In no order of importance (well, except the first item, which is not only a demand by me for freedom of speech, but for truth, which trumps freedom of speech any day!), it has come to my attention that:
The so-called "Anti Defamation League", which claims to want to abolish anti-Semitism, doesn't have a problem when they themselves practice it. There are all sorts of articles, pro and con, regarding Mel Gibson's "The Passion", which perports to be about as Biblically accurate regarding the tortuous death of Jesus Christ as one can get, right down to the fact that the Pharisees in the then ruling body, the Sanhedrin, handed Him over to the Romans for death. Now, did "the Jews" put Christ to death, or did "the Jewish government"? This is tantamount to asking, did the "American people" destroy Iraq, or did the "American government"? We know the answer to both (I hope). Gibson simply isn't saying that "the Jews" did anything to Jesus, but that their government--both religious and secular (that being the Romans)--did. So why is ADL--though not a media organization, they act like one--trying to get Mr. Gibson--who makes some of the best movies I've seen in years--to "soften" (read: self-censor) the truth? Because the truth hurts, perhaps? Because, if they really believe the Old Testament--which says that their leaders WILL put the Son of God to death (Read Isaiah and Jeremiah)--then it's not like they didn't already know what was going to happen. And, speaking of the Old Testament, there's a book in there, Genesis--and let's not forget the two Samuels--that talk about the twelve tribes of Israel, a Semite, aka Jacob, one of which, Judah, produces the line of kings. David, for instance, and, as the bible prophesies, 14 generations later, Jesus, King of Kings and Lord of Lords. All of which makes Jesus a Semite! So what's with this charge of "anti-Semitism"? The ADL is in DENILE, and I don't mean a river in Egypt!
For a couple of months now, WorldNetDaily has had it in for the New York Times, among other reasons, aside from the Jayson Blair affair, is that the Times is corrupt (aren't they all?), and that the Times got a spurrious Pulitzer Prize for its non-reporting of Stalin's crimes in the Ukraine which it is in danger of losing. Editor Joseph Farah claims it is "time to choose sides" between the Times and WND. See The New York Times vs. WorldNetDaily.
