• Please use real names.

    Greetings to all who have registered to OPF and those guests taking a look around. Please use real names. Registrations with fictitious names will not be processed. REAL NAMES ONLY will be processed

    Firstname Lastname

    Register

    We are a courteous and supportive community. No need to hide behind an alia. If you have a genuine need for privacy/secrecy then let me know!
  • Warning: and are NSFW. Threads may start of as text only but then pictures could be added as part of a discussion or to make some point. This is not for family viewing without a parent's consent and supervision. If you are under age 18, please do not use this section
  • Welcome to the new site. Here's a thread about the update where you can post your feedback, ask questions or spot those nasty bugs!

Mel Gibson's Arrest Photos of arrest reports

Don Lashier

New member
Asher Kelman said:
People who are poor get to be dumped in jail. Nobody redacts and rewites reports.

People who are poor get beaten up - remember Rodney King, whose behaviour was probably not as outrageous as Mel?

- DL
 

Chuck Fry

New member
Roger Lambert said:
Could you go into more depth about that, Chuck?

Let's let the ADL speak for themselves:

Abraham H. Foxman said:
... His tirade finally reveals his true self ... It is unfortunate that it took an excess of booze and an encounter with a police officer to reveal what was really in his heart and mind.

We would hope that Hollywood now would realize the bigot in their midst and that they will distance themselves from this anti-Semite.

First off, the ADL presented an official press release in response to an arresting officer's report that was leaked and not obtained through any official channels. On this basis, they called for an end to Gibson's career.

Second, the ADL deliberately tried to blur the lines between Gibson's record as an actor and director, and his drunken private rantings. The ADL didn't like the way "The Passion of the Christ" portrayed Jews, fair enough. But with the alleged anti-Semitic drunken tirade, in hindsight they saw "The Passion" as an expression of a clear pattern of deliberate bigotry. That's like saying 1 + 2 = 56.

Understand that I'm not condoning Gibson's actions in any way. But it is a fact that people are not normally rational thinkers when they've just been stopped for drunk driving. And it's clear from the rest of the arresting officer's report that Gibson was being obnoxious to everyone, irrespective of race, creed, or gender. I read all of this as saying Gibson was looped clear out of his mind when he made these remarks.

In light of the facts, I feel the ADL's reaction was hypersensitive to the point of being inflammatory.
 

Chuck Fry

New member
Asher Kelman said:
We have a perfect right, no I should say, responsibilty, to denounce M.G. or any other racist. Admission, accountability, change in behavior and restitution commensurate with his wealth, would go a long way to him earning himself forgiveness.

I'm sorry, I don't agree that Gibson has been proven to be a racist. And I don't agree that denouncing people on the basis of their presumed attitudes is responsible in any way.

If you want to call Gibson's behavior "disgusting", I won't argue.

Gibson's public statements since the arrest have effectively admitted his guilt as far as drunken driving, verbally assaulting police officers, and making anti-Semitic slurs. As I said before, this is not the usual ass-covering, finger-pointing behavior we see in such cases, and it goes a long way towards accountability in my book.

What more would you have him do, Asher? Would you crucify him??
 

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Chuck Fry said:
Let's let the ADL speak for themselves:


A. they saw "The Passion" as an expression of a clear pattern of deliberate bigotry. That's like saying 1 + 2 = 56.

.

A. No, there was no "retrospective" mathematical thinking linking M.G. current actions to his previous.

People who knew Mel's father and Mel had perfect understanding of their so-called Catholic independent church and Mel’s beliefs fit in perfectly. For him, sober, he cast the Passion with all the opprobrious mythology largely expunged by the Popes in the mid-20th century. Read the encyclicals "Nostre Aetate" and "Pacem in Terres".

Mel is obsessed with hatred fueled by ideas that other Christians have tried to nuance, blame and hate for Jews for the crucifixion. His feelings were quite reasonable at the time of Constantine, who set this in motion, and was expressed well in the venom of Martin Luther in Germany and the Catholics in the Inquisition.

He celebrates the torture. No Jewish court could have passed a death sentence. Anyway crucifixion was just an everyday way of slaughtering thousands of Jews into submission. Herod, presented by Mel as struggling in anguish of Jesus' fate, in fact was hauled back to Rome for his barbarous cruelty to Jews all over the occupied Jewish state.

The only thing that ADL did is to say, see that is the real Mel Gibson that we have known all along.

Asher

BTW, if "save" doesnt seem to work in posting replies, use "Go Advanced"
 

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Chuck Fry said:
I'm sorry, I don't agree that Gibson has been proven to be a racist. And I don't agree that denouncing people on the basis of their presumed attitudes is responsible in any way.

What more would you have him do, Asher? Would you crucify him??

He is attitudes are not "presumed". The facts speak for themselves. His upbringing, his archaic church, his father, his retention of views disavowed by Catholic Church, his rendering of the Passion and the photographed transcripts.

As to your question and the proposed solution, that in itself is inexplicable and unacceptable. What would make you think that a Jew would ever crucify anyone? It has never hasppened and it never will.

What more would you have him do? What more than what? "I'm sorry"? Those are mere words. He has long standing behavior to go with his outburst.

I personally would never do anything to him, except if he was hungry or cut or needed an antibiotic or asked for my advice.

This is his job. He has all the capability, charm, wealth and knowledge to respond as he should by deeds.

Words are fine and can be very decorative like a great suit or a warm smile.

What he should do is like the following:

Work against racism for the rest of his life.

Support clincs for battered women.

Provide limbs for children hurt by landmines,

Fund Aids vaccines for Africa.

He has at his whim, the power to do all that. Then I might say he has repented. As to his heart, only he will know, unless he gets plastered again.

In any case, I have told you what he can do. This will earn forgiveness and my awe.

Asher
 

KrisCarnmarker

New member
Well this is certainly an interesting thread full of rather sensitive subjects.

First of all, I agree completely with Dierk's comments about "racism" being a result of evolutionary circumstances ("Racism" is the wrong word, xenophobia is probably a better word but not quite right either). No, it is not genetic or instinct as us humans have very few of those (compared to most other animals on the planet). We are taught almost everything. I have lived in many places around the world and have or have had friends, colleagues or acquaintances from all walks of life and from most all races or cultures. So far I have not met a single one that does not have some racism in them (this includes myself and "my own people" as well). Some cultures are more openly racist than others, some people more so than others and some people knowingly and some unknowingly. Racism against some is tolerated more than against others (which is racism in itself, of course).

I see it right now, right this minute. Arabs here treat the Asian sub-continentals as little more than slave labour, being mistreated or being paid 1/100th or less (if they even get paid at all) for the same job as a native doing the same job, simply because they are Indian or Pakistani or whathaveyou. Israelites racism against Arabs and Palestinians is so developed that they now feel justified in massacring hundreds of civilians as fair and appropriate retribution for the capture of two enemy soldiers. Yes, this is a complex matter but I'm afraid actions speak for themselves and if you cannot see the racism in this action then my point about "hidden" racism is proven IMO. And yes, Arabs are equally racist against the Jews.

Why is it that racism against Jews is so much worse than racism against Arabs? Has anybody here publicly "denounced" the daily racism Arab-Americans have to endure? Does MG's drunken racist rant really justify this much public attention when much MUCH worse racism is happening all around you, every day (and I'm not only talking about anti-arab sentiments here)? I'm not saying it should be ignored, but come on! Some proportionality please!

About drunken behaviour showing the person's true believes. That is utterly preposterous! Alcohol exaggerates all emotions, be it sadness, happiness, love or hate. That is not to say the feelings displayed are not true, but they need not be.

Having said all this, MG's actions where dispicable! Being drunk is absolutely no excuse whatsoever. Driving a car while drunk is much worse IMO than the words he said. Like was said, words are just words (although depending on who you are they can lead to other things). A drunk driver will kill somebody sooner or later. Somehow, that is not the focus of the public outcry though.

At least MG made public appologies, which is more than many other celebs have done.
 

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
"Israelites racism against Arabs and Palestinians is so developed that they now feel justified in massacring hundreds of civilians as fair and appropriate retribution for the capture of two enemy soldiers. Yes, this is a complex matter but I'm afraid actions speak for themselves and if you cannot see the racism in this action then my point about "hidden" racism is proven IMO. And yes, Arabs are equally racist against the Jews."

The Israelites gave way to the Roman Empire. There are no Israelites. There are however Israeli's.

No Jewish child is taught to hate Arabs and they do not. There is no Jewish or Israeli racism to Arabs. Arabs and turks are respected hy Jews as having been hospitable to Jews every time Easter preachers fermented iliterate people to rob, rape and murder their Jewish neighbors.

Jews know that the Turkish Empire and its scholars where doing art and science incomprehensible to the Europeans at a time when bread and porridge was considered great cuisine. both Jews and Arabs suffered at the hands of the Crusades, about which G.B. was particularly ignorant.

Jews and Israelis don't massacre anyone. However, the terrorists do launch missiles everyday from behind civilians, ensuring that defensless women and children become postercard victims for prime time.

Then the outrage.

Of course it is terrible. That is war. Why did Iran supply over 13,000 missiles to be dug in aimed at Israel who didn't occupy an inch of Lebaneses soil.

The shame is on a world, who has selective outrage. Where is the anger and riots by Arabs against the maniacal

Homicide bombers in Iraq, slaughtering 700 innocents each week on and on without mass demonstration. where are the defenders of Arabs there?

Where are the riots to protest rape of tens of thousands of black women in Darfur, 1 million people driven from their land and hundreds of thousands murdered in cold blood.

Who protests the hacking to death of Christians in Indonesia?

No, we have the fashionable orchestrated outrage limited to the arranged victims of the Jews.

When Israel fires, it is to destroy a military sotre, command center or fighters.

When the terrorist fire it is to kill as many Jews as possible and to induce Lebanese or Palestinians to be killed and this inflame the Arab streets to support them and join the cause.

But is it really about Israel? I believe not.

The really war is between East and West, a religious fundamentalist authortitariean state with all knowledge coming from a divine book versus pluralistic democracies, informed by modern points of view.

There is an underlying key issue. Who will control Mecca. On The Shia side is Iran with oil and impending nuclear capabilty, on the other side are sunni dictaterships, one of which controls Mecca.

It is that holy shrine that is the underlying immediate goal and the war with Israel in a stategic prize on the way.

For now, the Saudi's, Egyptians, Gulf States and Jordanians don't fear Israel. They fear the Iran and Syria backed Hezbolah-Israeli war will cause so much civiliasn losses that their own claims to relevence will be lost in a tide of street rage. That is what is at stake.

Israelis don't go to summer camps and learn songs of martyrdom or how to murder people by nails mixed with explosives in bomb belts. Israelis are taught to love all children as much as their own.

Judaism is love your neighbor as yourself. However, Jews have decided not to be victims anymore.

Israel was the first to respond to many tragedies including the first to set up a mobile army hospital im Muslim Kosovo!

Asher
 

Dierk Haasis

pro member
Asher Kelman said:
He is attitudes are not "presumed". The facts speak for themselves. His upbringing, his archaic church, his father, his retention of views disavowed by Catholic Church, his rendering of the Passion and the photographed transcripts.

Could it be you don't like MG?

As I've made clear - I hope - I am not a friend of his views, I am not an anti-semite [this is the first instance of Godwin's Law in this thread; and I take it upon myself!], I am definitely not a sexists although every single feminist I know thinks otherwise. Personally I never liked people drinking too much, a much smaller portion almost anybody thinks.

But what and in which tone you hurl at Mr Gibson's bad behaviour seems a bit excessive. The facts as we know them are:

1. Mel is a self-proclaimed alcoholic
2. Thursday night he was drunk
3. He drove drunk and like a drunk
4. [As every drunk driver stopped by the police] He was rude and insulted everybody around
5. Some of his remarks are nowadays big No-Nos everywhere but in Alabama and the Muslim world
6. Alcohol [and other drugs] is known to lower our rationality and [natural cum cultural] inhibitions

The conclusion is: DUI is bad, Mel Gibson's behaviour was bad. Some of his remarks may be what he really thinks. But even then he has not ever actually done anything ant-semitic, he has not even called anybody to arms against Jews. Whatever the fault with his most discussed film since Mad Max - which is decidedly not a Christ story, quite to the contrary, if at all it's an Old Testament story - you cannot really hold against him that he took the pieta as written literal. Especially not in conjunction with his drunk driving. Or do you want people prosecuted on their thoughts, and then on thoughts that have no connection to the actual crime?

The facts you come up with have no bearing at all at what happend save for some vague circumstancial one. Mel Gibson is not any way to blame for his having a father. He is neither accountable nor responsible for his upbringing. If the church he belongs to is "archaic" is a matter of debate and opinion, not of fact. Staying with views the church you yourself call "archaic" (in an obviously denigrating way) is a matter of opinion. You think the views are wrong but are they? What if they are right?

Let's get personal. Most of us most likely have been intoxicated at least once in our life; we've also been greatly annoyed by some happenings around us, not necessarily at the same time. In both cases we surely did and said things we shouldn't, things we were ashamed of when we were sober again. We groped ladies' body parts even if they didn't like it, we talked about the bad driver we encountered just the other day, "the white bread", slammed our superior as an "old slut, too obsessed with her career to get a guy" [yes, our insults when drunk aren't very consistent]. Depending on ones background Jew, Arab, towel-head, atheist, heathen, nigger and many more were also used. That does not make us bad people.

Often enough people coming in on a conversation between me and others lately could hear some pretty insulting and incriminating things out of my mouth. Sometimes I cited others and it wasn't clear to the ones coming late, sometimes I played the satirist's card [very often in fact]. One of my favourite jokes is definitely insulting to the real victims of the Holocaust, and heard without background it could get me into trouble. Just because I like that joke, and just because I use it to counter a specific argument (a variation on Godwin's Law) does not make me an anti-semite. It makes me a cynic, perhaps someone with no heart but not anti-Jewish.

Should we dislike Mel Gibson because he is a drunk? Because he is a Catholic? Because he is a human being behaving bad towards everybody and the kitchen sink on one instance?
 

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
I don't hate Mel gibson at all. Not one iota. I just dislike his behavior and what he is obsessed with: deicide and the crucifixion.

Being druink doesn't make one speak latin. You have to have it in you first!

I empathize that anyone has an illness. That has been my lifelong work.

However, I could care less about his claim that he is a self-proclaimed alcoholic. Let him turn in his car keys!

Let him devote himself to helping real victims. The forgivenes he currently seeks is, IMHO, for his own social standing to be repaired. That, he can do by his own efforts. He has all the power, charm, wealth and capability to turn his life around and be an example.

One can't be driving 80 miles an hour in a Malibu, even sober!

For now, if he would turn in his driver's license, I'd be 1/3 way there to forgiving him.

Asher
 
Last edited:

Don Lashier

New member
One of the interesting questions I've seen on the news sites is of the nature "are you now going to view future MG productions?". I've always separated the artist from the product. For instance, I still enjoy Woody Allen films, I still love Jerry Lee Lewis's music. So although I've never seen and have no interest in seeing Passion of the Christ, I'll judge future productions on their merits and not the fact that MG appears to be an ahole.

- DL
 

Roger Lambert

New member
Dierk Haasis said:
[this is the first instance of Godwin's Law in this thread; and I take it upon myself!],

We need to set the record straight on this. I take great pride that I invoked Godwins Law back in post # 12.

Harrumph.

:D
 

Ray West

New member
You all missed the point...

The title of this thread is wrong. I do not think it is photographs (the usual meaning, afaik of 'photo' abreviation) but it is in fact photo copies.

And Asher and others go on and on about this being a professional forum.

Asher : Feel free to commmunciate with me personally.

If a photocopy is not a photograph in the sense I used it, making it suspect, I could correct the heading.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Roger Lambert

New member
Dierk Haasis said:
he has not ever actually done anything anti-semitic, he has not even called anybody to arms against Jews.


I think Gibsons antisemitism has been more underhanded and covert than "calling anybody to arms against Jews", although violence against Jews is the inevitable result of antisemitism.

I would argue - and I am a little surprised I have to - that Mr Gibson has done plenty that is plainly anti-semitic.

1)

For starters, he aids and abets a notorious and active anti-semite, his father, who prosyletizes his message of Holocaust denial, Sedevanticism ( which rejects the Second Vatican Council's Nostra Aetate absolution of responsibility for Christs' death on the Jews, as a Jewish plot!) world-wide to this day. His father associates with known antisemites and Holocaust deniers and revisionists, and espouses all the classic deceipts of their ilk:

* all just fiction
*Impossible to dispose of that many bodies
*actually the Jews all got up and left before the war
*actually census shows more Jews living in Europe after the war than before

According to Wikipedia, Mel Gibson claims that his fathers statements (above) do not amount to Holocaust denial.

In fact, Godwin's Goblin told Peggy Noonan in an interview for Readers Digest that [of his father] "The man never lied to me in his life."

When then asked directly about the verity of the Holocaust, his answer was pure sidestep: Many people died in WWII, and some were Jews. (!)

2)

Evidently, Mr Gibson has spent over $5 million on expansion of a Catholic Church compound for a denomination his father explicitly recommended, which follows preVatican 2 canons. Granted, this sum is a pittance, considering how much money he has made on ...

3) The Passion of the Christ

Make no mistake about it. This is antisemitic propaganda at its finest. I will let Katha Pollitt of The Nation take it from here:

The Passion of the Christ: Is it anti-Semitic? It's a testament to Gibson's public relations genius that this is an open question.

Gibson claims that there are good Jews and bad Jews in the movie, as in the Gospels. This is true, but disingenuous: In The Passion, the high priest Caiaphas and his faction are not just bad, they fit neatly into ancient Christian stereotypes: They are rich, arrogant and gaudily dressed; they plot and scheme and bribe; they cleverly manipulate the brutal but straightforward Romans; they are gratuitously "cruel" and "hard-hearted," to quote Anne Catherine Emmerich, the nineteenth-century German nun whose visions of the Passion Gibson relied on for some of the more disgusting tortures he inflicts on Jesus. Physically, they are anti-Semitic cartoons: The priests have big noses and gnarly faces, lumpish bodies, yellow teeth; Herod Antipas and his court are a bizarre collection of oily-haired, epicene perverts. The "good Jews" look like Italian movie stars (Magdalene actually is an Italian movie star, the lovely Monica Bellucci); Mary, who would have been around 50 and appeared 70, could pass for a ripe 35. These visual characterizations follow not just the Oberammergau Passion Play that Hitler found so touching but a long tradition of Christian New Testament iconography in which the villains look Semitic and the heroes, although equally Jewish, look Northern European.

Gibson claims he's only telling the story as written in the Gospels, which he calls eyewitness accounts (historians say no). That the film is entirely in Aramaic and Latin underscores this bid for authenticity: "It is as it was," as his publicist falsely claimed the Pope had said. Thus Gibson, the literalist, presents himself as bending over backward to placate the you-know-who by removing from the subtitles (but not the soundtrack) the line from Matthew in which the crowd condemns itself: "Let his blood be on us and our children." Yet when called on his inaccuracies and distortions, Gibson claims artistic license. Thus, Pontius Pilate is upright and sensitive; too bad for Josephus, the first-century historian who described him as savage and corrupt. Most improbably, the temple priests tell their Roman overlord what to do. The Bible's brief mention of Jesus's flogging--one sentence in three Gospels, nothing in one--becomes a ten-minute homoerotic sadistic extravaganza that no human being could have survived, as if the point of the Passion was to show how tough Christ was.

Gibson adds considerably to the Gospels in ways that emphasize Jewish villainy. The Gospels contain no scene in which the Jewish guards who arrest Jesus whip him with chains, throw him over a bridge and dangle him over the water, choking, for fun; or in which Caiaphas and his most Fagin-resembling sidekick show up to watch Christ's scourging by the Romans; or in which Satan (played by a woman, for a nice touch of misogyny) flits among and merges with the crowd as it shouts, "Crucify him! Crucify him!" Why does Gibson dress Mary and Magdalene in what look like nun's habits, if not to turn these two Jewish women into good Catholics avant la lettre? And why does he show an earthquake splitting the temple interior as Christ expires (in the Bible, a curtain is torn), if not to justify as God's vengeance the historical destruction of the temple by the Romans a few decades later and all the sufferings of the Jewish people since?

It's a mystery to me why the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops has given this crude and kitschy film a thumbs up ("deeply personal work of devotional art...the Jewish people are at no time blamed collectively for Jesus' death"). Gibson has violated just about every precept of the conference's own 1988 "Criteria" for the portrayal of Jews in dramatizations of the Passion (no bloodthirsty Jews, no rabble, no use of Scripture that reinforces negative stereotypes of Jews, etc.). Even stranger is the enthusiasm for the film among Protestant evangelicals and fundamentalists, who seem not to realize how specifically Catholic Gibson's theology is. A generation ago, "Bible-believing" Protestants would have been up in arms over, among other "popish heresies," the quasi-divine role given to Mary and the reverence for Christ's blood (in one extra-biblical scene, Mary on her knees mops the floor where he has been scourged, using some towels given to her by Pilate's kind and thoughtful wife). Do evangelicals not have theology anymore--anything goes as long as it's "conservative," and puts Jesus on top?

The Passion is nondenominational bigotry: Jesus wept.
 

Dierk Haasis

pro member
Roger Lambert said:
For starters, he aids and abets a notorious and active anti-semite, his father

You are right, he should denounce his father and not help him anymore.

Evidently, Mr Gibson has spent over $5 million on expansion of a Catholic Church compound for a denomination his father explicitly recommended, which follows preVatican 2 canons. Granted, this sum is a pittance, considering how much money he has made on ...

I guess the Pope is always right as long as it doesn't matter or conforms with my views.

Make no mistake, I am not exempting Gibson, sr. or parts of the Catholic church, particularly not on their almost complete silence during the 30s and 40s on German politics. I simply don't think this amounts to outright anti-semitism by Mel. The most he may be guilty of is naivete, believeing his father cannot be wrong. But then, Mel Gibson is an actor, someone who can cite other people's thoughts rather convincigly ...

[Passion of the Christ] is antisemitic propaganda at its finest.

I don't deny that the Gospels are anti-Jewish and that any literal adaptation necessarily shows that. My criticism of this specific film has always been that it shows the naivete of its maker. What I find much more repelling is those Christians - incl. the so-called Christians which stem from the Protestant movements - trying to whitewash the Bible and church history. In so far Mel Gibson's movie is a success in truthfulness, not glossing over the anti-Jewish sentiments but showing them.

Anybody who believes in any Holy Scripture takes what fits his then current situation best - you want revenge, go for the Old Testament with an Eye for an Eye. You are deeply into peace, just show your left cheek after having been slapped on the right. Some, like the Catholic church, believe the Bible has to be interpreted, which is denied by many Protestants and Muslims.

Now comes a impressionable, obviously naive actor who wants to be a serious filmmaker, takes his dearest piece of literature, makes it into a movie with the express intent to show why it is called 'Passion' and 'pieta'. Which includes lots of anti-Jewish propaganda, like Jewish rabbis wanting Jesus nailed to the cross. the few changes he made may not be called for but seem to me a) reasonable (sorry folks, don't you think Jewish guards would probably have worked like Communists ones or American soldiers in Abu ghareib?], b) more a matter of being particularly gruesome.


Is Mel Gibson anti-Jewish, or anti-semite [there's a difference]? I don't know, but I do know that the DWI is not remotely proof of the hypothesis. Is Mr Gibson, sr. guilty of the same charges? From all I know about him I say yes. But that has relatively little to do with Mel Gibson being pissed when stopped by the police for driving at high speed through town.

Hey, Woody Allen, Ernst Lubitsch, Billy Wilder, Mel Brooks, Jon Steward, to name but a few, have made snide remarks and biting jokes on Jews.
 

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
"Hey, Woody Allen, Ernst Lubitsch, Billy Wilder, Mel Brooks, Jon Steward, to name but a few, have made snide remarks and biting jokes on Jews." The use of mostly poking fun at one's own ethicity in no way equates to a serious argument in this discussion.

The detailed, extreme (and standard Jew-hatred) diversions from written scripture, are not addressed Dierk in your response.

The first step for Mel is to give up his driving license so as not to put at risk real people on real roads.

When his alcoholism is clearlly controlled, we can talk differently!

Asher
 

Roger Lambert

New member
Dierk Haasis said:
Make no mistake, I am not exempting Gibson, sr. or parts of the Catholic church, particularly not on their almost complete silence during the 30s and 40s on German politics. I simply don't think this amounts to outright anti-semitism by Mel.

I'm sorry if I led you astray about the church. My point was not that he supported a Catholic Church. It was supposed to be that he knowingly gave enormous financial support to an organization based specifically against the pretext that the Jews be absolved of the Blood Libel for the Death Of Jesus. That, to me, is undeniably the act of an antisemite.

Dierk Haasis said:
The most he may be guilty of is naivete, believeing his father cannot be wrong.

Mel Gibson is an adult, and these charges are NOT new. He defends his father, has not repudiated him nor his actions, and has never directly answered repeated and specific questions about his own views on Holocaust denial, etc.



Dierk Haasis said:
I don't deny that the Gospels are anti-Jewish and that any literal adaptation necessarily shows that. My criticism of this specific film has always been that it shows the naivete of its maker.

Did you read all of the article I appended, above? It shows quite clearly that Gibson went well beyond any literal adaptation, and when he did, his choices were always antisemitic. He made a clearly over-the-top antisemitic propaganda piece.
 

Will_Perlis

New member
"Should we dislike Mel Gibson because he is a drunk? Because he is a Catholic? Because he is a human being behaving bad towards everybody and the kitchen sink on one instance?"

The latter. I don't care what he thinks. There are hoards of people thinking far worse thoughts out there and I've thought some myself at times.

I care about what he *does*, and becoming a direct threat to anyone near him via DUI (especially at his age and with his admitted self-knowledge) is something I'm not inclined to forgive. It's not as if he doesn't have someone(s) handy and happy to drive him to the nearest pizza or burger joint whenver the urge hits him.
 

Gary Ayala

New member
Will_Perlis said:
"Should we dislike Mel Gibson because he is a drunk? Because he is a Catholic? Because he is a human being behaving bad towards everybody and the kitchen sink on one instance?"

The latter. I don't care what he thinks. There are hoards of people thinking far worse thoughts out there and I've thought some myself at times.

I care about what he *does*, and becoming a direct threat to anyone near him via DUI (especially at his age and with his admitted self-knowledge) is something I'm not inclined to forgive. It's not as if he doesn't have someone(s) handy and happy to drive him to the nearest pizza or burger joint whenver the urge hits him.

Or nearest bar ...
 

Ray West

New member
What exactly is the matter with you lot? Pots, ketle, black, calling, seems to me.

A drunken actor gets arrested. spouts off a bit. some cop decides it serves no purpose to give all the details. someone else decides to stir the sh1t. Media frenzy, etc.

Isn't there anything more exciting to discuss?

I don't care what you call me, as long as you don't call me late for dinner!

Bad people...

But in reality, at a higher level, I think its rather funny.
 

Don Lashier

New member
Ray West said:
But in reality, at a higher level, I think its rather funny.

or as Craig Ferguson put it last night, "I haven't had this much fun since Cheney shot his hunting partner".

He then displayed his "Malibu warning system" and noted that since Mel announced he was going into rehab the alert level was lowered from "red" to "orange" (or Robert Downey Jr. level).

- DL
 
Last edited:

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Nill Toulme said:
I'm just counting among my many blessings the fact that it's the Sports forum and not this one I'm moderating...

Nill
~~
www.toulme.net

Nope, this is the safety valve forum! If you think this is rough fun, wait!

However, please don't neglect the rest of the forum!

BTW, I should have visited Dierk in Germany and gotten him drunk at the Munich Beer Garden where we watched the world cup. One is so busy drinking and then responding to ingestion of those 1/2 Gallon jugs of beer, that no one seems to argue about anything. Certainly, they would say, "I think he can swim, throw him in the river and be finished with the matter!"

Asher
 

Dierk Haasis

pro member
Asher Kelman said:
BTW, I should have visited Dierk in Germany and gotten him drunk at the Munich Beer Garden where we watched the world cup.

From Hamburg to Munich? Not likely. Some other problems with getting me drunk:

1) I don't like beer much, particularly not Southern Germany ones.
2) I don't drink much alcohol in public.
3) I usually only get drunk on purpose at home with a bottle of really hard stuff (think Single Malt Scotch at cask strength) when lovesick. Unfortunately I am heterosexual, so I guess, Asher, it wouldn't happen between us. ;-)

OTOH, I am one of those getting very quiet when drunk.

A few scattered notes:

- Anybody should be a possible target of poking fun at, regardless of ethnicity, sex, disability. Why segregate by humour-possibility?
- Many Jews have been known to be anti-Jewish, some mildly some rather violently. One of Woody Allen's best jokes is in Bananas when he uses the New York electric and encounters a black Jew.
- Several classic movies could not be made today for being regarded offensive. And I don't think of Birth of a Nation but harmless satirical comedies and children's movies Bambi is obviously sexist and racist.
- John Wayne has been known as an arch-conservative, in the 60s and early 70s many boycotted his movies. OTOH, he spoke out for environmentalist causes, he spoke out on behalf of the Indians [even in is movies: Chisum has a wonderful scene about the demise of Indians and how they should be treated], he spoke out against racism, was married to a Mexican. Point is: People are a bit more complex than one news story about them.
- The original intent of mine was to point out that this whole MG-drunk affair is only worth it for the writers of Colbert and Steward [BTW, American (TV) journalism is really down the drain isn't it? I refer to the way actual news shows now report.]
- The answer is 42.
- Ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam!
 

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Self-depreciatory ethnic humor in no way qualifies for repugnant racism.

I don't know, why a person sitting safely at his desk, at no risk from such attacks at this time, would put so much energy in trivialization of witnessed, filmed and self-admitted reprehensible statements. There is no argument of facts.

Further 87 MPH drunk driving in a residential zone is not a sign of a man "struggling" with alcoholism.

Asher
 

Ray West

New member
Hi Dierk,

I wuz in Hamburg last week, for a day. We did a 'quick tour' in one of the three wheeled pedal taxi things. A great way of seeing places, I reckon. A very helpful student pedeler gave an incite on how he thought your folk viewed the Brits. Its one of the places I'd like to spend some more time in. Never got to eating a real hamburger, 'tho.

re your recent 'scattered notes'.

The answer is 42

I think, more recently on here, we decided the answer was 'ctrl +'

and if you're quoting latin, one of my favourites, from schooldays, long, long ago, 'nihil illigitimae carborunderum' - my favourite may well be considered rude by some senstive folk here.

Best wishes,

Ray
 

Ray West

New member
Hi Asher,

no latin is good (I got 2% in the mock 'o' levels', took art instead, got 'A' level in one term.)

Apparently, in ww2, they had a guy in India, and one in UK, both who had been to the same uk public school, and spoke 'schoolboy french' to each other, on open channel radio. Nobody, unless they happened to learn French at the same school, could uderstand what they were saying. Reminds me of when Terry Waite (sp) was realeased from Iran prison a few years back. He said, sort of, that the deprivation he suffered was nothing compared to being a pupil at his public school.

Best wishes,

Ray
 

Chuck Fry

New member
Asher Kelman said:
Further 87 MPH drunk driving in a residential zone is not a sign of a man "struggling" with alcoholism.

How would you know? Have you spent any time with people struggling with alcoholism? Maybe you should visit a nearby recovery clinic or AA meeting. It'll open your eyes.

One characteristic of an alcoholic is that he gets drunk precisely when he has every reason in the world not to, and no explicit desire to do so. Appeals to reason and emotion don't work with alcoholics. It's not a matter of "just say no".

It's not my intent to defend Gibson's actions - they are indefensible and shameful. And they are quite typical for someone struggling with untreated alcoholism.
 
Top