Why does Mel Gibson hate Jews?

LostAngeles said:
Hitchens v. Gibson

http://www.slate.com/id/2146880/nav/tap1/
Click to expand...

This is not just proved by his twistedly homoerotic spank-movie The Passion of the Christ, even though that ghastly production did focus obsessively on the one passage in the one of the four Gospels that tries to convict the Jewish people en masse of the hysterical charge of Christ-killing or "deicide." It is validated by his fealty to his earthly father, a crackpot who belongs to a Catholic splinter group of which our Mel is a member. This group more or less lives off the stench of medieval anti-Semitism.
Click to expand...

good article....:)
 
I'm disappointed. This guy just looks like a happy drunk, not a foaming-at-the-mouth Anti-Semite/sexist pig. Nick Nolte still wins the Best Mugshot Award I think.

melgibsonmug1mf7.jpg
 
Mycroft said:
This is probably why the anti-Semetic stuff made the press. He said this to the cop, the cop got a little ticked off, and a few hours later copies of the offending portions of his report mysteriously made its way to the press.
Click to expand...

I still think the most likely leaker is Mel or a friend of Mel's. You can't buy this kind of publicity.
 
shecky said:
Two thoughts:

How bizarre is it to promote a movie by getting pulled over for DUI and inexplicable start yelling anti Semitic remarks?
Click to expand...

Get arrested for publicity? Say something outrageous for publicity? Not bizarre at all.

How bizarre is it that one could successfully market a movie by making oneself a victim of Jewish persecution?
Click to expand...

Don't know, I guess we'd have to ask Mel Gibson about that one.
 
Mel wasn't actually suffering from lack of publicity. Every project, especially his directing ones, was getting huge publicity anyway. This may be not Fatty Arbuckle territory, but Mel might have done his career real damage.
 
Dave1001 said:
I still think the most likely leaker is Mel or a friend of Mel's. You can't buy this kind of publicity.
Click to expand...


being caught driving at nearly twice the legal speed limt whilst drunk....

making anti-semitic remarks....

how is that good publicity?

the cliche over all publicity being good publicity is simply not true - just ask michael jackson....actually ask his ex-publicist

"It's a nuclear disaster for him [Gibson]," said publicist Michael Levine, who has represented Michael Jackson and Charlton Heston. "I don't see how he can restore himself."
Click to expand...
http://www.theage.com.au/news/peopl...llywood-balance/2006/07/31/1154198074632.html

this incident portrays him as a grossly irresponsible individual with an intolerant and bigotted streak....and that's hardly a great public image to cultivate.
 
Last edited:
hgc said:
Mel wasn't actually suffering from lack of publicity. Every project, especially his directing ones, was getting huge publicity anyway. This may be not Fatty Arbuckle territory, but Mel might have done his career real damage.
Click to expand...

What did fatty arbuckle actualy do, other than be at the wrong place at the wrong time, and have newspapers decide that they could make alot of money ruining him?
 
Unlike Mel Gibson, Fatty ArbuckleWP didn't do what he was accused of:

During the carousing, one of the women, a 26-year-old aspiring actress named Virginia Rappe, became seriously ill and was examined by the hotel doctor, who concluded that she was merely intoxicated.

In truth, Rappe had been a sick woman for some time. She suffered from chronic cystitis, which would cause her to become violently ill after drinking alcohol. She was also widely rumored to be a carrier of venereal disease. Significantly, while in San Francisco she allegedly asked Arbuckle to help pay for an (illegal) abortion. In her book Frame-Up!, author and researcher Andy Edmonds theorizes that the after-effects of an illegal abortion may have contributed to Rappe's illness at the party.

Rappe died three days later of peritonitis caused by a ruptured bladder. Rappe's companion to the party, Maude Delmont, tried to blackmail Arbuckle over his involvement in the matter, claiming that he'd crushed Rappe's innards while raping her. Arbuckle, confident he had nothing to be ashamed of, refused to be intimidated. Delmont then made a statement to the police in an attempt to get money from Arbuckle's attorneys, but the matter soon got out of her hands. Newspapers, particularly those controlled by William Randolph Hearst, made a fortune endlessly crucifying Arbuckle in spurious and surreally vicious articles and editorials (the New York Times stated that Rappe was lucky to be crushed to death during the rape before having to consciously endure "a fat man's foulness").

Roscoe Arbuckle's career is seen by many film historians as one of the great tragedies of Hollywood. The Arbuckle trial was a major media event, and stories in William Randolph Hearst's newspaper empire made Arbuckle appear guilty. After two trials resulted in hung juries, the third resulted in an acquittal and a written apology from the jury—a gesture unprecedented in American justice.
Click to expand...
 
Lisa Simpson said:
I have never been drunk, but I would think alcohol might bring forth the statements one normally represses because of societal pressure.
Click to expand...

The question is: does his id say, "I hate jews" and his superego say, "that's wrong", or does he see nothing wrong with hating jews at all and merely apologizes to not hurt his PR status?

We can't tell which it is. However, IF it is the former, then I would be lenient with him. Sure, when you're drunk your superego is weak and you do and say things you know you shouldn't, but it is very false to say that your id and passions are the "real you".

Your superego, your sense of right and wrong, is also the "real you" just as much as your passions. Sure, it's due to "societal pressure" that you have it at all--but it's precisely this "societal pressure" that makes us civilized. The "authentic" id of each and every one of us is a monster.
 
Skeptic said:
The question is: does his id say, "I hate jews" and his superego say, "that's wrong", or does he see nothing wrong with hating jews at all and merely apologizes to not hurt his PR status?

We can't tell which it is. However, IF it is the former, then I would be lenient with him. Sure, when you're drunk your superego is weak and you do and say things you know you shouldn't, but it is very false to say that your id and passions are the "real you".

Your superego, your sense of right and wrong, is also the "real you" just as much as your passions. Sure, it's due to "societal pressure" that you have it at all--but it's precisely this "societal pressure" that makes us civilized. The "authentic" id of each and every one of us is a monster.
Click to expand...

What makes it even harder is that I imagine for most people it isn't all superego or all PR, but some blend.
 
ponderingturtle said:
What did fatty arbuckle actualy do, other than be at the wrong place at the wrong time, and have newspapers decide that they could make alot of money ruining him?
Click to expand...
I was referring to the consequences of ruined career rather than to the underlying bad or supposed bad acts.
 
as far as i see it either;

1) he was steaming drunk and spouting utter nonsense, and therefore culpable of inexcusable negligence in getting behind the wheel of a car - let alone for going double the speed limit....if this is the case he deserves a harsh sentence - possibly even custodial....

2) he wasn't steaming drunk - and was in control of his actions, even though he was over the legal limit. In this case his anti-semitic comments are inexcusable....

I don't see how he can argue one case without damning himself on the other.....
 
If he was so steaming drunk that he didn't know what he was saying, it's unlikely he could have driven his car at all.
 
Granted, alcohol does effect everyone differently, but - from eveything I've heard - Mel had a rep for being a pretty hard core drinker in his day. Like four beers before breakfast hardcore. I just find it hard to believe that an experienced drinker would act so fancy-free-crazy with a BAC of .12. That not so overwhelming for one who knows how to handle himself.
 
right, according to the internet the limit in the US and the UK is the same....at 0.08%

If you have more than 80mg of alcohol per 100ml of blood, or 35mg of alcohol per 100ml of breath, you're over the limit for driving in the UK. This amount is roughly equivalent to two pints of regular strength lager. But remember, the drink-driving limit can't easily be translated into units because alcohol has a different affect on people according to their metabolism, weight, gender and how much they've had to eat. Because of this, two pints might affect one person more than another
Click to expand...
http://www.thesite.org/drinkanddrugs/askthesiteqandas/drinkanddrugsqands/onetoomany

In Europe it is usually expressed as milligrams of alcohol per 100 millilitres of blood. However, 100 milliliters of blood weighs essentially the same as 100 milliliters of water, which weighs precisely 100 grams. Thus, for all practical purposes, this is the same as the simple dimensionless BAC measured as a percent. Since 2002 it has been illegal in all 50 US states to drive with a BAC that is 0.08% or higher.
Click to expand...

Now this is roughly 2 pints of larger.....(and bearing in mind Mel is a big guy, and a confessed alcoholic you'd expect him to not to be too affected by this...)

if the relationship is linear then 0.12 should be around 3 pints......

Police conducted field sobriety tests and a breath test indicated Gibson's blood-alcohol level was 0.12%, Mr Whitmore said. The legal limit in California is 0.08%.
Click to expand...

which, in my opinion is no real excuse for anything.....most big guys with a tolerance for alcohol would just be merry on 3 pints....certainly not off their face enough to excuse anything they said or did....
 
andyandy said:
as far as i see it either;

1) he was steaming drunk and spouting utter nonsense, and therefore culpable of inexcusable negligence in getting behind the wheel of a car - let alone for going double the speed limit....if this is the case he deserves a harsh sentence - possibly even custodial....

2) he wasn't steaming drunk - and was in control of his actions, even though he was over the legal limit. In this case his anti-semitic comments are inexcusable....

I don't see how he can argue one case without damning himself on the other.....
Click to expand...

Thought the same myself and wondered how he would have to word his "apology" before his court date to avoid incriminating himself:

"Sorry folks, I didn't mean it -- I was just too drunk to know what I was saying" probably doesn't help his upcoming DUI case.
 
Last edited:
shuize said:
Thought the same myself and wondered how he would have to word his "apology" before his court date to avoid incriminating himself:

"Sorry folks, I didn't mean it -- I was just too drunk to know what I was saying" probably doesn't help his upcoming DUI case.
Click to expand...
Actually I kind of respect him for that. He seemed to consider it more important to address and settle the matter of his hateful remarks, than to dodge responsibility for the DUI.

Not that it matters to his case HOW drunk he is. He was over the legal limit. He's not getting in MORE trouble if someone says, "Oh, but he was REALLY drunk!"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom