Well written, keep it up.

Personally, I'd like to know where I might have the right to view an
uncensored version of Mr. Gibson's movie. Perhaps the ACLU might step
in and...oh...I forgot...never mind.

Ein Stein wrote in message ...
Let's see, the allegations of the supposedly lunatic fringe right wing
extremist claim that Jews secretly run things. The supposedly level
headed left wing extremist counter that the idea that Jews run the world
surreptitiously is preposterous. Yet time and time again Jews make
ludicrous requests and comments, things that only Jews can get away
with.


http://tinyurl.com/3e5tl
Israeli's "Chief" Rabbis are to visit the Vatican, but they are going to
ask for permission to search the Vatican Achieves, lest the dirty
Catholics be secretly hiding booty that belongs to Israel.


http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/675361.stm
Then there are the ubiquitous requests that the world apologize for the
Holocaust. Since the Catholics didn't assemble a Vatican army to
overthrow the Germans during WWII, the Catholics must therefore be to
blame for the Holocaust.

Never mind that of the Vatican, "The Vatican is the smallest sovereign
state in the world, measuring only about 109 acres (44 hectares). It is
ringed with centuries-old walls and entirely surrounded by the city of
Rome. But it is a separate nation, formed in 1929 in a treaty with the
Italian government." http://tinyurl.com/2mzff

Never mind that the Vatican is in Italy, and Italy was fighting with the
Germans in WWII.

Never mind that same religion that is incapable of rousing its faithful
to oppose abortion was supposed to rouse its faithful to defeat the
Germans, something that the combined effort of a great number of
countries almost failed to do. One can also suppose that of all the
other Holocaust equivalent or greater genocides occurring in the 20th
century that the Jews have aligned themselves to defeat same. No? Then I
guess its time they apologize to the Chinese, Ukrainians, etc.

Mel Gibson's movie. From Christian sources, I have read nothing but
praise for the movie. From the Jewish perspective, the idea is that Jews
killing a Jew is somehow going to inflame Christians into contemporary
anti-Semitism. I see, this makes sense?

How about this objective article?

http://www.iht.com/articles/125340.html

"NEW YORK Pope John Paul II, frail with Parkinson's at 83, is rarely
able to celebrate Mass. But why should his suffering deter a Hollywood
producer from roping him into a publicity campaign to sell a movie?

In what is surely the most bizarre commercial endorsement since Eleanor
Roosevelt did an ad for Good Luck Margarine in 1959, the ailing pontiff
has been recruited, however unwittingly, to help hawk "The Passion of
the Christ," as Mel Gibson's film about Jesus' final 12 hours is now
titled. While Eleanor Roosevelt endorsed a margarine for charity, John
Paul's free plug is being exploited by the Gibson camp to aid the movie
star's effort to recoup the $25 million he personally sank into the
film."

Then the author of the above article attempts to assert that "Jewish and
Christian critics alike have faulted for its potential to reignite the
charge of deicide against the Jews".

Sorry, no one's buying the idea that Jews are to become targets of
increased hatred due to this movie. In the million or so movies that
largely Jewish producers have made over the years, I have been offended
by quite a few. But what the hell, I'm not Jewish, therefore my views
don't count.

Either all artwork is sacred for the expression of its creator, or none
is. The same for movies, they cry that freedom of expression is
being suppressed if someone objects to the latest serial killer flick,
but then wish to suppress that very same freedom of expression if they
are offended.

I agree with them, some artwork should be censored, some movies too. But
not only the movies and artwork that offend Jews.

WHAT'S GOOD FOR THE GOOSE IS GOOD FOR THE GANDER!

Dr. Artaud