Interfaith leaders join Jews in call for new envoy to fight anti-Semitism

CIA Director Mike Pompeo, nominated to be the next secretary of state, pauses while speaking during his Senate Foreign Relations Committee confirmation hearing on April 12, 2018, on Capitol Hill in Washington. Pompeo's remarks were the first chance for lawmakers and the public to hear directly from the former Kansas congressman about his approach to diplomacy and the role of the State Department, should he be confirmed to lead it. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon)

Interfaith leaders are calling on Secretary of State Mike Pompeo to appoint a new U.S. envoy to fight anti-Semitism. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon)

WASHINGTON (RNS) — An interfaith group of more than 1,100 leaders is urging Secretary of State Mike Pompeo to appoint a new U.S. envoy to fight anti-Semitism after the post has been vacant for more than a year.

“Mr. Secretary, anti-Semitism starts with Jews, but doesn’t end there: when any minority is threatened, everyone is less safe,” the signatories told Pompeo in a letter coordinated by the American Jewish Committee and released Wednesday (May 16).

“The world looks to America for leadership on this as on so many other matters. America can and must lead, beginning with the appointment of the next Special Envoy.”

The faith leaders said the position, empty since January 2017, should be filled to oppose the physical harassment of Jews and new campaigns to distort the history of the Holocaust.

“Around the world, violent and even lethal attacks have been made on Jews and Jewish institutions,” they wrote. “In far left and far right political parties in Europe and elsewhere, anti-Jewish rhetoric is on the rise as is the demonization of Israel and intimidation of its supporters.”

Congress mandated the envoy position in 2004. Last year, the State Department said it would retain the post, which some Jewish groups worried might be eliminated.

RELATED: State Department to keep anti-Semitism envoy but scrap many others

“We are gratified that our friends from Christian, Muslim and other faith communities have joined this appeal to Secretary Pompeo and that they too recognize both the threat of anti-Semitism and the need for U.S. leadership in mobilizing concrete actions to combat this cancer,” said Daniel Elbaum, the AJC’s chief advocacy officer.

Among the signers are Bishop Joseph C. Bambera, chairman of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops’ Committee on Ecumenical and Interreligious Affairs; the Rev. Gabriel Salguero, president of the National Latino Evangelical Coalition; Imam Faizul Khan of the Islamic Society of the Washington Area; and John Taylor, director of interfaith relations of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

Other signatories included representatives of the Baha’i, Buddhist, Hindu and Sikh faiths.

About the author

Adelle M. Banks

Adelle M. Banks, production editor and a national reporter, joined RNS in 1995. An award-winning journalist, she previously was the religion reporter at the Orlando Sentinel and a reporter at The Providence Journal and newspapers in the upstate New York communities of Syracuse and Binghamton.


Click here to post a comment

  • “Imam Faizul Khan of the Islamic Society of the Washington Area; and John Taylor, director of interfaith relations of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.” Two cults in the list. Are they trying to appear credible?

  • I combat it most days Spud; Sorry you are unable to distinguish that. You do realize that Christ is a Jew?

  • LOL!

    “You do realize that Christ is a Jew?”

    Have you told fellow Christians on this site, Roy Hobs, Strong119, Otto T. Goat?

  • I am not a Christian believer like you and them. Not my job to set them straight there.

  • Some people become anti-semitic only after having a traumatic experience with an eighteen-wheeler. They’re actually very nice people.

  • We can’t adequately fight anti-Semitism against Jews unless we fight all other forms of anti-Semitism as well. For there are other groups of people who qualify as Semites. So the exclusive designation of anti-Semitism as applying to the Jews only sabotages our opposition to anti-Semitism against the Jews.

  • Christianity is a cult, too, built around a man, Jesus. You’re just a bit larger and older. But a cult, nonetheless.

  • Sorry Sandi…you are wrong on this one. Jesus was a Galilean from the Tribe of Judah. “Jew” and “Israelite” are NOT synonymous.
    Keep studying. A simple google — jesus was not a jew — will point you in the right direction.
    Read — “Who is Esau-Edom” by Charles Weisman. You can find a free PDF online.
    I pray you do.

  • No………….not a ‘jew’ if you are going to compare modern jewry with Israelites in the time of Jesus.

    Sandi…………………it is not difficult. Just do some research. We are talking about Revelation 2:9. Simply google — Jesus was not a Jew.

    By the time Christ hits the scene , the distinction between Israelite and Edomite is BLURED.

    The Historian Flavius Josephus writes in “Antiquities of the Jews” Book 13: Chapter 9, Section 1: “Hyrcanus took also Dora, and Marissa, cities of Idumea, and subdued all the Idumeans; and permitted them to stay in that country, if they would circumcise their genitals, and make use of the laws of the Jews; and they were so desirous of living in the country of their forefathers, that they submitted to the use of circumcision, and of the rest of the Jewish ways of living; at which time therefore this befel them, that they were hereafter no other than Jews.” http://www.perseus.tufts.ed
    Read John 8:33 very carefully. The ‘jews’ claim they were never under bondage. This is true because they are not Israelites! They are related to Esau. Not Jacob. Esau’s descendants were never taken captive as the Israelites were.
    Seriously……………….find “Who is Esau-Edom” by Charles Weisman. A free pdf exists online. Just search for it. Give Christ the honor He deserves. He is not to be compared to modern jewry. This is blasphemy.

  • Perhaps after a close examination of the policies of Israel toward the Palestinians might shed light on the cause for the rise in ” antisemitism” ; because only an antisemitic would dare criticize the sacred Israel.

    The national media would be wise to diversify its producers, directors, actors, writers and reporters in order to stop the idea that Jews have a disproportionate control of the entertainment and news industries. .

  • Yes, blame Jews for antisemitism. You blame Israel, but you use classic antisemitic tropes of antisemitic conspiracy theories of Jews controlling the media. That sort of antisemitism preceded Israel’s existence and has nothing to do with Israel’s actions.

  • There are those on the left and right who want to deny the Jewishness of Jesus and the Jewishnesss of modern Jews. It’s all a lie.

  • We do need to fight all forms of prejudice, but every modern dictionary defines antisemitism as hatred or prejudice against Jews. You’re just being disingenuous. It’s used as an excuse to ignore antisemitism.

  • Susan,
    Authoritarianism automatically resists change even change that is quite reasonable. And since Arabs and others are Semites, to not call prejudice against them a form of anti-Semitism just as we would rightfully call prejudice against Jews anti-Semitism at the least suggests that Jews should be considered privileged over Arabs.

    There is a reason why anti-Semitism originally referred to Jews only. There are valid reasons why the definition of anti-Semitism should be expanded to hatred of other Semite groups.

  • Yes, I do blame the extremist government in Israel for half the reason peace cannot be achieved. The second suggestion is about the media is an observation. Your reaction instead of self reflection only adds to the rise of antisemitism.

  • Then it was an antisemitic observation. Pointing out antisemitism doesn’t add to the rise of antisemitism. Only people who want Jews to remain silent say things like that.

  • That only gives antisemitism an excuse. I’ve never heard any one say what you just said who didn’t say it because they hated Jews. It has nothing to do authoritarianism except that Nazis and the KKK like to use the same argument.

  • Susan,
    To the contrary, nothing gives anti-Semitism an excuse. If one believes that all Semites are equal, then prejudice against any Semite group is rightfully called anti-Semitism.

    So what you never heard anyone say what I said. That doesn’t prove anything. It doesn’t even prove that I am the only one who says what I say.

    You have not dealt with the logic of what I have said. Instead, you try to discredit what I am saying and the attempt to discredit rather than deal with the logic of what I say is an authoritarian move on your part.

    And your statement about nazis and the kkk saying something similar is vague and another attempt to discredit rather than deal with the logic of what I wrote. Please quote where the KKK and the Nazis use the same logic I employ. Please quote them where they said that nothing gives any anti-Semitism an excuse. If you cannot quote them saying that, then stop with the attempts to bully someone because they said something you disagree with.

  • The logic doesn’t matter because it’s used to often as an excuse for Jew hatred or vilifying Israel. The word can’t be restored to its original meaning of people who speak Semitic languages. that just doesn’t work anymore.

  • Susan,
    Logic does matter. Tell me, what I have I written that excuses hatred of Jews? When one condemns all anti-Semitism, how is including hatred of Arabs and the Bedouin justify hatred of the Jews? What would be the difference between our two positions when both of us condemn all hatred against those groups.

    By saying thing just don’t work anymore is an authoritarian answer, not a logical one.

    All along, you have associated treating either the Jews or Israel as special as the only way of avoiding anti-Semitism. You manipulate to do so. Before you were offended when I wrote that a Jewish ethnocracy could not provide equality for all of its citizens. But what I said about Israel’s Jewish ethnocracy applies to every ethnocracy regardless of the ethnicity of the people in chrarge.

    Now you want to say that the term anti-Semitism should only apply to the Jews and to expand the use of that term to any other group of Semites inflames hatred of the Jews and the vilifying of Israel. But unless you can show the logical connection between expanding the term and stirring hatred of the Jews, again, your statement merely becomes an authoritarian demand. And your authoritarian appeal is simply another way of claiming special treatment.

  • Why did I know exactly what your response would be? I’m not treating Jews as special. I’m am looking at history and how the term antisemitism has been used and mis-used over a period of time. I can’t allow people who are are hateful and prejudiced against Jews to say I’m not antisemitic, “I don’t hate Palestinians.” They use it to prove Jews have no connection to Israel and are not Semites. So the term is not equally applied to Jews and Arabs. It happens all the time. It’s just an excuse to ignore Jew hatred. I can’t allow people to miss-use Zionism and say that, for example, Zionists control the media and twist words to say they are just anti-Zionists. Then why are they using a Christian Medieval stereotype of Jews to criticize Zionists? It’s just old wine in a new bottle. Nor can I allow people to demonize Israel. That is not criticism. I cannot allow people to say they are just being critical of Israel and then use blatant antisemitism. I should add that there are those on the left who say they are just being anti-captlaist. I was pointing out that the term antisemitism isn’t going to be expanded. It is frozen in time. It now means hatred of Jews and you’re not going to succeed in expanding the term. Nobody will follow your example. I think I have shown the connection. I still think a Jewish State can be a democracy. It doesn’t have to be an echnocracy. I’m not going reargue that.

  • Susan,
    This is why I don’t discussing things with you, you try to manipulate.

    I just cited two examples of you associating anti-Semitism with treating Jews as equals and you try to associate that with anti-Semitism by citing the past. Note that the groups you mentioned before denied the equality of Jews by putting them down. I simply say they should be treated as equals. In addition, the last time we discussed anti-Semitism, you tried to label me as an anti-Semite when I objected to the current form of Modern Zionism because of the inequality it promotes.

    And now, according to you, only prejudice against Jews is to be considered anti-Semitic even though Arabs are Semites too. But you don’t want to call prejudice against Arabs ‘anti-Semitism’ because why? If one condemns anti-Semitism, how does assigning the label ‘anti-Semitism’ to the hating of Arabs promote hatred of Jews? And if such labeling does promote the hatred of Jews, then how doesn’t calling the hatred of Jews ‘anti-Semitism’ promote hatred of Arabs too? To you, logic doesn’t matter here, just historical examples like the KKK and the Nazis do. But cutting out logic here obscres the disparity between what I am saying and what past groups you cited were saying and yet you want to associate what I am saying with what the KKK and the Nazis said.. That is manipulation.

    You know that I have condemned the anti-Semitism of my own group–my fellow Christians–and have laid much of blame for the Israeli abuse of Palestinians at the feet of my fellow Christians–especially people like Martin Luther. At the same time, any ethnocracy, Jewish or not, practices inequality. So though Jews both needed and deserved a homeland in terms of having a safe haven, some have gone beyond that with the Modenr Zionist venture because that venture is based on an ethnocracy. Not all forms of Zionism have promoted inequality between Jews and non-Jews in the Promised Land. But the form that has been leading the modern state of Israel has been practicing and promoting inequality from its very beginning..

  • I say what I think and you accuse me of manipulation. I’m not trying to manipulate anyone.

    It does matter that no one else thinks that the term antisemitism applies equally to Jews and Arabs. You ignore that if Arab armies had not invaded Israel numerous times. Israel would be a different state. Israel was fighting for it’s life. The Arabs meant it when they said they wanted to throw Jews into the sea. I never said there was perfect equality in Israel, but Israel has court system and Arab MKs who can work to change things.

  • Susan,
    Why do I say you manipulate? It is because of how you frame what I’ve said. And you’ve done so selectively to make it appear different from what I’ve said. You manipulate.

    Yes, we live in a logical world. And yes, the world is filled with hate and prejudice. Both statements are true. And that regarding that hate and prejudice, Israel is both a perpetrator and victim. But just because someone uses hate and prejudice to twist what others say, that doesn’t mean that logic is irrelevant and what others have said is wrong..

    For example, suppose reporting on the Gaza massacre by Israeli troops stirs more anti-Semitism. Does that mean that that reporting is false because some of the results of that reporting consisted of inflaming hatred? So if someone can twist my words to misuse them, then my words were wrong?

    It isn’t me who fostered anti-Semitism, it is those who twisted my words or the words of someone else. And it is manipulative to discount the logic behind my words simply because you can find examples of people twisting those words to make them say something the words don’t say.

    And a couple of discussions ago, you demonstrated a significant eagerness to associate what I wrote with anti-Semitism. Do you understand why I say you try to manipulate.

    In addition, you are very selective in terms of how you report history. Did all Arabs want to drive the Jews into the sea? Did all Jews or all forms of Zionism try to establish supremacy for the Jews and expel the Arabs? And when the Arabs invaded Israel, what preceded those invasions? And what about Jewish terrorist groups that attacked even the British? And what about the fact that Palestinian Arabs were the first ones to resort to violence? And we could ask, why did some of the leaders of the Jewish immigration plan to push out Arabs before there was violence?

    Neither the Palestinians nor the Jews are more innocent than the other. And fair reporting would show that. But your reporting doesn’t. Do you understand why I say that you try to manipulate?

  • Is a black man with a Ireland driver’s license an “Irish Man”? Is an Arab with a Scotland driver’s license a “Scot”?
    Answer — of course not.
    The word ‘jew’ in the new testament does not designate any difference between “Judahite” or “Judean”. There were Edomites who converted to Judaism living in Judea who were then called “Judeans”.
    Again………………..Jesus was a Galilean from the tribe of Judah.
    The word “Jew” and “Israelite” is NOT always synonomous.
    Revelation 2:9; and 3:9. We are talking about ‘jews’ who claim to be of Judah but lie. They are the Synagogue of Satan.
    And sadly Sandi………………you believe them.

  • Encyclopedia Judaica 1971, Vol 10:23, states: “Jews began to call themselves Hebrews and Israelites in 1860 [AD

  • I do think that certain things you said slid from criticism to antisemitism. That’s not manipulation. That’s what I think. I do understand that the history is very complex and both sides are at fault, but you’re so one-sided that I felt the other side needed equal expression. I was trying to balance what you said. You say here that both sides are equally guilty, but that’s what you said so far anywhere else.

  • Christians have manakged to be antisemitic and anti-Jewish for centuries despite the fact that Jesus was Jewish.

    They also seem to think that being told Jesus was Jewish will make me want to convert. No it doesn’t. I’m Jewish too and I don’t think I’m the Messiah.

  • Last we talked Susan, you really expressed no interested in God and His anyway, so why bother to comment? The only person you impressed was probably yourself

  • Susan,
    That has been my point from the beginning of our discussion. And I think it is too easy for you to see anti-Semitism in the criticisms leveled at Israel.

    Please note that in my criticisms, I have never scapegoated Jews, I have provided context for the wrongful behaviors of Israel and laid a significant amount of the blame for thier wrongful behaviors on people from my fellow Christians, I readily acknowledge the need for Jews to have a safe haven, and I have strongly spoken against any kind of stereotype of Jews as well as putting them down. So where is that anti-Semitism? Is it because I believe we should look at Jews as being superior to other ethnic groups in that they can do what others haven’t? Is it because I believe that the current form of modern zionism is wrong because it practices and promotes inequality? Is complaining about inequality evidence of anti-Semitism? Is expressing the same complaints about Israel as I express about America anti-Semitism?

    Yes, you have tried to manipulate things by how you have framed some of what I have written. And you have tried to manipulate by putting the bar for what qualifies as anti-Semitism way too low so that anti-Semitism amounts to not recognizing special privileges for Israel. The best article I’ve seen on the foibles of Israel is written by a friend and fellow activist and I will lead another link to that article below:

  • How The Myth Of The ‘Good Jew’ Hurts Us All via @jdforward

    I will, if you read this. Yes, I’m so much antisemitism hides as criticism of Israel and anti-Zionism. I have a good reason to look carefully at all criticism of Israel to check for antisemitism. Some of you comments have crossed the line whether you can see it or not. After over two thousand years Jews have a right to be wary. I won’t apologize for that.

    It has nothing to do with special privileges for Israel. That is not what I object to. It is your one-sided opinions and empathy which are all for the Palestinians. You say Jews should have a refuge, but you won’t support anything that makes it possible to have one.

    I will read the article, but I know all about Israel’s foible. I don’t need you or your friend to joint them out. I’m not going to discuss them with you, because you are so one-sidedly against Israel. I wouldn’t say anything negative about Israel to you, but that doesn’t I don’t see negatives. I’ve said before that I would vote for Meretz if I were an Israeli citizen. I do have relatives that live very near the Gaza border. One of them could be hurt by a Hamas fighter who got through the border or by a kite that was set on fire with gasoline.

  • Susan,
    I don’t really care about the myth of the Good Jew even though most of the people who have had the biggest influence on my political views are Jewish.

    And your criticisms of Israel provides just one source of criticisms. Many who are not Jewish have good reason both to criticize Israel and to exaine those criticisms. You’re one of many equals. So your comment that some of my comments have crossed the line have no bearing unless you can support that comment logically. But according to you, logic isn’t important, history is. But the history you cited was that of people twisting words and thoughts and thus to sound anything like them despite different reasons causes confusion for you

    Yes, you want special privileges for israel. According to you, it is the only ethnocracy in the word that can establish equality for all and anti-Semitism should only apply to hatred of Jews, not hatred of other semitic groups. IN addition, I don’t believe you were too keen on the idea that Isreal and the Palestinians should be judged the same laws and by a 3rd party like the ICC. Those are 3 examples where you want want special treatment for Israel.

    So let me ask this, are you for the UN and/or the ICC investigating Israel’s shooting of Gazan protesters? And explain why either way?

    Being accountable involves more than just being self-critical. And right now, there are a number of nations that are operating without accountability. Israel is one of them. The US is one of them. Russia is one of them. European nations that have joined the US in regime can also be included. And these nations operate that way because they can rely on the rule of force either because of their own military or the military of their allies.

    So how do you feel about Israel being investigated by the UN and/or ICC? I know that the US and Russia deserve to be investigated for past and current actions. Bu those with enough military might can either prohibit those investigations or ignore them.

    Finally, you are trying to speak as an authority of he subject of Israel. But what makes you such an authority that we should listen to you over others? I still find the article written by my friend about ISrael to be the description of what is going on. Those ruling Israel dehumanize man-Jews and thus they feel free to treat them anyway they want. And those who support that treatment do so because they also dehumanize many non-Jewish people in the area.

    Why the dehumanization? Because possession of the land become a g_d. But in dehumanizing others, they also dehumanize themselves only in a different way. And how is that dehumanization different from how the US has dehumanized people throughout its history or how Russia has or how those who colonized Africa and/or Central and South America and/or Asia have? There is nothing new here. Those who have dehumanized others so that Israel can treat them anyway its gov’t leaders want are not unique. It is what people with power and greed do. And description of power and greed is a description of too many governments in the world today.

    With Israel and its treatment of the Palestinians and the atrocities committed by the Palestinians against Israel, we are talking about human problems and sins, not ethnic ones.

  • The term anti-semitism was coined specifically to refer to anti-Jewish hatred by a German in the 1870s. At that time, it was used to provide a racial pseudo-scientific basis for the hatred as opposed to a religious one, but the term wasn’t used to describe hatred of other Semitic people.

    I have no idea how this is a “privilege” in your view. Being a victim of hatred is a privilege? Having someone come up with some racist BS to justify a traditional hatred to the point that even babies are targeted for murder is a privilege?

  • Cynthia,
    And why was it originally used just to describe hatred against the Jews?

    Of course, the other question is, why shouldn’t the term also be used to describe hatred against other semitic groups?

    As for privilege? All one needs to do is to read about the special privileges some want granted to Israel. Here we should note that victimhood is not the only part of Israel’s experience. And if you study people and countries enough, you will find that victims often become victimizers. Those who first settled America in order to escape religious persecution, for example, persecuted others for religious reasons once they got here.

    Again, being a victim is not the only part of Israel’s existence and the same can be said of the Palestinians as well. That is why I wrote that the US, Israel, and the Palestinians should all submit themselves to the jurisdiction of the ICC. Those who object to being judged by the same standards by which they want others to be judged by are looking for special treatment.

  • Because the guy who invented the term, Wilhem Marr, was explicitly focused on promoting hatred of Jews in Germany. He wasn’t talking about other Semitic groups at all. He resented various Jews in his life and the fact that Jews had been granted emancipation in Germany, and was actively promoting the term anti-semitism as part of his theory that Jews could never be part of the German people, no matter how much they might assimilate, because of racial conflict. Unfortunately, that phenomenon continued to develop and culminated in the Holocaust. See

    The point wasn’t the actual Semitic background of Jews in Germany. It was that this was a pretext to promote hatred against them and strip them of recently-granted rights.

    The historical reality is that anti-semitism was a distinct form of hatred aimed at Jews, simply for existing.

    Other forms of hatred against other groups exist, of course, and deserve their own terms. That is not a reason to deny the historical use of this term.

    Here is an analogy: there is a decent argument to be made that race is a social construct, but that doesn’t mean that racism doesn’t exist.

  • The UN has never treated Israel fairly and you know that. I am against special treatment for Israel. Israel gets special treatment from the UN. Israel is treated worse than any other country. The UN is biased against Israel.

    That’s what I object Israel is treated much worse than any other country. No, I don’t support an ethnocracy. I do support a democratic Jewish state. I will never agree that Israel can’t be both at the same time. Your beginning premise is wrong. It’s a human problem, but it also is an ethnic problem because the Arab and Muslim world has become permeated with antismitism. This started in the 1800s. It didn’t start in 948. Seeing it as a problem of sin seems very Christian way of looking at it. Arabs had their prejudice opinions of Jews. They saw Jews as being contemptable, feminized and not powerful enough to persecute unlike Christians who saw Jews as evil, but powerful.

    However much I disagree with Netanyahu and Israel’s current government doesn’t mean I am going to stop supporting Israel anymore than I would stop being American because of Trump. As I said before, whatever crticisms I have of Israel are not going to be discussed with you just because you don’t think I’m being fair or dehumanizing Palestinians. If you’re Christian, you have anti-Jewish opinions and anti-Semitic views even if they’re subconscious, every Christian does.

  • Cynthia,
    He focused on the Jews because that was the prevailing problem in all Europe including Germany. And I am aware of the history of anti-Semitism not just in Germany, but in all of Europe. But since Jews are not the only Semites, distinguishing them by restricting the term ‘anti-Semitism’ to the hatred of the Jews only and magnifying the problem of anti-Semitism shows preference to the Jews over other semitic groups. Such is a denial of equality and goes against the NT warnings about showing preference.

    Do you think that hatred of the Arabs is any less immoral than hatred of the Jews? I don’t think you do. But are you elevating the Jews above other semitic groups by giving hatred of the Jews the ‘anti-Semitic label while hatred of Arabs given a label that denies their connection with Jews.

  • Susan,
    Sorry, but I disagree regarding the UN treatment of Israel. What I have seen is resolution after resolution ignored by Israel while the US does not allow its minor enemies to ignore UN resolutions.

    And, again, I just cited 3 instances of where you show favoritism toward Israel and you objection to the UN’s treatment of Israel provides another example

    BTW, if you support a Jewish state, you are supporting an ethnocracy just as if I supported America being a Christian state, then I would be supporting an ethnocracy. A democratic Jewish state is a contradiction in terms and its treatment of it Arab citizens as well as its Arab neighbors provides further evidence that you can’t have a Jewish Democracy. The same applies here. You can’t have a Christian democracy.

    Why can’t we have an ethnic democracy? Because such denies that the nations belongs equally to all of its ciizens. We still don’t have a democracy here despite the fact that we can vote. Why? Because whites, especially many of my fellow evangelical brothers and sisters, always draw a line in the sand that requires the imposition of their values. And even though we are approaching equality here for the LGBT community with the legalization of same-sex marriage, use an adequate same of those minorities and ask them if they are treated in ways that say they have an equal share of the US with whites.

    And finally, you present the problem of hatred from only one side and yet you claim not to treat Israel as special. MAny of the early Zionist settlers from Europe pictured Israel as a place where Arabs would moved out of the nation and the land would only belong to them. THat is what started the conflict between the Palestinians and the Jewish settlers in Israel. And certainly there is a lot of Arab hatred for Jews in Israel. But there is as much, though sometimes a different kind of, Jewish hatred of the Palestinians in Israel.

    Claim what you want to, your words do not support your claim.

  • It wasn’t about an actual problem. It was his perception of a problem, and that perception was focused squarely on Jews.

  • Cynthia,
    Are you saying that hatred of the Jews only a perception?

    Again, why was the term associated solely with hatred of the Jews? It was because of the demographics in Europe and nothing else. You didn’t have close to the same Arab population in Europe as you did the Jewish population. And, in fact, when Islam was a threat to Christian Europe, the Jews were expediently accepted as allies to beat back the Muslim invaders. Afterwards, the Jews were enemies again while there was no significant Arab population to complain about.

    And again, if both groups are Semites, to call the hatred of one group anti-Semitic but not use the same term for the hatred of the other semitic group is to show preference. There is no other explanation. And being selective with the facts regarding history is showing preference.

  • Yes, the problem of hatred toward Jews was real. I was reading your previous comment as suggesting that the problem was the presence of Jews in Europe.

    Again, this didn’t start with Marr deciding out of the blue that he had issues with all Semites. It started with Marr once having close relationships with a few Jews, and then developing a strong hatred of them. He had become an atheist so he couldn’t justify his views on religious grounds. He developed a racial theory to justify a pre-existing hatred of Jews – the hatred came first, the racial justification followed. He didn’t decide to hate all Semites and then say “oh, a Jew, I guess I will hate him since he seems to be part of this group and there’s no Arab close by to hate on instead”. He may have named his hatred poorly (I don’t expect perfect logic from a racist), but that specific hatred existed and it had been known by that term.

    Anti-Muslim hatred (Islamophobia) also exists and has a history, which certainly would include the Crusades. It is its own distinct history, although there are areas of overlap. For example, the attacks on Jews in the Rhineland during the Cruades. More recently, we can include attacks motivated by hatred of Muslims even if the target wasn’t actually Muslim but was Sikh, since those attacks are evidence of anti-Muslim hatred and show that Muslims would be justified in their fears.

  • Is your definition of a cult something that isn’t your religion and that came later?

  • The term Jew comes from Judah. In Hebrew, Jew is Yehudi and the tribe is Yehudah. If someone believes the NT and its genealogies, they believe that Jesus was Jewish.

  • That’s because UN Reosolutions have been so unfair to Israel or do you think Zionism is racism because if you do you are calling the vast majority of Jews racists. What you are saying is that if I don’t agree with you, I can’t be logical. A Jewish state can be a democracy and doesn’t have to be an ethnocracy. Also, a bi-national state would never be a refuge for Jews. It is not the same thing as supporting America being a Christian state.

    I have never denied I show favoritism to Israel in my comments here. I’m not going to criticize Israel when you think it shouldn’t exist. I keep my criticism to myself, but that doesn’t mean I don’t have any. They’re just none of your business. I don’t have to respond the way you think I should. I won’t do it.

  • Susan,
    You will have to give me a few examples of UN Resolutions that you believe were unfair to Israel.

    And I don’t care if you keep your criticisms to yourself. the favoritism alone can be a problem when the loyalty that drives the favoritism starts to rob you of objectivity. That is a problem we all risk one we align ourselves with groups.

    And let’s be clear about my opposition to the existence of Israel. It is solely because ethnocracies, or, as you claim here, an ethnic democracy, oppose equality for all legitimate groups. Just labeling Israel as a permanent Jewish Democracy means measures are going to be taken to ensure that Jews are always a majority population. That alone rules out equality. I am not against a homeland for the Jewish people. What must be realized though is that the land in question is a homeland for more than one group.

  • ‘the Jews were expediently accepted as allies to beat back the Muslim invaders. Afterwards, the Jews were enemies again while there was no significant Arab population to complain”
    Not true There is also a difference between tolerating something you hate and genuine acceptance. The hatred was real and it was always there. The Crusades were used as an excuse to massacre Jews across Europe, mostly in Germany along the Rhine River or Jews were given a choice of conversion or death. That doesn’t seem like toleration because Islam was the enemy to me.

  • Yes, you are against a homeland for the Jewish people. A Jewish state by your definition can’t be a state of equality for all its people. Yes it is a homeland for both people. That’s why we need to share it and create two states.
    I don’t have to do anything because you say so. The UN calling Zionism racism is enough.

  • Susan,
    You really missed what I wrote. Yes, it is true that European Christians accepted Jews as allies in their battles against Muslim invaders. But that had nothing to do with the Crusades, it had t to do with the Muslim invasion of Europe. As much as those European Christians hated the Jews, they saw that they had more in common with them than the Muslim invaders. But after the Muslim invaders were driving out of Europe, then the persecution of Jews returned because of the hatred you cited.

    In addition, the Crusades weren’t orchestrated to slaughter Jews in the Holy Land even though that is what occurred. The Crusades were initially started in response to the takeover of the Holy Land by the Seljuk Turks who were Muslim. They started showing more and more hostility to the Christian residents and Pope Urban II, I believe, called for the Crusades to take back the Holy Land from the Turks. During those initial battles, the Crusaders slaughtered not just their Muslim counterparts, but many residents of a couple fo the cities they conquered and, if memory serves, that included some Christian residents as well.

    Please note that nothing that I wrote and you responded minimized or denied the hatred that many European Christians had for the Jews. In addition, with as great as that hatred was, not all of the atrocities committed by European Christians revolved around the Jews. The Crusades weren’t about them, but they were slaughtered none the less because of the hatred you cited.

    Finally, I am waiting for you to share those UN resolutions that you believe were unfair to Israel.

  • Right……………….the Greek word used for “jew” does not distinguish between whether the writer meant “of Judah” or “from Judea”. Could be two polar opposites.
    When a black man gets an Irish Driver’s License, is the black man truly “Irish”? No………..of course not.
    Edomites living in Judea CONVERTED to the religion of Israel. They are or were “Judeans” but they were not “of Judah”.
    Modern Jewry is not blood related to the 12 tribes of Israel. Period.

  • Susan,
    One of the problems with the two-state solution is that it does not the inequality that exists for Arab citizens of Israel nor would it address the problem with equality that any Jewish residents or citizens of Palestine would experience.

    IN addition, with the destruction and the confiscating of Palestinian territories by Israel, there is no viable Palestinian state to be formed.

    Finally, Israel would never allow a Palestinian state equal to itself to emerge. It has enough trouble restraining itself from attacking its neighbors in the region as they develop in technology.

  • It would do a great deal to fix the inequalities between Jews and Arabs in Israel. Israeli Arabs would no longer be seen as the enemy if there were peace. All the polls show that if given the choice Israeli Arabs would live in Israel
    That’s just an excuse for people who don’t want two states. Yes, the land can still be divided and most Israelis would support two states if their security would be guaranteed.

  • I was wondering why you keep mentioning that a Black man can’t be Irish, until I googled the guy you mentioned and saw the racist screeds. No thanks.

  • I’m interested in God. I just don’t think that Jesus is God, the son of God or the Messiah. I also don’t think that every word in what you call the “Old Testament” is true. None of that means I don’t or can’t have an interest in God. It’s true I never talked about my interest in God or religion, but that’s because You’re only interested in being “saved by Jesus” which I don’t have an interest in. That has nothing to do with my interest or lack of interest in God.

  • Thank you for getting back to me and sharing this with me Susan.
    Jesus healed and it is my understanding that only God can heal.
    Over 500 persons saw him ascend to Heaven.
    He called God, his Father, which makes Him equivalent with God.
    I love God and love to talk about him and I think you could be really interesting because of your background.
    I do believe the OT because Jesus referred to it so many times.
    Thank you for sharing that with me. God bless you.

  • Susan,
    But one can’t approach establishing equality while either side insists on dominance. And resorting to dominance because the other side insists on it maintains the status quo.

    Both the resorting to and insisting on dominance relies on the rule of force. And no one is a permanent winner when the rule of force is in play. That is my worry about Israel as well as my own nation the U.S.

    And wanting one’s own state where one’s own group is dominant gives yet another example that an ethnic democracy regardless of the ethnicity in charge is an ethnocracy rather than a true Jeffersonian democracy.

    IN addition, what guarantees to the Palestinians have regarding their security in a two-state solution especially when Israel will not allow Palestinian state that is equal to Israel to emerge? It isn’t just Israel that needs security, is the Palestinians as well.

  • Racism…..racism…..racist. Does that work now to silence a debate???

    How could you possibly be confused by the analogy??? A black man who has an Irish Driver’s license is not “Irish”. Just as a White man, born in Africa, is not considered “African”. You never hear White Americans born in Africa called “African Americans”.

    The Greek word for “Jew” does not dinstinguish between whether or not we are talking about a person who is from the Tribe of Judah; or a person who simpy resides in Judea. Edomites residing in Judea are NOT Israelites. Would you at least agree on this one point?

    In regards to Charles Weisman being a “Racist”…………….perhaps you shouldn’t just trust any ‘google search’ you get. Why not simply go to the source. Read the man’s work and find out from him if he is a racist or not. Do you always just trust people? Then you are simply a lemming who can’t think for themselves.

  • What mass murder? Are you referring to the “Holodomor”? Or Dresden? Or Hiroshima?
    I don’t know of any mass murder of Jews.

  • Modern Jewry DOES NOT descend from the Biblical 12 Tribes of Israel. Contemporary Jewish sources admit that Modern Jewry is primarily descended from Edomites who were forcibly converted to Judaism by the Hasmonean leader Johanan Hyrcanus in 130BC, as recorded by historian Flavius Josephus. The Greek Geographer, philosopher and historian Strabo, also testified to the colonisation of Judea by Edomite converts to Judaism. Note: The Greeks and Romans referred to the Edomites as Idumeans].

    FLAVIUS JOSEPHUS: “Antiquities of the Jews” Book 13: Chapter 9, Section 1.
    Hyrcanus took also Dora, and Marissa, cities of Idumea, and subdued all the Idumeans; and permitted them to stay in that country, if they would circumcise their genitals, and make use of the laws of the Jews; and they were so desirous of living in the country of their forefathers, that they submitted to the use of circumcision, and of the rest of the Jewish ways of living; at which time therefore this befel them, that they were hereafter no other than Jews.

    STRABO: “Geography” Book 16 Chapter 2 Section 34.
    The western extremities of Judæa towards Casius are occupied by Idumæans, and by the lake [Sirbonis]. The Idumæans are Nabatæans. When driven from their country by sedition, they passed over to the Jews, and adopted their customs.

    In Jewish Virtual Library, under the heading, Johanan [John] Hyrcanus, it states: “On the southern front he forced Judah’s neighbors in Idumea [descendents of the Edomites] to accept Judaism.

    P.S. Knowing the above, it begins to make more sense that the Apostle John spoke of impostors [Revelation 2:9, Revelation 3:9] who “SAY THEY ARE JEWS, AND ARE NOT” labelling them the “SYNAGOGUE OF SATAN.” Romans 9:13 “As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but ESAU HAVE I HATED.” Genesis 36:9 “And these are the generations of Esau the father of the Edomites in mount Seir:” P.S. The complete extermination of ESAU’S EDOMITE OFFSPRING, [which Modern Jewry descends from] is foretold in Obadiah 1:9, Obadiah 1:18.