did with “The Passion of the Christ”) or destroying his influence on popular culture. Like it or not, Mel Gibson will not simply disappear (though he might well take some time off for rehab) and the Jewish community will hardly benefit by isolating him as a permanent enemy and encouraging him in the far more open expression of anti-Semitic attitudes. Does Ari Emanuel believe it would somehow help the Jewish cause if his client, Michael Moore, could now welcome a new colleague –Mel Gibson — as a participant in the poisonously anti-Israel rallies, conferences and demonstrations that Mr. Moore regularly addresses? Those who believe that Gibson’s anti-Semitism couldn’t get any worse simply lack imagination. Public amplification of the bigotry that Mel revealed privately in Malibu might well spoil his popularity in the United States, but imagine how it could boost his already considerable following in Europe, Latin America, and the former Soviet Union– not to mention the Islamic world!
Read it all.
RSS feed for comments on this post.
After watching Mel apologize properly, I actually feel better about him than I did before this incident. I think going before the Jewish community on atonement day will be a brave gesture on his part.
I’ve always believed you tend to be a lot more honest when you’re inebriated…your defenses come down and apparently, so does the filter on Mel’s mouth.
What a rough lesson to learn.
I,m sick of this, I like his movies and I’ve watched Signs six times and will watch it again.
He said he is sorry and will be apologizing till the day he dies, then he can discuss with the only person who matters.
This story is kinda gettin’ on my nerves.
First, I’d just like to respond to Phil from the earlier post, that drinking does not necessarily cause a loss of the knowledge of right and wrong. Though it can for some, I believe it’s more accurate to say that for most, drinking makes it easier to overcome their sense of right and wrong. I know that in my case, I maintain that sense and am even aware enough to recognize situations when using the “drunk excuse” would have been advantageous, but I declined to go that route, because despite my level of intoxication, it still seemed lame. Indeed, getting ripped is wrong all by itself, and I’m aware of that as well. But enough about me, and ain’t it about time?
As to the story itself, the more I hear of it, the more I feel the only appropriate response should have been, “What an idiot!” and not much more. Are we so thinned skinned that we should expect anyone to be crucified because that got some beer-balls and talked trash? This indicates nothing of his true feelings about Jews, only that he knows how to piss them off. Unless he’s serious about it being a dark part of his personality, the event holds no meaning whatsoever. And even then, he may only be doing damage control due the over-the-top reaction to his moment of stupidity. After all, who in public life would want THAT albatross hanging around his neck?
In Richard Roepers column on the story, he spoke of Mel calling the cop a motherf***er and that he was gonna f**k him. “Then it got ugly.” as Roeper said. I don’t know if Roeper was just being glib, as his columns can be smarmy sometimes, but if he was being serious, I’d have to say that Mel was already being ugly before the anti-Semetic stuff. He was being abusive to the cop already. Why is it worse to use the anti-Semetic lingo than the other coarse lingo?
But the more I hear, the more I see this as a huge non-story. He drank, he drove, he got busted, he behaved poorly. Case closed, let’s move on. Israel still stands. I’m sure that there’s a few thousand Jews in northern Israel that would exchange the real hate they’re dealing with for Mel’s drunken tirade any day of the week.
Now if you’ll excuse me, I’m getting another drink.
What I find fascinating is all the ink and pixels dedicated to villifying Gibson, and so little about that creep in Washington state that killed one and injured several Jewish women.
Did Gibson hurt anybody? Did he even hint at violence?
He said something stupid, I don’t dispute that — but a self identified muslim goes on a shooting spree inside a Jewish organization, and the story isn’t worth covering?
stoo – I’m thinking that just possibly the authorities are low-balling the story intentionally. What little has been said would make sense if the guys a “sleeper”, and maybe they’re quietly trying to trace this guys connections. The drive-by press is more than happy to let it die, because any sort of state-side terrorist activity hurts their anti-American Liberal campaigns. Just a guess.
- Bang
You make excellent points Marshall Art and stoo, I agree with you both. This is, when all is said and done, a tempest in a teapot and not really worth the hairpulling and wailing and gnashing of teeth that’s going on. I think, to some extent, Hollywood and liberals hate Gibson in general, and are using this as a convenient excuse to pile on. Typical school yard tactics, show any sign of weakness or commit any kind of mistake, and everyone will gang up and stomp you.
As for downplaying the incident, I’d like to believe that’s because the police are doing due diligence and looking for connections, but I don’t believe it. It’s all part and parcel of the disturbing practice we see in the West of downplaying and ignoring Islamic extremism and not calling it what it is, much like the way liberals seem incapable of acknowledging that Stalin killed 10′s of millions and Castro, despite his coutries high literacy rate and free medical car, has murdered countless numbers of people and turned Cuba into a gulag.
I believe that it is possible that Mel Gibson may have been dealing with much ‘silent’ abuse from the Hollywood Jewish elite who, while publicly being quiet about his runaway success with ‘The Passion’, steamed in private at the perceived anti-semetic flick and his refusal to march to their tune, and they have been working against him behind the scenes in Tinseltown since that movie debuted. I find it strange that Disney, known to be run by some of the powerfully connected Jewish men of Hollywood, just announced they have cancelled a contract for a miniseries they were ‘in development’ with Mel – after waiting TWO YEARS for a script. Two years and no script – nada?? Mel Gibson is known in the industry as a very hard-working man. Could it be that Disney sucked up the contract with Mel with the intention of sitting on it for as long as they could (it was a story about a Jew during the Holocost) to prevent his forward momentum? It’s certainly been done before. Then when the drunk story broke, they saw it as an appropriate time to release the contract because a) if they truly were holding it back to ‘punish’ Mel that might come out in further stories as one of the reason for Mel’s anger, b) it makes Disney look good for being sensitive the the Jewish community, and c) it’s a great way to publicly slap him while he’s down. Certainly Mel is in no position to say ANYTHING negative about Hollywood now. And that probably suits them fine.
I could be dead wrong on this, but I think there is probably much more to this story than simple bigotry. They say Hollywood can be a vicious environment for those that refuse to ‘toe the line’. This may be a story of a man who has felt somewhat ‘persecuted’ himself by the Hollywood elite, and let out his frustrations in one stupid, drunken binge. We’ll probably never know.
You know, the press stories make it sound like Gibson just started mouthing off anti-semitic statements at random due to deep seated Jew hatred, but if you dig further it’s somewhat different. He started, apparently, by acting aggressively and threateningly to the cop, the “I’ll $#** you!” kind of things, I’ll get even, then apparently he noticed the cop was Jewish (maybe a stereotypical name?) and asked him if he was a bleep bleep Jew, and when he said yes, then launched into his Jews are responsible for wars tirade. This in no means excuses it, but it appears to be part of an escalating tirade by an angry, violent drunk, not an out of the blue anti-semitic rant for no reason. As I said, not that this excuses it, but it makes it more understandable if you’ve dealt with drunks. If you are that violently upset and wanting to verbally hurt someone, a person will latch on anything they think will work, including race/religion/country of origin. If the cop had been black, it probably would have been the N word, etc.
Just think if he called the cop a “fag” or worse, a “faggot Jew”. He’d have to apologise to two groups and probably give up a pinky. Hey! Since he called the cop a “motherf**ker”, shouldn’t he have to apologise to all those who are into incest? OK. Maybe I went too far. Sorry.