Isn't he cute? Why he's positively adorable. Do you know who that cute little baby above is?
Adolf Hitler.
Much like film producer Oliver Stone in this week's interview with the Sunday Times (UK), I'm just putting little baby Adi "in context".
That's what Stone did in his interview when he told the Times that we need to "put Hitler in context". Hell, he killed more Russians than Jews, said Stone. And why is the US so "fixated" on the Holocaust? Why, simple, says Ollie. It's all because of the "Jewish control over the US media".
We also need to put Iran's Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in context (We "don't know the full story"), as well as Hugo Chavez, the latter of whose posterior Stone has joined Sean Penn, Danny Glover and Harry Belafonte in rushing down to Venezuela to kiss. (It feels like I wrote that last sentence in German.)
Here's a little context on Ahmadinejad for Ollie's benefit:
And what was the "crime" of these teenage boys? They were homosexual in Iran.
Her "crime"? Adultery
But according to Mr Stone, the darling of the Hollywood set, we boobs here in the US have misconceptions about Hitler, Ahmadinejad and Chavez because of the "Jewish control of the media". (I'm surprised he didn't blame it on Fox News.)
It's all a rush to judgement.
While I don't think that the idea of putting guys like Hitler in context, meaning that we pay attention not only to the man but the type of society that would allow him to even get into power in the first place, comments about the "Jewish control of the media" don't really help things and hurt Stone's case by making him look like a bigot.
ReplyDeleteDo Jews have a lot of influence in the media? Sure. It would be hard to argue that they're not disproportionately represented. Obviously, they will advocate for themselves as well. Still, to say that they "control" the media is ridiculous, and well, anti-Semitic.
It's an overly simplistic thing to say as well because it assumes that all Jews think the same and are trying to get out the same message. Look at all the flak Stephen Spielberg got from many Jews for his movie Munich. And there's a guy where it's pretty safe to say that he's rather proud of his Jewish heritage.
Lance,
ReplyDeleteIf Jews are highly represented in the media or Hollywood or banking or any other legal pursuit, that is nothing to be asahmed of rather something to be proud of. Let's remember that jews were for centuries in Europe limited to only certain professions, so they wound up excelling in those professions.
Oliver Stone is a jerk.
Sure. I wasn't saying that it was a bad thing. The problem is that people see that and completely blow it out of proportion and make ridiculous statements about how the Jews supposedly "control the media".
ReplyDeleteI try not to characterize people "as " any verbal noun, but Oliver Stone's WORDS are biggotted. There is no other adjective for them.
ReplyDeleteNow that we've seen how cute Hitler's baby picture is though, perhaps we could stop talking about how we have to "save the unborn." The truth is, some of those unborn will be statesmen and women, while others will be rapists and serial killers. We don't know.
"Now that we've seen how cute Hitler's baby picture is though, perhaps we could stop talking about how we have to "save the unborn." The truth is, some of those unborn will be statesmen and women, while others will be rapists and serial killers. We don't know."
ReplyDeleteA completely different subject, Siarlys, but how do you know which baby will become a statesman and which will be a rapist?
This is the new reality. Anti-Semitism is accepted by the Hollywood elite, the MSM, the Churches, and is prevalent in Islam.
ReplyDeleteSo I expect to soon see Woopie Goldberg on the View spouting this line, proclaiming that Oliver Stone is a "good man", what he did was taken out of context, he is a great director, etc...
I hate to take up bandwidth by writing "me too" but I agree pretty much with all the comments here. Jews usually do well when there is a circumstances where merit determines advancement. (See Malcolm Gladwell's book, Outliers)
ReplyDeleteBeyond that, there is no telling what positions a particular Jew will hold (just like other people). They were prominent members of the Communist Party while at the same time were prominent Capitalists. You can find them in the high echelons of both the Right Wing and the Left Wing of American politics right now.
The unfathomable reasons why too many of them betray their own self interest has been analyzed over and over.
Right now the President of the UC Board of Regents is Jewish and yet he appointed two people on the new Advisory Board that have anti-Jewish, pro- Muslim, matters in their backgrounds. He did not appoint a single person from a pro-Jewish or pro Israel background. Another UCI (Jewish) Professor, Mark LeVine is a regular contributor to Al Jazeera with anti-Israel rants.
Oliver Stone himself, I understand, has a Jewish parent. There must be some random gene or personality flaw among some that cause them to betray their own people.
Gary, you are entirely correct that we don't know which will become a statesman and which will become a rapist. We do know that what is growing inside a woman is not the "cute baby" they will be at age one year post birth, and we do know that "cute baby" is not going to be cute all their life.
ReplyDeleteSo, since there is so much that we don't know, let's stop this nonsense of imposing some kind of presumed mass emotionalism (that about half of "the people" don't share anyway) on an intimate, private decision. Parents make good and bad decisions, but some matters are left up to parents. Post partum, life and death are not one of them, although in many human cultures, it has been. While the fetus still depends on the mother, and cannot live independently outside the mother, it is the mother's choice. Maybe Hitler had a bad mother whose brutality warped a cute baby into a mass murderer, and if she had the option to abort, she would have? Or maybe not. There is some evidence that those women most likely to choose abortion are most likely to be living hell for their offspring, if brought to term.
Its not a "completely different subject" once you start talking about "cute babies." Its the same deceptive technique.
Findalis never fails to bring the crazy.
ReplyDeleteFindalis,
ReplyDeleteI was not talking about abortion in this essay.
Nor did I. I was wrote:
ReplyDeleteThis is the new reality. Anti-Semitism is accepted by the Hollywood elite, the MSM, the Churches, and is prevalent in Islam.
So I expect to soon see Woopie Goldberg on the View spouting this line, proclaiming that Oliver Stone is a "good man", what he did was taken out of context, he is a great director, etc...
Where did I mention abortion?
For Jews this is our reality. Every time a "celebrity" goes on an anti-Semetic rant, the Jewish community is to automatically forgive him or her.
Not this time.
The mea culpa Stone said is not enough.
ADL chief: Oliver Stone's apology about remarks on Jews, Holocaust 'insufficient'
But we are all crazy.
Remember Roman Polansky and all the support he got? "Oh, but he is such a great director."
ReplyDeleteRemember Roman Polansky and all the support he got? "Oh, but he is such a great director."
ReplyDeleteGary, name one person who defended him with that argument. (And no, I never defended him. I was disappointed that they let him go and he's getting away.)
Lance,
ReplyDeleteThere was a host of movie groups in France, Poland and Holloywood who spoke up in his defense. Would they have done the same for some lumberjack who had done the same?
Gary, name one person who defended him with that argument.
ReplyDeleteWhoopie Goldberg. Her famous or should I say infamous line:
"I know it wasn't 'rape' rape. I think it was something else, but I don't believe it was 'rape' rape," said Goldberg, dismissing the possibility that Polanski had forced himself on anyone.
Then there was this article.
Actors and actresses from Harrison Ford to Debra Winger have reportedly joined the growing throng of liberal celebrities calling for Polanski to be released following his arrest in Switzerland last week.
Just like Polanski, Stone will be treated the same way. Hollywood must always defend their own when caught doing wrong.
Thank you Findalis, and Lance take note. That is because to the Hollywood set, having sex with underage teenage girls is really not that big a deal.
ReplyDeleteSorry Findalis, but that's a big fail. Nobody said that he should be let go because he was a great director. If anybody did, then you haven't provided any quote of that. I asked for an apple; you gave me an orange.
ReplyDeleteAs for Whoopi, we did this to death. She was just making the distinction between forced rape and what Polanski did. There is a difference. By acknowledging that, you're not excusing him or saying that he shouldn't pay for what he did. It's just like saying that shooting somebody with a gun and stabbing somebody several times is different.
My point is this: When you use quotes, you imply that somebody actually said those words. When nobody has actually said that, then you're being misleading.
There was a host of movie groups in France, Poland and Holloywood who spoke up in his defense. Would they have done the same for some lumberjack who had done the same?
ReplyDeleteProbably not, but that's not the point now is it?
Lance,
ReplyDeleteThe reason all these people took up Polanky's defense is because he was one of them. They may have used other justifications, but that was really their motive.
Lance,
ReplyDeleteThe reason all these people took up Polanky's defense is because he was one of them. They may have used other justifications, but that was really their motive.
@Lance
ReplyDeleteNobody said that he should be let go because he was a great director.
How about these fine examples of the Hollywood elite:
Woody Allen, David Lynch, Martin Scorsese, Luc and Jean-Pierre Dardenne, and Terry Gilliam all willing to give the Pedophile Polanski the benefit of the doubt.
So there was popular support for him. Not nobodies or D listers.
As for Whoopi, we did this to death. She was just making the distinction between forced rape and what Polanski did. There is a difference.
I pray you don't teach that to your students. There is no difference to the victim for one. Is it your understanding that drugging a woman or girl, then forcing yourself upon her is NOT rape?
It is rape. Whoopie found that out the hard way. Thousands of letters, many from victims of the Date Rape Drug. But under your understanding, it is not really rape.
Typical male mentality!
And for the billionth time, my actual point is not addressed, and words are put in my mouth.
ReplyDeleteI think Lance is substituting his own judgment for what "anyone" said here. Lance doesn't think "He's a great director" is an excuse for rape. Neither do I. Neither does Gary. It appears that some among the glitterati do. Perhaps we are overusing the "who said" defense.
ReplyDeleteAnd in everyone else's defense, I believe I am the only person who mentioned abortion, except for Gary responding to me.
What I love about the comments on this post is that we went from talking about how Jews are over-represented in the film/TV/entertainment industry (a fact), to Findalis bringing the crazy and saying that there's a "Hollywood" conspiracy against the Jews.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous,
ReplyDeleteExcuse me, but I see no such statement by Findalis on this thread.
Are you saying that there are too many Jews in Hollywood? What other professions are Jews "over-represented" in and why should they be embarrassed by it?
"Excuse me, but I see no such statement by Findalis on this thread."
ReplyDeleteAllow me to point it out for you then:
"This is the new reality. Anti-Semitism is accepted by the Hollywood elite, the MSM, the Churches, and is prevalent in Islam."
I'm not exactly sure how that jives with the fact that Jews make up such a large percentage of the "Hollywood elite." That's why I thought it was so funny.
"Are you saying that there are too many Jews in Hollywood? What other professions are Jews "over-represented" in and why should they be embarrassed by it?"
Not saying that at all. What is meant by the term "over-represented" is that Jews are X percentage of the general population but a much higher percentage of the entertainment industry. Perhaps I should have said disproportionately represented, to be clearer and more neutral-sounding. I never said that it was a good thing or a bad thing, but simply a fact.
As for why they should be embarrassed, I have no idea why you are asking me that question, as I never stated that they ought to be embarrassed about it, or even used the word embarrassed. You (and your friends) sure LOVE putting words in others' mouths!
My dear Mr Anonymous,
ReplyDeleteI believe the phrase you used was "Hollywood conspiracy against Jews". Findalis did not use that phrase. Who is putting words in whose mouth?
And I would srgue that even many, if not most Jews in Hollywood have been quite silent in the face of growing anti-Semitism-in other words, as Findalis says- that Hollywood elite have accepted it. So I go further than Findalis.