Originally posted by JewelsVernz
I didn't miss your argument.
Yes, you did. And you still are...
The fact is, as far as I know, the ADL hasn't specifically made that claim. You have.
If you haven't read or heard any comments from the ADL or others in the media calling this movie (in effect) "one that depicts the Jews of the time as blood-thirsy", you're not paying attention. It's all over the place! Just watch a few interviews on MSNBC or whoever happens to be covering it in the coming days. The detractors say the same kinds of things, over and over... and over.
"This movie unfairly blames the Jews..."
"This movie makes Jews look cruel..."
"This movie overstates what happend..."
"This movie is an unfair portrayal..."
Ad infinitum... but the implication of all these is the same: the Jews were out to see Jesus executed in this movie (and the ADL and others don't feel it's true / fair).
You're the one that snaked that line of argument trying to dress it up as an argument the ADL might make. The argument is yours. And you've still to explain it. So what's the connection?!!
Idiocy. Won't even honor it with a rebuttal. Given your post count is in single digit territory, if I were you, I might take a hint from the fact that other veteran posters in here (even those who may disagree with me) are not taking the "in your face" type of stance that you are. That is to say, they know me a lot better than you do and so if they don't see anything wrong with the way I'm making my argument... well you figure out the rest.
What is the connection someone should make as they watch Jews haplessly suffer the brutality of Roman occupation and them being blood thirsty? You think that connection might be there in the movie? You think it might be in the story - i.e., The Official Roman Edition? I want to know where you got this idea from. C'mon Moogs, don't be shy. Speak up!
A) I've made an effort to reply to all of your assertions thus far, no matter how baseless they seem to me, but your attitude is getting old fast. I haven't said a thing that seems to offend anyone, other than you. So knock off the "snake" and "shy" talk. As if I've somehow dodged something. The more you post, the more you come off as a troll and nothing more.
B) I DON'T KNOW what connections and ideas the general public "should draw" from this movie. I only know what the ADL *seems* to be drawing from it, based on their FAQ and several interviews with ADL supporters than I've seen on TV. Intelligent people will make up their own minds when they see it, and as I've said THREE TIMES NOW, I haven't yet MADE MINE UP, because I haven't seen the movie. I've made crystal clear (to everyone buy you apparently) that I am trying to show some CONTEXT (you know what context is, right?) as to why the ADL might be so upset about this (beyond just the superficial issue of "gory depictions").
I'm trying to look at the whole thing with an analytical / critical eye... apparently this bothers you.
Note that I never said they were WRONG to be upset, just that (TO THIS POINT) I think they might be overreacting somewhat. Who knows... I might see the movie this week and totally change my mind about that part. Maybe Gibson put all kinds of inappropriate themes in the movie and I will side with the ADL... I'm just making points based on what I've seen and heard to date.
Get that through your head before you post to me again, OK?
C) I don't have an agenda, so you can stop badgering me as if I do. If your next post doesn't bag the accusatory overtones, don't expect a response.