ADL: "We wish that Palin had used another phrase, instead of one so fraught with pain..."

[jefferson_dem]

ADL defends, criticizes Palin

Abe Foxman weighs in:

It was inappropriate at the outset to blame Sarah Palin and others for causing this tragedy or for being an accessory to murder. Palin has every right to defend herself against these kinds of attacks, and we agree with her that the best tradition in America is one of finding common ground despite our differences.

Still, we wish that Palin had not invoked the phrase “blood-libel” in reference to the actions of journalists and pundits in placing blame for the shooting in Tucson on others. While the term “blood-libel” has become part of the English parlance to refer to someone being falsely accused, we wish that Palin had used another phrase, instead of one so fraught with pain in Jewish history.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0111/ADL_defends_criticizes_Palin.html

MORE --

Jewish Groups: ‘We Are Deeply Disturbed’ By Palin’s Use Of Anti-Semitic Term ‘Blood Libel,’ She Should Apologize

On a day when the president and the nation are mourning the victims of the tragic shooting in Tucson, former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin (R) is trying to seize the spotlight to mourn her tarnished reputation. Palin apparently views herself among the real victims of the tragic shooting this weekend that killed six and wounded 14. This morning, Palin launched an aggressive Facebook and web-video campaign to counter what she deemed a “blood libel” against her by the media to connect her infamous cross-hairs map and other right-wing incendiary rhetoric to violence.

Of all the terms Palin could have used, from “defamation” to even “implicating me in murder,” why did Palin choose “blood libel”? As the conservative National Review’s Jonah Goldberg, who says he “agree entirely with…Palin’s, larger point,” notes, “Historically, the term is almost invariably used to describe anti-Semitic myths about how Jews use blood — usually from children — in their ritual.” Indeed, many Jews consider the term extremely offensive, and the Anti-Defamation League and other prominent Jewish organizations has spoken out against its use in the Muslim world, the U.N., and elsewhere on dozens of occasions in the past.

Palin could be ignorant to the true meaning of “blood libel,” as Rep. James Clyburn (D-SC) has suggested. But Politico’s Ben Smith speculates, Palin’s advisers, especially the Weekly Standard’s Michael Goldfarb, “get the context — so this is a pot being stirred, not an accident.” Goldfarb “is practically a talmud scholar,” Smith added.

Former Bush speechwriter David Frum, writing on Politico’s Arena, notes “Now is not the time to use words like “blood libel” or to attack those who seek to lessen the use of violent words or deeds.”

Indeed, Jewish groups are taking offense to Palin’s choice of the term. Noting that accusations of blood libel have been “directly responsible for the murder of so many Jews across centuries,” the National Jewish Democratic Council condemned Palin’s use of the term:

<SNIP>

http://thinkprogress.org/2011/01/12/palin-blood-libel/

[onenote]

1. Not strong enough imo - updated

The first part of the ADL response was unnecessary; at very least, it should have also defended the legitimacy of those who have used the occasion of the Arizona shootings to decry the state of political discourse -- something that the ADL itself did in a statement by its Arizona regional office immediately after the shootings wherein they praised Sheriff Dupnick for his comments.

But even accepting the first part of the statement as written, the second part was unacceptably weak. Its not enough for ADL to say they wish she hadn't used the phrase; they should have said it was wrong to use it because it trivializes it by equating the use of blood libel by those who committed heinous crimes against Jews to justify their acts to the criticisms of Palin levelled at her by those who contend her rhetoric is extreme and violent in tone and message.

I will be letting ADL know what I think in a respectful way. I hope others who may have supported ADL in the past will do the same

[TheBigotBasher]

2. Agreed.

As a result of her choice of words the original term "blood libel" will disappear. It will be diminished because her supporters will diminish it, just as they trying to create "refudiate"

[vaberella]

4. I concur. n/t

[Sinistrous]

3. Well, we are trying to tone down the rhetoric, but

I think that the ADL could have been a bit edgier and still been well within bounds.

Edit: typo.