Blood Libel, Church Burning and Sarah Palin.

On “Blood Libel” Sarah has one point to make.

Her own church got torched, children’s lives were at stake.

The media kept silence

To not promote violence

Christians endure much. How much does it take?

Dec 14 2008. — Andrew Malcolm

Sarah Palin, her husband Todd and up to 1,000 fellow parishioners will worship in a local school this morning after a suspicious fire virtually destroyed the Wasilla Bible Church early Saturday. Some women and children in a crafts group were inside at the time. Larry Kroon said some parishioners were in the church on Nicola Avenue at the time the fire was noticed but no one was injured. Firefighters battled for about eight hours in minus-20 degree temperatures to completely extinguish the blaze that began at the front door.

The former Republican vice presidential candidate went to the church Saturday to apologize to pastors in case the estimated $1 million fire damages, suspected as arson, were “in any way connected to the undeserved negative attention the church has received” since the governor’s involvement with the church.

The 30-year-old congregation in Wasilla, about 40 miles north of Anchorage, had moved into its new church just 30 months ago. Church officials said they expect to hold services at the Wasilla Middle School for the foreseeable future during repairs.

(UPDATE:

Though several federal, state and local agencies were involved in the investigation, no arrests have been made, nor have any solid leads been announced. The media reported the fire and the subsequent determination that arson was involved, but quickly lost interest in the story. The Obama administration closed the federal part of the investigation.

In the ensuing weeks since the fire, there doesn’t seem to have been much media attention or outcry against the anonymous attack on a house of worship. Probably just because Wasilla is so far away. (Yes, that’s probably the reason.)

Blood Libel and Sarah Palin. A most apt term.

The illustration on the left, located at the cult-church of Anderl von Rinn until recently, portrays the “martyrdom” of Anderl, a three year-old boy who became the focus of a blood-libel cult in the seventeenth-century. Anderl is the child being held down and having his throat slit. The killers are clearly marked as Jews by their clothes and turbans (one form of the “special mark” Jews were forced to carry by Church decree).

The third, lower, figure is collecting the child’s blood in a bowl. The myth of the blood libel was that the blood of a Christian child was used to make Passover matzohs.

Blood Libel” is termed the new phrase of the week.

As ugly as sin and not fit for the weak.

Sarah Palin, she dared

 The apt term to be shared.

For hate is much worse than a slow dripping leak.

While most liberal Jews attacked Sarah Palin for using a term she knew nothing about and was offending them in so doing, the famous law professor Alan Dershowitz defended her use of the term, saying “I myself have used it to describe false accusations against the State of Israel by the Goldstone Report. There is nothing improper and certainly nothing anti-Semitic in Sarah Palin using the term to characterize what she reasonably believes are false accusations that her words or images may have caused a mentally disturbed individual to kill and maim. The fact that two of the victims are Jewish is utterly irrelevant to the propriety of using this widely used term.
Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/257003/alan-dershowitz-defends-palin-blood-libel-daniel-foster