Palin charges critics with 'blood libel'

Sarah Palin released a video statement Wednesday calling the rush to pin blame on conservatives for the shooting in Tucson, Ariz., a “blood libel.”

“Acts of monstrous criminality stand on their own,” she said. “They begin and end with the criminals who commit them.”

In the eight-minute video, Palin says, “Especially within hours of a tragedy unfolding, journalists and pundits should not manufacture a blood libel that serves only to incite the very hatred and violence they purport to condemn. That is reprehensible.”
[ For complete coverage of politics and policy, go to Yahoo! Politics ]

Palin’s use of the charged phrase “blood libel” — which refers to the anti-Semitic accusation from the Middle Ages that Jews killed Christian children to use their blood to make matzo for Passover — touched off an immediate backlash. (see: Full text of Sarah Palin's statement)

“The blood libel is something anti-Semites have historically used in Europe as an excuse to murder Jews — the comparison is stupid. Jews and rational people will find it objectionable,” said Hank Sheinkopf, a New York-based Democratic political consultant and devout Jew. “This will forever link her to the events in Tucson. It deepens the hole she’s already dug for herself. … It’s absolutely inappropriate.” (see: The Arena: Palin's 'blood libel' defense fair?)

Palin has faced criticism this week for images that look like gun cross hairs she used to identify the districts of Democrats who were vulnerable in the 2010 elections, including that of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-Ariz.), who was shot on Saturday. (see: Shooting presents 2012 test)

But in her first extended response to the shooting — released hours before President Barack Obama is to visit Tucson — Palin said that “responsibility lies not collectively with all the citizens of a state, not with those who listen to talk radio, not with maps of swing districts used by both sides of the aisle, not with law-abiding citizens who respectfully exercise their First Amendment rights at campaign rallies, not with those who proudly voted in the last election.

So who here agrees with her? I would say that I would stick it in her tho haha

Unless she has said at any point in her life "I'm an idiot" I can't really find anything to agree on. She really has blown it. I don't care what people say to be honest, her site triggered an insane man to shoot that woman, she tried to cover it up, and now she's playing the victim even though it was entirely her fault. And she uses a term that refers to Christian attacks on Jews.

The irony here is that Giffords herself is Jewish. I swear I'm not making that up.

Her choice of words is nothing new, she has never been good at what needs to be said,or actually how it needs to be said. As much as hate to agree with anything she says, I do believe she is right in saying “Acts of monstrous criminality stand on their own. They begin and end with the criminals who commit them.” We need to quit blamming the TV shows, games and internet for the actions of Evil. Some people are just Evil and Evil needs to be destroyed within the limits of the law. JMO

Is Palin sure that the 'Blood Libel' against the Jews by the European Christians a lie?

Professor Ariel Toaff claims in his book that some Christian children may have been killed by "a minority of fundamentalist Jews of Ashkenazi origin." In an interview with Haaretz Toaff said: "Over many dozens of pages I proved the centrality of blood on Passover," Toaff said. "Based on many sermons, I concluded that blood was used, especially by Ashkenazi Jews, and that there was a belief in the special curative powers of children's blood. It turns out that among the remedies of Ashkenazi Jews were powders made of blood.".........

Blood Libel