Wednesday, June 10, 2009
American Jewish Youths Hate Obama
I like the following story. I really do.
The Jerusalem Post:
A new video posted on the Internet featuring inebriated American Jewish youth in a Jerusalem bar spouting hate-filled sentiments has garnered massive exposure and caused a firestorm in the media and the Jewish world.
In the video, filmed on June 3 and titled "Feeling the Hate in Jerusalem on the Eve of Obama's Cairo Address," the visitors to Israel are asked their opinions on President Barack Obama and his relationship to the Jewish state
"You're all about talking to the Arabs," says one. "You're going to Cairo making a speech to the Muslim world trying to get them to love you, what about the Jews, man? What are we, chopped liver? You don't care about us. Are we nothing to you? Do we matter? Do you care if we get driven into the sea? Do you care if we get nuked? Are we even... ugh... do you care about us?!"
"My grandmother was in Auschwitz, Obama," he adds. "We're not going to take any Auschwitz bullshit! Listen, Obama, my grandma's number was 1268493, I remember her number on her arm, dude. And listen, never again will we deal with this, never again!"
"He's a f**khead... I don't know politics, but he's a s**thead! Anyone who wants to take away my gun rights is an a***ole. He's an a***ole and deserves to get shot," declares a bandana-wearing youngster.
The camera shifts to his friend, who denounces Obama, frat-boy style: "Obama shouldn't pressure Israel for shit. Netanyahu told him to f**k himself and that's how we do it here in Israel baby, (applause) yah!"
Another member of the group stands up and declares, "I worked for the Obama campaign, but honestly, you f**kin' with Israel, you mother, STOP IT!" He stands and points his finger at the camera lens.
"White power, f**k the ni***rs!" declares the bandana-clad drunken youth as a final word from the group, grabbing the microphone to make his point.
In an interview with The Jerusalem Post, Blumenthal, an American documentary filmmaker, defended his video.
Asked about its editing, he said that in the two hours of video he collected, "no people were edited out who expressed pro-Obama sentiments."
Why did he use the interviewees featured?
"These were the most direct responses. I had to make the video watchable," Blumenthal said.
He denied that using inebriated teenagers to represent "a slice of reality, but reality nonetheless," was irresponsible journalism. "Reporting is no less credible when it happens at a bar," he said.
I agree with the filmmaker too, his slice of reality is reality, whether impacted by inebriation or not. In fact, one could make the argument that since liquor reduces and lowers inhibitions, the opinions expressed - as vulgar as some of them may be - are indeed accurate and legitimate reflections of reality.
If what is said in the print story and in the videos were said about a Republican president or politician, The Left would be promoting and touting the story and video as the best thing since sliced bread.
Anyone with a follicle of objectivity knows that Obama is no friend to the Jewish people or the country of Israel.
Do the math.
We live in a democracy right ;)?
They can say afterward that it was just because they were drunk but alcohol takes out inhibitions, this is really what they are thinking and jews are getting pissed off like most whites indeed at Obama's so-called liberal (hum, hum, this is COMMUNISM big time to power 100) policies.
The booze does lower inhibitions, and yeah, I just thought the opinons of the Am-Jews in the video are as relevant as any, if not - like I wrote - perhaps moreso considering their inhibitions were lowered and what they said was from the heart. As I wrote, some of what they said could be considered as vulgar (the NWord, etcd) but hey, they have Free Speech. That's the essence of Free Speech, to be free to say vulgar things. Otherwise, what is the point of it?
"That's the essence of Free Speech, to be free to say vulgar things. Otherwise, what is the point of it?"
Those brainwashed by political rectitude and hypocrisy don't get it though.
I hope Pittsburgh will findly solve the curse of Detroit.
Not an easy mission, far from it.
Thanks for adding your comments on the First Amendment. I don't know why the brainwashed and hypocrites don't "get it."
Barring slander, libel and defamation of character, Free Speech by its definition is going to be considered inflammatory and perhaps vulgar. Just because it may be offensive to some doesn't mean it should be silenced.
On the Cup:
Whew, it has been a back and forth series, with (for me) wondering if the Penguins had any hope or skill left in them; after an 0-2 start and the 0-5 loss in game 5.
I too am pulling for Pittsburgh. The Red Wings aren't the Red Wings for nothing. They are quite a good and consistent (over the years) team. And yes, I too want to see a different Cup winner this year.
I like Tiger Woods a lot, but I don't want to see him win every single tournament. That's just how I am with championship series and individuals.
Unless it comes to the MN Wild. They can win the next 25 Cup playoffs in a row and I'll never tire of it. ;-)
Links to this post:
accordance and compliance with Fair Use Section 107 U.S. Copyright Code.
All other images and content © 2005-2009 David Drake.
Not responsible for content contained at linked sites.
Policy on commenting:
- Anonymous comments have little chance of being published.
- Comments made on posts 60 days old or older have little chance of being published.
- Published comments do not necessarily reflect the views of this blog author.
- Discretion of publishing or rejecting submitted comments rests solely with the owner and creator of this blog.
- Comments that egregiously "plug" (i.e. advertise or promote) another site or blog will be rejected. This doesn't mean you cannot include a link to your story, blog or to another site, but don't go overboard.
- Profanity is not a disqualifying factor, but profane rants solely for purposes of profanity are unlikely to be published.
- The owner and creator of this blog is not liable or responsible for the opinions of those who comment.