The Blood Libel Returns

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

The Blood Libel Returns

With the revival of anti-Semitism as a global phenomenon, everything old is new again. A new Holocaust is threatened in Iran, a former top military leader and presidential candidate speaks in code of the dark power of New York money circles, and now, shockingly, the ancient blood libel against the Jews is revived in seemingly respectable quarters. After all the terrible things that have been done because of this lie, who could be so reckless as to give it new life?


Two Jewish professors, one an Israeli of Italian origin who teaches at a prestigious religious Jewish university in Israel, Bar-Illan, and is the son of a former chief rabbi of Rome, the other an Italian Jewish historian, have just revived the notorious "blood libel" that has caused the cruel murder of thousands of their co-religionists since medieval times. Professor Ariel Toaff has just this past week published a book in Italy called Pasque di Sangue, or "Bloody Passovers," reasserting that the long-discredited medieval Christian legend that Jews ritually murder Christian children, drain their bodies of blood, mingle the blood in their matzah during the Passover festival and ritually consume it, has some truth in it.

American Thinker: The Blood Libel Returns

And these people are teachers? WTF? :shock:

 

[Simon W. Moon]

And these people are teachers? WTF?

They must be some more of them Jewish anti-semites.

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

They must be some more of them Jewish anti-semites.

Umm, so you don't think this is re-god-damn-diculous? Oh and BTW there were Jews at the holocaust denial rally in Iran, every faith's got crazies I suppose, just look at the Phelps clan.

 

[CaptainCourtesy]

I appreciate this post TOT. You have shown integrity by showing a different view of a position you normally adhere to. No group is perfect or lacking of extremists. It is the responsibility of the members of that group to point them out.

 

[Simon W. Moon]

Umm, so you don't think this is re-god-damn-diculous?

A Prof wrote a book where he cites confessions obtained under duress as his evidence.
We all know that TORTURE IS NOT A RELIABLE MEANS OF OBTAINING TRUTHFUL, USEFUL INFORMATION, right?
I mean, if torture WAS a reliable means of producing info, then there might be something to these terrible accounts provided under duress.

Based solely on the article provided, the prof's point is that there were a few Jewish wack-jobs in Europe back in the day. That's it. That's his case. He does NOT say that all Jews did it. He just says that there actually was a small group of nuts.

I don't find it outside the realm of possibility. Humans are capable of such and worse [and things incredibly nobler]. As we've already established, just because you're Jewish doesn't mean that you're sensible. Maybe it's true, maybe it's not.

I don't see how it's that big of a deal outside of some very narrow academic circles whether there actually were some nut jobs in Europe centuries ago who happened to be Jewish.

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

A Prof wrote a book where he cites confessions obtained under duress as his evidence.
We all know that TORTURE IS NOT A RELIABLE MEANS OF OBTAINING TRUTHFUL, USEFUL INFORMATION, right?
I mean, if torture WAS a reliable means of producing info, then there might be something to these terrible accounts provided under duress.

Based solely on the article provided, the prof's point is that there were a few Jewish wack-jobs in Europe back in the day. That's it. That's his case. He does NOT say that all Jews did it. He just says that there actually was a small group of nuts.

Then I ask you what was the point of bringing it up(save for the obvious one)? Answer that one soldier.

 

[Gardener]

I don't see how it's that big of a deal outside of some very narrow academic circles whether there actually were some nut jobs in Europe centuries ago who happened to be Jewish.

It's a big deal because it has been one of the tools haters have utilized to promote their agenda -- an agenda which has resulted in genocide historically, and is so very much on the upswing throughout the world today.

I guess I'm just a pragmatist. I value the lives of the six million murdered and the 20 million today under constant attack more than I do some professor's right to inflame.THe mere fact we are discussing him (and I had already read the article TOT posted) means this ISN'T restricted to some academic backwater. THis is the age of communication, and it is very naive to think this won't be added to the arsenal of countless hate groups and hate sites who will point to select passages and proclaim "look, it IS true".

Whether or not this professor portrayed this blood libel as rare is hardly important considering the signifigance of the libel historically. What is important is that he has validated it. Do you actually think the people inflamed will stop to consider whether or not it was limited to a few Jews?

 

[Navy Seal Patriot]

Christian legend that Jews ritually murder Christian children

Let's see what Google has to say about this legend vs. fact.

evidence of jewish ritual murder - Buscar con Google

Home Page got my attention.

 

[The face of Jacob]

MKs demand trial of blood libel writer

Knesset Members demanded Monday that the state prosecute Prof. Ariel Toaff, author of Pasque di Sangue [Passover of Blood], which suggests that there might be hard facts behind the accusations of blood libels against the Jews.

Italy's Jewish community slams blood libel book
MK Michael Melchior (Labor-Meimad), chairman of the Knesset Education Committee, said that Toaff has caused "damage to the Jewish People and to the Nation of Israel." MK Ze'ev Elkin (Kadima) suggested that the committee appeal to Bar-Ilan University to fire Toaff from his position there as a Professor of Medieval and Renaissance History.

MK Marina Solodkin (Kadima) said she thought "there are valid reasons to prosecute the author of the book," and called to "bring him to trial over historical truth and the Jewish people's reputation."

Due to the controversy, Toaff has already suspended the distribution and printing of the book, and has said that he would donate his profits from the 3,000 copies already sold to the Anti-Defamation League (ADL).

"As far as the ADL is concerned the damage is done. This is one of the most disastrous episodes in or battle against conspiracy theories. They are not marginal, they are flourishing," said Arieh O'Sullivan, spokesman for the ADL in Israel. "Enemies of Israel will seize on this book as a gift. They will argue that because of this 'courageous' Jew with impeccable credentials, the son of a the former chief rabbi of Rome and from Bar-Ilan, all the other conspiracy theories will be true."

Bar-Ilan University President Professor Moshe Kaveh said that he had met with Toaff and issued a press release condemning the book.

In the book, Toaff discusses the blood libel of Trent in 1475, and suggests that Jews may have murdered the young child mentioned in that story. Last week, Toaff said that he would clarify in a journal, and state that the Jews did not routinely murder Christian children for their blood.

Full article inside

 

[Simon W. Moon]

Then I ask you what was the point of bringing it up(save for the obvious one)? Answer that one soldier.

It is the central evidence the guys used to make the case in the book that is the topic of this debate.

How did you plan on conducting a debate about the book WITHOUT discussing the evidence used to make the case presented in the book?

From your cite:

To substantiate the charges of ritual murder against the Jews, Toaff relies not on any new evidence, but on the original confessions extracted through torture from the accused Jews in Trent and elsewhere.
​

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

It is the central evidence the guys used to make the case in the book that is the topic of this debate.

How did you plan on conducting a debate about the book WITHOUT discussing the evidence used to make the case presented in the book?

From your cite:

To substantiate the charges of ritual murder against the Jews, Toaff relies not on any new evidence, but on the original confessions extracted through torture from the accused Jews in Trent and elsewhere.​

So you're comparing coercive interogation to medieval torture? Show me the CIA or NSA using the Iron Maiden and we'll talk.

 

[Simon W. Moon]

Don't be afraid of ideas

I guess I'm just a pragmatist. I value the lives of the six million murdered and the 20 million today under constant attack more than I do some professor's right to inflame.

And do you pragmatically think that this book will kill these twenty million people?

THe mere fact we are discussing him (and I had already read the article TOT posted) means this ISN'T restricted to some academic backwater. THis is the age of communication, and it is very naive to think this won't be added to the arsenal of countless hate groups and hate sites who will point to select passages and proclaim "look, it IS true".

And you think that yet another piece of silly scholarship is a threatening doomsday weapon in their 'arsenal'?
Do you think it will be the one that will finally turn the tide in their favor?

Whether or not this professor portrayed this blood libel as rare is hardly important considering the signifigance of the libel historically. What is important is that he has validated it. Do you actually think the people inflamed will stop to consider whether or not it was limited to a few Jews?

What if the guys are right?

 

[Simon W. Moon]

So you're comparing coercive interogation to medieval torture? Show me the CIA or NSA using the Iron Maiden and we'll talk.

Where did I do this exactly?

And what exactly is the difference between these two terms- technically speaking?

Do you think that the case presented in the book is undermined by the fact that the evidence consists of confession obtained through torture?
To me it seems self-evident that such confessions are of dubious quality and therefore do not make solid evidence on which to build a case.

Do you agree or disagree?

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

Re: Don't be afraid of ideas

What if the guys are right?

Right about what? That Jews use the blood of Christian children to make motza? Are you ****ing serious?

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

Where did I do this exactly?

Oh please, it's obvious that that is your intention.

Do you think that the case presented in the book is undermined by the fact that the evidence consists of confession obtained through torture?

To me it seems self-evident that such confessions are of dubious quality and therefore do not make solid evidence on which to build a case.

Do you agree or disagree?

To me it seems self evident that Jews using the blood of Christian children to make motza is a crock of sh!t and anti-semetic slander regardless of where the information comes from.

 

[Simon W. Moon]

Re: Don't be afraid of ideas

That Jews use the blood of Christian children to make motza?

Do you think this is what these guys said in their book?

Are you ****ing serious?

Do you think that I have said that these guys are right?

 

[Simon W. Moon]

Oh please, it's obvious that that is your intention.

How did you plan on conducting a debate about the book WITHOUT discussing the evidence used to make the case presented in the book?

To me it seems self evident that Jews using the blood of Christian children to make motza is a crock of sh!t and anti-semetic slander regardless of where the information comes from.

Because its not PC its wrong and that's all the more one needs to know.
Why bother refuting evidence?

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

Re: Don't be afraid of ideas

Do you think this is what these guys said in their book?

That is exactly what they were saying, read the article.

Do you think that I have said that these guys are right?

You left it as a possiblity why else would you ask: "what if these guys are right?"?

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

How did you plan on conducting a debate about the book WITHOUT discussing the evidence used to make the case presented in the book?


Because its not PC its wrong and that's all the more one needs to know.
Why bother refuting evidence?

Not because it's not PC but because it is obvious anti-semetic libel that has long been debunked.

 

[Simon W. Moon]

Re: Don't be afraid of ideas

That is exactly what they were saying, read the article.

They said that there were some wack jobs living near Trent who were Jewish.

You left it as a possiblity why else would you ask: "what if these guys are right?"?

So you don't think I've said that these guys are right?

 

[CaptainCourtesy]

Home Page got my attention.

A wonderfully absurd anti-semetic website, full with the typical prejudical innuendo one would find in a place like that. Continuing to promote your agenda, eh, NSP?

 

[The face of Jacob]

Couple of days ago, I heard a daily radio show in radio Kol-Chai of a famous Israeli Rabbi and a religious person in the name of Yisrael Aichler, who was also a Knesset Member for couple of years and also is a well known panelist in TV political talk shows, anyway, he interviewed couple of very important Rabbis in Israel who said that the book of this Tuaf is nothing but a blood libel itself and that he should be baned from Israel. They also said that also his father - the former chief Rabbi of Italy was a very controversial Rabbi and he was the one who invited the pope to enter the big synagogue in Rome in 1986 and he allows the pope to enter the synagogue whilst he was wearing the big cross on his neck. It wasn't appropriate and there was lot's of fuss amongst Jews worldwide when he did it.

 

[Gardener]

Re: Don't be afraid of ideas

And do you pragmatically think that this book will kill these twenty million people?

Obviously not. That would be stupid. Do you think there is absolutely no correlation between words and actions,though? Between rhetorec and the creation of perceptions that damage people? Do you have no understanding of the way people process information, form opinions, propagate memes or indulge in rationalizations?

And you think that yet another piece of silly scholarship is a threatening doomsday weapon in their 'arsenal'?
Do you think it will be the one that will finally turn the tide in their favor?

Once again, obviously not.That would be stupid. Why are you dealing in such absolutes, or attempting to portray me as one who does? Obviously it is not *THE* "doomsday weapon", but it certainly provides validation for a notion that has certainly provided much of the componants for a damaging weapon historically.

THe blood libel has been used as one tool throughout history to persecute Jewish people. The reasons Jewish people have been persecuted are certainly much more complex than that, as the persecution is much a byproduct of group dynamics vis a vis majority vrs. minority and the resulting prejudices arising from attachment to group coupled with fear of that which is different. What the blood libel accomplishes is a galvanization of opinion whereby the natural distrust of that which is different is reinforced by the creation of perceptions where they are not just different, they are evil.

Instead of trying so hard to trivialize that which has contributed towards the persecution of a people, perhaps you might try to understand that persecution, instead. Perhaps you are unaware of the role the blood libel has played throughout history, but all your trivilization indicates to me is that you don't want to know. Whether two people were crazy and indulged in it is immaterial from the standpoint of the signifigance of the libel, itself. A couple of Salem women may have indulged in rites associated with witchcraft. Also immaterial from the standpoint of the role the libel plays is whether or not confessions were extracted by force. Do you actually think every person in the world evaluates in the same manner as you? Do you think humans are all rational beings who say "hmmm, confessions were extracted by force, therefore they might not be valid?".

So far in this conversation,I have not seen you acknowlege, much less condemn,the role the libel has played in history and is still playing today. All I have seen are your attempts at trivilization.

 

[Simon W. Moon]

Re: Don't be afraid of ideas

Obviously not. That would be stupid. Do you think there is absolutely no correlation between words and actions,though?

You made it out to be an either or choice:

"I value the lives of the six million murdered and the 20 million today under constant attack more than I do some professor's right to inflame."
​

Perhaps now you're saying that "the lives of ... the 20 million today" can still be reasonably secured while this book exists.

Between rhetorec and the creation of perceptions that damage people? Do you have no understanding of the way people process information, form opinions, propagate memes or indulge in rationalizations?

Do you think that these guys are trying to do such a thing?
Or do you think that these guys are earnest?

From what I can see, these guys earnestly believe that over the course of four hundred years "several" ritualistic murders of children took place. I don't know if that means one every hundred years or or two every hundred years.
from the OP's site

"...[FONT=times new roman,times]Toaff holds that from 1100 to about 1500. . .several crucifixions of Christian children really happened,"[/FONT]
​

[FONT=times new roman,times]The folks who twist things to fulfill their propaganda needs get more mileage out of bannings and adverse reactions than they do from dispassionate debunking,

This isn't really that big of boon to them. Rushton does more for them. Haven't you ever wondered why so many of them say they "know about genetics and stuff?"

Further, no matter how wrong these guys are, they have right to pursue their research. That's how these things work. Kind of like a drawn out dialectic. These guys present their evidence and their case, then some other folks analyze and critique their evidence and case and everyone goes round and round till enough of the questions are resolved.

There's no need to resort to censorship just because the topic isn't PC. In addition to being unnecessary, it is counter-productive as it adds credibility, importance and mystique to the banned book.
The only way to win in the war of ideas is with ideas. Censorship and the like strengthen the case of the opposition..
[/FONT]

Instead of trying so hard to trivialize that which has contributed towards the persecution of a people, perhaps you might try to understand that persecution, instead.

I'm not inflating this book with the potential to reawaken the kinds of nastiness that occurred before.
There's already such a huge wealth of things for them to twist to their ends, that the ostensible value of censoring the book [which I think would be counter-productive to the goal] is far outweighed by the value of letting of bringing these things to light for critical evaluation.

Do you actually think every person in the world evaluates in the same manner as you?

I don't think I'm smart enough to know what's for everyone else's own good.

Do you think humans are all rational beings who say "hmmm, confessions were extracted by force, therefore they might not be valid?".

I notice that I seem to be the only one debating and rebutting the evidence presented in the book rather than merely saying that the book is bad, bad bad.

In the war of ideas, censorship is the last refuge of the incompetent government.