I think Alan Dershowitz dealt with this nonsense already
Isaac Send a noteboard - 16/01/2011 02:34:10 PM
To quote him:
The term “blood libel” has taken on a broad metaphorical meaning in public discourse. Although its historical origins were in theologically based false accusations against the Jews and the Jewish People,its current usage is far broader. I myself have used it to describe false accusations against the State of Israel by the Goldstone Report. There is nothing improper and certainly nothing anti-Semitic in Sarah Palin using the term to characterize what she reasonably believes are false accusations that her words or images may have caused a mentally disturbed individual to kill and maim. The fact that two of the victims are Jewish is utterly irrelevant to the propriety of using this widely used term.
Just to add in the usages of blood libel by major media over the years, from Jim Geraghty of NRO's growing list...
The Term ‘Blood Libel’: More Common Than You Might Think
January 12, 2011 9:51 A.M.
By Jim Geraghty
The use of the term “blood libel” in non-Jewish contexts is out of bounds, eh?
Andrew Sullivan, October 10, 2008:
A couple of obvious thoughts. Paladino speaks of “perverts who target our children and seek to destroy their lives.” This is the gay equivalent of the medieval (and Islamist) blood-libel against Jews.
Ann Coulter’s column, October 30, 2008:
His expert pontificator on race was The Washington Post’s Eugene Robinson, who said the Pittsburgh hoax was “the blood libel against black men concerning the defilement of the flower of Caucasian womanhood. It’s been with us for hundreds of years and, apparently, is still with us.”
From the Military Religious Freedom Foundation, September 30, 2009:
Almost immediately following the aftermath of the shooting, the Military Religious Freedom Foundation was the unlikely voice that called for the safeguard of Muslims in the armed forces.
Within hours of the news breaking, MRFF founder and president Mikey Weinstein called upon President Barack Obama to “immediately issue a statement as Commander-in-Chief making it clear that there would be a zero-tolerance policy against any member of the U.S. military inflicting harassments, retribution or reprisal against an Islamic member of the U.S. military.” . . .
He criticized former Alaska Governor and vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin for saying that she was “all for” profiling against Muslims.
“We’re not painting all Jews as thieves for Madoff’s economic crimes,” said Weinstein, comparing Palin’s comments to a “blood libel.”
During the recount in 2000:
Florida Democrat Peter Deutsch last night on Crossfire:
Let me just talk a little bit about the whole, I guess, spin from the Republicans about — which has been to me the absolute most — the worst statements I have ever heard probably in my life about anything. I mean, almost a blood libel by the Republicans towards Al Gore, saying that he was trying to stop men and women in uniform that are serving this country from voting. That is the most absurd thing and absolutely has no basis in fact at all.
In the grand scheme of things, the idea that Palin used a phrase associated with one particular, egregious, and historically recurring false accusation to rebut a modern false accusation seems like little reason for outrage. For perspective on what really is worth outrage, the services for 9-year-old victim Christina Taylor Green are tomorrow.
UPDATE: Some more examples, from my side of the aisle:
Jed Babbin, September 8, 2004:
When, in April 1971, John Kerry testified to a Senate committee that “. . . war crimes committed in Southeast Asia [were] not isolated incidents but crimes committed on a day-to-day basis with the full awareness of officers at all levels of command,” he said that the average American soldier who fought in Vietnam was a war criminal. Kerry’s statement was false, a blood libel that hangs in the air to this day.
Michael Barone, November 15, 2004:
And the argument against Michael Dukakis, which he never effectively countered because there is no effective counter, is that giving furlough to people who have life without parole is a position that Dukakis defended over 11 years as governor of Massachusetts or governor candidate, is a crazy law, and he supported it over 11 years. You don’t have to be a racist to want a murderer, whatever his race, to stay in jail and not be allowed outside on the weekend. To say that the American people were racist and they just want black people in, is blood libel on the American people.
John Hood, September 23, 2003: “A ‘Blood Libel’ Against the News & Observer.”
ANOTHER UPDATE: Either Joel Roberts or Andrew Cohen of CBS News (both names are listed), February 9, 2005:
Ward Churchill still doesn’t get it. Even though he has tried to clarify and backtrack upon the worst of his intemperate remarks about the victims of the terror attacks on America, he persists in hanging a blood libel on thousands of victims and, by clear implication, you and me.
Andrew Cohen of CBS News, May 7, 2008:
So-called “judicial activism” occurs, in other words, when it’s your side that lost the case and it is nothing short of a blood libel against judges to accuse them of operating by fiat.
Alex Beam in the Boston Globe, January 14, 2005, discussing the accusation that an official had used the “n-word” in meetings overseas:
My two anonymous sources were making charges that amounted to ‘blood libel’ against former colleagues; that raised the bar for ethical publication.
John Derbyshire, April 28, 2008: “A Blood Libel on Our Civilization.”
AP, July 28, 2008:
Just before Obama spoke, Newsday editor Les Payne had called “blood libel” the argument that African-American journalists could not objectively cover Obama’s candidacy.
ANOTHER UPDATE: Frank Rich, New York Times columnist, October 15, 2006:
The moment Mr. Foley’s e-mails became known, we saw that brand of fearmongering and bigotry at full tilt: Bush administration allies exploited the former Congressman’s predatory history to spread the grotesque canard that homosexuality is a direct path to pedophilia. It’s the kind of blood libel that in another era was spread about Jews.
The term “blood libel” has taken on a broad metaphorical meaning in public discourse. Although its historical origins were in theologically based false accusations against the Jews and the Jewish People,its current usage is far broader. I myself have used it to describe false accusations against the State of Israel by the Goldstone Report. There is nothing improper and certainly nothing anti-Semitic in Sarah Palin using the term to characterize what she reasonably believes are false accusations that her words or images may have caused a mentally disturbed individual to kill and maim. The fact that two of the victims are Jewish is utterly irrelevant to the propriety of using this widely used term.
Just to add in the usages of blood libel by major media over the years, from Jim Geraghty of NRO's growing list...
The Term ‘Blood Libel’: More Common Than You Might Think
January 12, 2011 9:51 A.M.
By Jim Geraghty
The use of the term “blood libel” in non-Jewish contexts is out of bounds, eh?
Andrew Sullivan, October 10, 2008:
A couple of obvious thoughts. Paladino speaks of “perverts who target our children and seek to destroy their lives.” This is the gay equivalent of the medieval (and Islamist) blood-libel against Jews.
Ann Coulter’s column, October 30, 2008:
His expert pontificator on race was The Washington Post’s Eugene Robinson, who said the Pittsburgh hoax was “the blood libel against black men concerning the defilement of the flower of Caucasian womanhood. It’s been with us for hundreds of years and, apparently, is still with us.”
From the Military Religious Freedom Foundation, September 30, 2009:
Almost immediately following the aftermath of the shooting, the Military Religious Freedom Foundation was the unlikely voice that called for the safeguard of Muslims in the armed forces.
Within hours of the news breaking, MRFF founder and president Mikey Weinstein called upon President Barack Obama to “immediately issue a statement as Commander-in-Chief making it clear that there would be a zero-tolerance policy against any member of the U.S. military inflicting harassments, retribution or reprisal against an Islamic member of the U.S. military.” . . .
He criticized former Alaska Governor and vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin for saying that she was “all for” profiling against Muslims.
“We’re not painting all Jews as thieves for Madoff’s economic crimes,” said Weinstein, comparing Palin’s comments to a “blood libel.”
During the recount in 2000:
Florida Democrat Peter Deutsch last night on Crossfire:
Let me just talk a little bit about the whole, I guess, spin from the Republicans about — which has been to me the absolute most — the worst statements I have ever heard probably in my life about anything. I mean, almost a blood libel by the Republicans towards Al Gore, saying that he was trying to stop men and women in uniform that are serving this country from voting. That is the most absurd thing and absolutely has no basis in fact at all.
In the grand scheme of things, the idea that Palin used a phrase associated with one particular, egregious, and historically recurring false accusation to rebut a modern false accusation seems like little reason for outrage. For perspective on what really is worth outrage, the services for 9-year-old victim Christina Taylor Green are tomorrow.
UPDATE: Some more examples, from my side of the aisle:
Jed Babbin, September 8, 2004:
When, in April 1971, John Kerry testified to a Senate committee that “. . . war crimes committed in Southeast Asia [were] not isolated incidents but crimes committed on a day-to-day basis with the full awareness of officers at all levels of command,” he said that the average American soldier who fought in Vietnam was a war criminal. Kerry’s statement was false, a blood libel that hangs in the air to this day.
Michael Barone, November 15, 2004:
And the argument against Michael Dukakis, which he never effectively countered because there is no effective counter, is that giving furlough to people who have life without parole is a position that Dukakis defended over 11 years as governor of Massachusetts or governor candidate, is a crazy law, and he supported it over 11 years. You don’t have to be a racist to want a murderer, whatever his race, to stay in jail and not be allowed outside on the weekend. To say that the American people were racist and they just want black people in, is blood libel on the American people.
John Hood, September 23, 2003: “A ‘Blood Libel’ Against the News & Observer.”
ANOTHER UPDATE: Either Joel Roberts or Andrew Cohen of CBS News (both names are listed), February 9, 2005:
Ward Churchill still doesn’t get it. Even though he has tried to clarify and backtrack upon the worst of his intemperate remarks about the victims of the terror attacks on America, he persists in hanging a blood libel on thousands of victims and, by clear implication, you and me.
Andrew Cohen of CBS News, May 7, 2008:
So-called “judicial activism” occurs, in other words, when it’s your side that lost the case and it is nothing short of a blood libel against judges to accuse them of operating by fiat.
Alex Beam in the Boston Globe, January 14, 2005, discussing the accusation that an official had used the “n-word” in meetings overseas:
My two anonymous sources were making charges that amounted to ‘blood libel’ against former colleagues; that raised the bar for ethical publication.
John Derbyshire, April 28, 2008: “A Blood Libel on Our Civilization.”
AP, July 28, 2008:
Just before Obama spoke, Newsday editor Les Payne had called “blood libel” the argument that African-American journalists could not objectively cover Obama’s candidacy.
ANOTHER UPDATE: Frank Rich, New York Times columnist, October 15, 2006:
The moment Mr. Foley’s e-mails became known, we saw that brand of fearmongering and bigotry at full tilt: Bush administration allies exploited the former Congressman’s predatory history to spread the grotesque canard that homosexuality is a direct path to pedophilia. It’s the kind of blood libel that in another era was spread about Jews.
The intuitive mind is a sacred gift and the rational mind is a faithful servant. We have created a society that honors the servant and has forgotten the gift.
- Albert Einstein
King of Cairhien 20-7-2
Chancellor of the Landsraad, Archduke of Is'Mod
- Albert Einstein
King of Cairhien 20-7-2
Chancellor of the Landsraad, Archduke of Is'Mod
This message last edited by Isaac on 16/01/2011 at 02:45:03 PM
OK, I'm Officially Sick of the "Blood Libel" BS.
16/01/2011 12:18:22 PM
- 1990 Views
Why are they calling it "blood libel"?
16/01/2011 12:23:47 PM
- 852 Views
Because if the facts were as they represent them those words would be applicable.
16/01/2011 12:49:22 PM
- 1029 Views
It's not entirely clear to me whether you're aware of this or not, but...
16/01/2011 01:12:22 PM
- 1074 Views
I think Alan Dershowitz dealt with this nonsense already
16/01/2011 02:34:10 PM
- 1367 Views
Interesting. I didn't realize it was so wide-spread.
16/01/2011 03:10:28 PM
- 925 Views
She wasn't even the first to use the term that week either
16/01/2011 10:10:35 PM
- 928 Views
I don't know that "expert" has anything to do with it.
16/01/2011 10:18:54 PM
- 956 Views
Oh please don't you start to
17/01/2011 02:34:43 PM
- 809 Views
I for one hadn't noticed it before.
17/01/2011 10:25:57 PM
- 979 Views
it was used here and nobody commented
17/01/2011 10:37:07 PM
- 869 Views
LOL, I totally forgot that got posted here
17/01/2011 10:54:26 PM
- 920 Views
It's funny you should say that...
18/01/2011 10:32:59 PM
- 952 Views
Precisely: I noticed, but it hadn't become a rallying cry for "the real victim" (Palin).
19/01/2011 12:14:48 AM
- 1061 Views
I thought you were the real vicitim
19/01/2011 02:49:06 PM
- 1035 Views
When and where did I say that? The ultimate victim is America, but six members of it just died.
19/01/2011 11:24:27 PM
- 756 Views
Re: It's funny you should say that...
19/01/2011 03:29:52 PM
- 938 Views
It was permissible to ignore until it became a rallying cry.
20/01/2011 04:27:23 PM
- 961 Views
Oh, I noticed that one alright.
18/01/2011 10:25:23 PM
- 792 Views
but is he accussed of being a tasteless moron who doesn't know what it means?
19/01/2011 02:28:03 PM
- 838 Views
I don't know, if I have to judge him based on that one article, then tasteless moron, absolutely.
19/01/2011 06:14:43 PM
- 952 Views
The peole who called her stupid for using the term didn't know it was so wide spread either
17/01/2011 02:33:19 PM
- 812 Views
Indeed, my response to Legolas references Wikipedias quotation of him.
16/01/2011 10:24:09 PM
- 1005 Views
Re: Indeed, my response to Legolas references Wikipedias quotation of him.
16/01/2011 11:09:21 PM
- 1035 Views
Again, Giffords specifically made the connection between Palins imagery and an attack on her.
17/01/2011 12:53:08 AM
- 1172 Views
That means precisely nothing
17/01/2011 03:59:07 PM
- 871 Views
It means everything.
18/01/2011 08:34:55 PM
- 1140 Views
I'm trying to understand your logic
19/01/2011 12:50:28 AM
- 745 Views
There are two points:
19/01/2011 02:47:48 AM
- 932 Views
I don't agree, but I understand. *NM*
19/01/2011 10:14:13 PM
- 458 Views
Giffords' statements and Palins are matters of public record; they're indisputable.
19/01/2011 11:34:53 PM
- 909 Views
I must say, if more people on both sides could say that we'd all be better for it.
20/01/2011 04:32:55 AM
- 951 Views
the old step one steal underwear step three profit argument
19/01/2011 06:01:14 PM
- 1025 Views
Your inability/unwillingness to follow basic and clearly delineated logic is not my failing.
20/01/2011 01:19:31 AM
- 846 Views
I admit I can't follow gnome logic *NM*
20/01/2011 05:50:22 AM
- 448 Views
I demonstrated the connection, whether or not you choose to look the other way.
20/01/2011 03:16:28 PM
- 923 Views
that is some twisted and bizarre logic
17/01/2011 02:38:41 PM
- 970 Views
Giffords said Palins crosshairs imagery would have "consequences"; Palin calls the suggestion libel.
18/01/2011 08:54:45 PM
- 863 Views
yes but the only consequences is liberals using them to slander Palin
19/01/2011 02:58:35 PM
- 943 Views
I read Toms reply; I don't think he exactly vindicated your position, nor meant to do so.
20/01/2011 01:52:37 AM
- 1179 Views
It was an example of blaming the victim, a phrase you keep misusing
20/01/2011 06:28:21 PM
- 884 Views
I thought you said only liberals blinded by political bias committed that grave sin.
20/01/2011 07:47:09 PM
- 931 Views
so in other words you again missed the point
20/01/2011 08:26:49 PM
- 881 Views
Well, one of us did.
20/01/2011 09:24:35 PM
- 994 Views
so lets be clear do you or don't you understand what it means to "blame the vicitm"?
20/01/2011 10:03:48 PM
- 636 Views
I understand it well; can we be equally clear you say the victim here is Palin?
20/01/2011 10:44:08 PM
- 1070 Views
So I am a little confused on something...
16/01/2011 02:38:59 PM
- 1028 Views
Palin putting Giffords district in the crosshairs and Giffords implying at the time she feared this
16/01/2011 11:21:36 PM
- 1162 Views
If I understand what you are saying correctly...
17/01/2011 07:07:56 AM
- 900 Views
I'm sorry you so badly misunderstand.
17/01/2011 08:33:47 AM
- 908 Views
Re: I'm sorry you so badly misunderstand.
17/01/2011 04:24:01 PM
- 962 Views
The Secret Service does guard Congressmen, just not all of them automatically.
18/01/2011 09:13:39 PM
- 798 Views
No, they don't
18/01/2011 10:19:34 PM
- 985 Views
Really? Cannoli says differently, and I believe he's right on that one.
18/01/2011 10:50:51 PM
- 1064 Views
You seem to be reading what you want to from what I said
19/01/2011 01:27:32 PM
- 914 Views
I read what you said & understood it as you restate here, hence I referenced local police (twice)
20/01/2011 02:15:17 AM
- 949 Views
The problem here is your ignoring normal policing powers to concoct an absurdity
20/01/2011 04:20:25 PM
- 999 Views
More absurd than the notion such incitement warrants no notice?
20/01/2011 05:42:47 PM
- 1059 Views
really because people post that kind of crap daily and nothing happens
20/01/2011 05:57:52 PM
- 857 Views
I thought waterboarding was OK and any suggestion to the contrary was terrorist sympathizing.
20/01/2011 07:54:05 PM
- 809 Views
way to dodge the point again
20/01/2011 08:34:33 PM
- 817 Views
Do you have an example of a credible threat of injury to a Congressman, or calls for one?
20/01/2011 10:02:53 PM
- 899 Views
Your shifting your original premise, *again*
20/01/2011 08:24:18 PM
- 884 Views
No, you're simply missing the point of it.
20/01/2011 11:09:57 PM
- 882 Views
Uh...Last I checked conservatives didn't list the Communist Manifesto as a favourite book.
16/01/2011 03:05:07 PM
- 1199 Views
Libs hate Mein Kampf and We the Living; conservatives hate the Communist Manifesto: He's neither.
16/01/2011 10:06:02 PM
- 899 Views
conseartives hate Mein Kampf and liberals stil read the Communist Manifesto
17/01/2011 02:57:22 PM
- 878 Views
That first line is says it all.
18/01/2011 09:34:06 PM
- 961 Views
Nazis had more in common with communist then capitalist
19/01/2011 04:10:09 PM
- 1067 Views
The founder of fascism called it "the merger of corporate and national power".
20/01/2011 02:51:09 AM
- 951 Views
It is to be expected that this site would be libtard central...
16/01/2011 05:23:53 PM
- 1155 Views
Again, I don't think Palin intended this, but Giffords feared ten months ago that this could result.
16/01/2011 11:29:19 PM
- 960 Views
And I call bullshit
18/01/2011 03:12:13 PM
- 1101 Views
If Palin wants to accuse Giffords of libel she should have the guts to do it to her face.
18/01/2011 10:39:07 PM
- 1059 Views
So if some jihadist shot Gifford, would you also blame Palin?
19/01/2011 02:52:42 PM
- 943 Views
don't get ti doesn't matter who is to blame it just matters if they can use it *NM*
19/01/2011 04:11:09 PM
- 425 Views
No, I'd blame the shooter first and the mullahs shouting, "JIHAD111" second, as I always do.
20/01/2011 03:11:33 AM
- 1040 Views
Then why are you even here? I pretty much agree with you entirely and I'm fairly liberal. *NM*
18/01/2011 01:16:33 PM
- 534 Views
Palin didn't really have anything to do with this, but it makes sense she's blamed.
16/01/2011 10:19:51 PM
- 878 Views
Did they ever catch the person(s) that vandalized Gifford's office? *NM*
17/01/2011 03:30:36 AM
- 448 Views
I didn't realize someone had, but it appears a militia leader was responsible (shocking, I know).
17/01/2011 07:04:08 AM
- 897 Views
politcal offices are vandalized on a regular basis *NM*
17/01/2011 02:41:29 PM
- 408 Views
She only asked if they caught the guy, she didn't accuse anyone, Sarah.
18/01/2011 11:27:18 PM
- 845 Views
Took you this long, huh?
17/01/2011 01:53:31 PM
- 798 Views
I didn't want to look because I was afraid the charges against the far right demagogues might stick.
18/01/2011 11:07:26 PM
- 1123 Views
I am sick of the desperate attempts of liberals to find a way to use a tragedy
17/01/2011 02:31:18 PM
- 814 Views
I'm just curious.
17/01/2011 03:23:47 PM
- 790 Views
Had that convo with the cab driver on the way home from a New Years party.
18/01/2011 11:42:07 PM
- 1084 Views
If slander, not mine, Giffords' (at least you don't err like Palin and say, "libel" ).
18/01/2011 11:14:23 PM
- 1007 Views
mark you calendar today is the day Joel offically went around the bend into insanity
19/01/2011 05:28:06 PM
- 813 Views
A mirror will show me who's to blame? On whom have I put a crosshairs?
20/01/2011 03:23:43 AM
- 867 Views
so it is all a matter of faith for you
20/01/2011 05:48:44 AM
- 818 Views
No, it's fairly straight forward logic.
20/01/2011 03:25:56 PM
- 923 Views
sorry Joel but you haven't
20/01/2011 03:29:49 PM
- 728 Views
It's there; in this thread alone people from both sides of the aisle have acknowledged that.
20/01/2011 05:51:21 PM
- 821 Views
only in your does the connection exisit
20/01/2011 06:39:35 PM
- 855 Views
No.
20/01/2011 07:35:09 PM
- 934 Views
dude wake up
20/01/2011 08:54:33 PM
- 1074 Views
Fine, I have no problem dropping the "right" label in my condemnations.
20/01/2011 10:39:34 PM
- 1050 Views
Why not just blame Giffords?
17/01/2011 06:07:14 PM
- 1151 Views
Indeed, why not; Sarah Palin does.
18/01/2011 06:58:01 PM
- 970 Views
The left are the ones storing up hate with their pathetic slaner
18/01/2011 07:53:23 PM
- 925 Views
At least 95% of the blame is Loughners; he's a nut, but that doesn't exonerate the demagogues.
18/01/2011 11:24:11 PM
- 1020 Views
0% belongs to political rhetoric from the right
19/01/2011 02:47:56 PM
- 786 Views
Uh huh; it's absurd to mention right wing rhetoric when left wing rhetoric is the OBVIOUS culprit
19/01/2011 02:59:41 PM
- 830 Views
No leftist rhetoric? You just called a bunch of people 'dangeorus lunatics'
19/01/2011 03:37:54 PM
- 798 Views
Rhetoric is one thing, but I didn't use violent imagery, did I?
20/01/2011 01:40:14 AM
- 1124 Views
no but the democratic party used very similar images in the same state
20/01/2011 06:41:19 PM
- 856 Views
It's news to me, but I condemn all violent inflammatory imagery and rhetoric.
20/01/2011 07:13:18 PM
- 827 Views
it was the national democrats
20/01/2011 08:32:01 PM
- 928 Views
Then that's equally dangerous and reprehensible and more reason to loathe the DLC and DCCC.
20/01/2011 09:49:08 PM
- 1197 Views
The right is not the ones claiming rhetoric is the issue
19/01/2011 03:58:39 PM
- 841 Views
"WE aren't doing it, except for when we are". Admission of guilt is a poor defense.
20/01/2011 03:25:16 AM
- 817 Views
The irony of this thread is not lost on me.
19/01/2011 04:09:01 PM
- 991 Views
Bizarre thread for that Soapbox
19/01/2011 05:17:58 PM
- 740 Views
You missed the point, obviously.
19/01/2011 06:04:23 PM
- 850 Views
That I knew it would go this way is why I avoided looking closely for so long.
19/01/2011 11:20:44 PM
- 997 Views
Re: OK, I'm Officially Sick of the "Blood Libel" BS.
22/01/2011 05:49:44 PM
- 1004 Views
We can debate whether it's coincidental, but the connections are documented fact
22/01/2011 08:17:24 PM
- 973 Views