MAD MAX VS. THE JEWS!

For the last couple of days, I’ve been seeing an article by New York Times Media critic Frank Rich titled Mel Gibson’s Martyrdom Complex. I spoke of Mr. Rich back on July 21st when he was convinced that liberals couldn’t break into talk radio because they were the serious ones.

Anywhoo, like I said, I’ve been seeing this editorial and today I finally read it. Boy, is that man a mess! He’s convinced that Mel Gibson’s new, privately financed movie “The Passion” is going to start a new Crusade to impale the Jews and the renewal of deicide, defined as:

The act of killing a being of a divine nature; particularly, the putting to death of Jesus Christ

You know, the Jews collective guilt for the death of Jesus Christ. Poor Frank Rich, he feels his people, who were collectively absolved with Vatican II, are know going to have the hatred start all over again. He says we need to worry because Mr. Gibson says so himself,

“Asked by Bill O'Reilly in January if his movie might upset "any Jewish people," Mr. Gibson responded: "It may. It's not meant to. I think it's meant to just tell the truth. . . . Anybody who transgresses has to look at their own part or look at their own culpability."”

Ah, the “anybody who transgresses” must be the Jews. But, notice the three dots just before that? That is the sure sign of a Dowdism, named after Mr. Rich’s own co-worker Maureen Dowd. A Dowdism is when you leave key parts out a quote to change it’s meaning. Let’s check out what the whole quote, sans the Dowdism:

“It may. It's not meant to.

I think it's meant to just tell the truth. I want to be as truthful as possible. But, when you look at the reasons behind why Christ came, why he was crucified, he died for all mankind and he suffered for all mankind, so that, really, anybody who transgresses has to look at their own part or look at their own culpability.”

When you look at the whole quote, you see that Gibson was talking about all mankind and it’s transgressions, not Jews. This is typical garbage that is printed daily in the New York Times, this isn’t an anomaly, this isn’t rare, it’s ALL OF THE TIME!

The other big problem Rich has with Mel Gibson is the screening Gibson did in Washington. It seems Gibson didn’t bother to invite any of the people who are gunning for him. This outrages Rich. He thinks it was just terrible that the ADL didn’t get an invite and the only Jew there was Matt Drudge (Oh, the horror!) This is a sign of blatant anti-Semitism to Mr. Rich.

Hmm, so…nobody who was sure to blast Mr. Gibson’s work was invited and this is surprising to Frank Rich? What an idiot. How many times has Frank Rich asked Ann Coulter to give him a jacket quote for one of his books? I wonder if he is concerned about the number of Mormons, Satanists or Hindus invited to the screening; is it some form of anti-Hindi thing going on? I wonder if Frank Rich is concerned about the number of white members of the Congressional Black Caucus? (The answer is zero, whites can’t be members) How about Republicans invited to the Democratic Convention? Use your head for once, Rich!

Rich also plays up the controversy by the letter from Jews and the US Conference of Catholic Bishops who read an early (and erroneous, according to Gibson) script that seemed to have anti-Semitic overtones. Of course, Rich never mentions the USCCB has since withdrawn their concerns. Again, Rich lies by omission to prove his point.

I wrote a few days ago it must be nice to be a member of the Times and be unencumbered by the truth and I think I was wrong. It must be easy, but they are so unhappy, I’m not sure it’s nice.