initially i was going to put 'squid fishermen' but in order to not be blamed for advocating violence (in a legally troubling way) i decided to go for the absurd angle of stabbing whales....
But... but ... then there would be no tasty calimari rings.....WhiteKiboko said:initially i was going to put 'squid fishermen' but in order to not be blamed for advocating violence (in a legally troubling way) i decided to go for the absurd angle of stabbing whales....
I'd like to see an image of this.Phil;10107 said:There are a number of images that were produced under the auspices of Josef Goebbels' propaganda machine that depict international Jewry as some form of bloodthirsty octopus. Taste dictates not posting them here, no matter how relevent. Indeed, one issue of Julius Streicher's ranting Der Sturmer magazine depicted an octopus bearing a Star of David being stabbed with spears labelled 'truth' and 'enlightenment'.
WhiteKiboko;91508 said:Was reading through Zombietime and saw this... the tentacle aspect of propaganda regarding the protocols of the elders of zion is noted....
about half to two-thirds the way down...
"U.S. Out of Iraq Now" Anti-War Rally
(numerous pictures arent family friendly)
Cabal, eh? Mr. Norell's article hits most of the marks a writer versed in coded messages would want to hit, nailing wealth, conspiracy, ruthless ambition and those two cities where lots of those people live. I'd like to know more about how the article and cover illustration came to be, who painted it, and did they read the article or get a summary for the assignment? The illustration is not particularly grotesque, and if you look closely you can see that the tentacles are a background figures unattached to Bloomberg, who has his own arms and signature suited torso. The association with anti-Jewish propaganda featuring cephalopods can still be made, obviously, but the fumes aren't as strong as what's inside the newsletter. Ms. Cardwell's Times piece does not explicitly engage or acknowledge the appearance of an anti-Jewish theme in either Norell's article or the cover illustration.The cover article, which labels Mr. Bloomberg “a billionaire, Boston-grown evangelist for the nanny state,” argues that despite the mayor’s carefully chosen words about keeping firearms out of the hands of criminals, he was actually waging war on legal gun ownership.
“Beholden to nothing except his own ambitions, the mayor has established himself as a kind of national gun-control vigilante,” writes James O. E. Norell, identified as a contributing editor. Calling the national coalition a “cabal,” Mr. Norell adds: “Bloomberg’s tentacles reach throughout the country to foist N.Y.C.-style gun control on you, your friends and neighbors.”
Shinbaum and Twersky are well-informed and about as measured in tone as I was, that is, before I read about what the Mr. Borell's NRA article actually says, which is a more overt example of anti-Jewish coding. Did the quoted AJC and ADL reps know what was written, or were they asked to respond to the drawing alone? Seems to be some sloppiness afoot.David Twersky of the American Jewish Congress said he did not think the NRA was trying to be purposely anti-Semitic, but that it had nonetheless committed a blunder by not being aware of the symbol's hateful past. "For them not to know this is really, really stupid," he said. "You take a powerful Jewish figure, and show him in a way that provokes traditional anti-Semitism, it's really unforgiveable." He said the organization may write a letter to the NRA pointing out the problem.
The Anti-Defamation League said although some may perceive the drawing as offensive, it did not believe the cartoon is inherently anti-Semitic. "While the use of an octopus to connote anti-Semitism has been used by the Nazis and anti-Semites, and is still used today, it usually is accompanied with a very specific symbol" or other indicators that the magazine cover does not have, said ADL spokeswoman Myrna Shinbaum.