The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 Maidhc O Cathail Archive
The Israel Lobby ‘In Defense of Christians’?
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>
shutterstock_58919059

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New Reply
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

Having long since captured the sympathies of America’s evangelical Christians, Israel’s friends have recently been attempting to show empathy for the persecuted Christian churches of the Arab World in what appears to be a concerted effort to garner support for Tel Aviv’s regional aspirations. Only founded earlier this year, a previously obscure non-profit organization called “In Defense of Christians” suddenly attracted international headlines during its inaugural summit (Sept. 9-11). The stated purpose of the three-day Washington, D.C. gathering was to raise awareness about the plight of beleaguered Middle Eastern Christian communities whose continued existence is threatened by the advance of the Islamic State, or ISIS, and other takfiri groups.

Although The Washington Post published a report on the IDC Summit in its Religion section on Sept. 10, it wasn’t until that evening’s gala dinner when keynote speaker Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) was reportedly “booed off the stage” for his provocative pro-Israel speech that most people first heard of the Washington-based group. Cruz left little doubt that he was more concerned about defending Israel than the region’s Christians when he began to “loop” ISIS and Al-Qaeda together with Hamas, Hezbollah, Syria and Iran (i.e. the latter three forming “the strategic arc” that poses “the greatest danger to Israel,” as Michael Oren, former Israeli ambassador to the US, has admitted to The Jerusalem Post.) But it wasn’t until the Texas senator asserted that “Christians have no greater ally than the Jewish state” that some of the attendees could take no more of what sounded like an AIPAC-scripted sermon and began to heckle him.

In light of the predictable outrage provoked by Cruz’s paean to Israel, it’s interesting to recall what The Washington Post had been told by IDC executive director Andrew Doran earlier that day:

One Orthodox leader on Tuesday (Sept. 9) declared his opposition to military action to stop the Islamic State militants, a view that is not likely widely shared at the conference, Doran noted. The next day, another called the Arab-Israel conflict the root of Middle Eastern chaos. He doesn’t speak for the IDC nor his brother patriarchs, said Doran .

Yet in a Sept. 11 press release entitled “Clarifying Senator Cruz’s Walk Away from Middle Eastern Christian Summit,” Doran, who previously worked for the US Department of State, still seemed assured that he and his allegedly “non-partisan” organization speak instead for the region’s Christians. After having recounted “in tears” his inspiration for the group’s name from a 1933 letter titled “In Defense of the Jews,” the IDC executive director claimed: “In last night’s Solidarity Gala Dinner, Senator Cruz chose to stand against the small and vocal minority of attendees who disagree with his views on Israel rather than standing with the vast majority of those who attended the gala and support both Israel and the Middle East’s Christians.”

Adding to Doran’s “clarification,” IDC president Toufic Baaklini noted “sadly” that “there was a small but vocal anti-Israel element in the room” who “do not represent the views of IDC.” Fittingly, the IDC press release ended by citing one of the summit’s most active speakers [.pdf] whose support for Israel has rarely, if ever, been in doubt: “As Nina Shea, who introduced Cruz later said, ‘We will not agree on territorial disputes, but we stand united against religious persecution regardless of the religion.’”

A senior fellow at the neoconservative Hudson Institute, Shea directs Hudson’s Center for Religious Freedom. A former vice chair of the US Commission on International Religious Freedom, which was once led by the pardoned pro-Israel Iran-Contra intriguer Elliott Abrams and currently chaired by a daughter of the late “true blue and white” Israel mouthpiece and infamous interventionist Tom Lantos, the senior Hudson fellow has, as one critical profile puts it, “a long track record of using human rights concerns to promote various foreign interventions favored by neoconservatives.” Significantly, the IDC summit is evidently not the first time concerns about specifically Christian suffering have been used by the neocon interventionist:

In a 2001 article for the Washington Monthly, Joshua Green related how in the mid-1990s Shea teamed up with Michael Horowitz, a former Reagan administration official, in an effort “to put the issue of Christian persecution on the map.” Green reported: “Horowitz, a Jewish neoconservative and a senior fellow at the conservative Hudson Institute, detailed the plight of persecuted Christians in Africa and the Middle East. He concluded by calling for intervention. ‘For American Jews, who owe our very lives to the open door of the blessed land,’ he wrote, ‘silence should not be an option in the face of persecutions eerily parallel to those committed by Adolf Hitler.’” According to Green, a favorite Horowitz sound bite at the time was that “Christians are the Jews of the 21st century.”

In a 2012 article entitled “What Will Become of the Middle East’s Christians?”—one of the many pieces in which Doran cites Shea’s work on Christian persecution—the IDC executive director echoes Horowitz’s favorite sound bite:

The exodus of Jews from Yemen, where they had lived for fifteen centuries before the birth of the Prophet, was not an isolated occurrence; it was repeated across the Middle East and North Africa, as these Diaspora Jews made their way, reluctantly in many cases, to Israel. Their fight for survival foreshadowed that of the more than ten million Christians of the Muslim world, who today struggle to maintain a presence and identity in the lands where they have lived for centuries.

Presumably, the reader is expected to infer Muslim persecution of Jews from Doran’s use of the word “reluctantly” as opposed to the Israeli false flag attacks that were required in at least some cases to convince those “Diaspora Jews” to flee to the newly-established “Jewish state” on Palestinian land.

A regular contributor to the neocon National Review Online, Doran also shares Shea’s favored response to the problem of Christian persecution. For instance, in an Aug. 18 op-ed piece entitled “Intervention as Duty,” the IDC executive director writes:

As I argued here last year, the intervention in the former Yugoslavia may serve as a compelling model today for Syria and now perhaps Iraq, but this would call for a willingness to see Iraq and Syria dissolved. For the moment, America clings, as it did at the outset of war in Yugoslavia, to nations that no longer exist.

In Doran’s prescription for the current crisis, one can’t help noticing the similarity with the policy recommendations of Oded Yinon, an Israeli journalist formerly attached to the Foreign Ministry of Israel. In his 1982 essay “A Strategy for Israel in the Nineteen Eighties,” originally published in Hebrew by the World Zionist Organization journal, Kivunim, Yinon argued that, “The dissolution of Syria and Iraq later on into ethnically or religiously unique areas such as in Lebanon, is Israel’s primary target on the Eastern front in the long run….”

However, if the dissolution of Syria, in accordance with Israeli strategic objectives, was indeed one of the ulterior motives behind IDC’s bringing the Middle East’s Christians together in Washington, it appears to have suffered a setback when on the final day of the summit, a delegation of Eastern Christian patriarchs met with President Obama in the White House. According to a report in Al-Akhbar English, Obama surprised his guests by telling them, “We know that President Bashar al-Assad protected Christians in Syria.” Further taken aback by Obama’s use of the term “the Syrian government” instead of “regime,” one of the attendees reportedly challenged the president: “Then you should stop talking about a moderate Syrian opposition.” Ironically, it was in this very same room four months earlier that Obama had met Ahmad Jarba, president of the Syrian National Coalition (SNC) who “thanked the US for its aid to opposition rebels.” One month before that, the leader of the so-called “moderate Syrian opposition” reportedly toured the devastated Armenian Christian village of Kassab, Syria which had been attacked and occupied by the Free Syrian Army, the SNC’s armed wing, and their Al-Qaeda affiliates.

Within a week of the historic meeting of President Obama with the leaders of Eastern Christianity, a World Jewish Congress delegation led by WJC president Ronald Lauder paid a Rosh Hashanah visit to Pope Francis at his Vatican residence. As in the White House, the persecution of Christians in the Middle East dominated the discussion. According to a Sept. 18 report in Haaretz, it was the Bishop of Rome’s turn this time to adopt Horowitz’s sound bite:

Lauder and the pope mutually condemned the attacks against Christians around the world, especially in the Middle East. “In the world, there is still great suffering. First it was your turn. Now it’s our turn,” the pope told the delegation…

Strongly agreeing with the Holy Father’s comments, the WJC president extended the Horowitzian analogy:

He showed a paper bearing the Hebrew letter nun, explaining that: “It is the symbol used in Iraq and Syria to identify Christians’ houses as the yellow star was used in the past against European Jewry.”

The head of the “Diplomatic Arm of the Jewish People” concluded with a well-worn albeit spurious hasbara talking point: “The truth is that Israel is the only safe place for Christians in the Middle East.”

As implied by the Haaretz report, the WJC president—not to mention another pro-Israel interventionist par excellence—has been showing an increased concern for his Christian brethren of late. An Aug. 19 Lauder op-ed in The New York Times asks, “Who Will Stand Up for Christians?” Given the gist of the piece, however, a more candid title might have been “Why can’t the world just stop fussing about Israeli war crimes in Palestine and focus their anger instead on Christian suffering in other parts of the Middle East?” As for how to respond to the persecution of his “Christian brothers and sisters,” the self-described “Jewish leader” pointedly reminds his readers that he is writing this call to action “as a citizen of the strongest military power on earth.” Thus, similar to the fervor that preceded the Second World War, “Onward Christian Soldiers” has yet again become the rallying cry for those who seek to embroil the United States and other Western nations in another major conflict—an unnecessary “Clash of Civilizations”—likely to accomplish little beyond further advancing the hegemonic designs of Israel.

***

Maidhc Ó Cathail is a widely published writer and political analyst. He is also the creator and editor of The Passionate Attachment blog, which focuses primarily on the US-Israeli relationship.

 
• Category: Foreign Policy • Tags: Christianity, Israel Lobby, Syria 
Of Related Interest
Bad_Moon_Rising (1)
A new cabinet will mark neocon ascendancy
Kushner and Bibi
Who was corrupting the American political system?
shutterstock_735157936
Hide 33 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
    []
  1. With the Zionists taking over the work of defending Christian interests it’s only a matter of time till everything will be fine, right? I have every confidence in the Israel’s willingness to fight for Christian rights right down to the last Christian.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Ryan
    Is that why in 2006 Israel bombed the Christian areas of Beirut killing scores of civilians as they always do?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
    AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
    These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
    Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
    Sharing Comment via Twitter
    /article/the-israel-lobby-in-defense-of-christians/#comment-727284
    More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  2. KA says:

    Great article.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  3. fnn says:

    Thus, similar to the fervor that preceded the Second World War, “Onward Christian Soldiers” has yet again become the rallying cry for those who seek to embroil the United States and other Western nations in another major conflict—an unnecessary “Clash of Civilizations”—likely to accomplish little beyond further advancing the hegemonic designs of Israel.

    History seems to keep repeating itself. Ladies and Gentlemen, former president Herbert Hoover:

    http://bionicmosquito.blogspot.com/2012/05/poland-as-pawn-hoover-identifies.html

    Hoover begins by outlining the behind-the-scenes actions of Roosevelt in convincing Britain to offer the infamous guarantee to Poland, and additionally to convince Poland to not negotiate with either Germany or Russia.

    President Roosevelt had on January 4, 1939 announced what had amounted to a revolution in American foreign Policy. He proposed action by the United States “stronger than words and less than war” on activities of foreign nations with which he disagreed.

    The President at once took action under this new policy with respect to Hitler’s demand of March 21, 1939 on Poland.

    The U.S. Ambassador to Britain, Joseph P. Kennedy, played a supporting role in implementing Roosevelt’s desires. He regularly urged firmness on the part of Britain when it came to dealing with the Germans. The German Charge d’Affaires in London confirmed Kennedy’s position, informing his government on March 20 that:

    …Kennedy…is playing a leading part. He is said to be in personal contact with the Missions of all the States involved, and to be attempting to encourage them to adopt a firm attitude by promising that the United States…would support them by all means (short of war”).

    Further American activities were disclosed after the Germans had invaded Poland in September 1939 and seized the Polish Foreign Office records. The Germans released a mass of documents which certainly indicated that the American Ambassador to France, William C. Bullitt, who could only act on Mr. Roosevelt’s authority, had made a profusion of oral assurances to officials of Poland and France which they could only interpret as a promise of assistance of some kind of force from the United States.

    When these documents were published, their authenticity was denied by both Bullitt and by the Polish Ambassador to the U.S. The Polish Ambassador later informed Hoover that he denied their authenticity at the request of the State Department. Further, Hoover has evidence of the authenticity of these German-released documents via Polish Embassy documents later given to the Hoover Institute. Besides minor differences in translations, these documents confirmed those released by the Germans as authentic. Hoover goes on to quote from a sampling of these documents – documents received directly from the Polish Embassy in Washington. From the Polish Ambassador Potocki to the Polish Foreign Office, dated two months before the British guarantee to Poland, in which he summarizes his conversations with U.S. Ambassador Bullitt:

    …2) the war preparations of the United States on land, sea, and air, which will proceed in an accelerated tempo and will cost the colossal sum of $1,250,000,000. 3) the definite opinion of the President that France and Britain should abandon all policy of compromise with the totalitarian countries and should not enter into any discussion with them which might be directed towards any territorial changes. 4) a moral assurance that the United States is abandoning the policy of isolation and is ready, in case of war, to participate actively on the side of Great Britain and France, placing all its resources, financial and in raw materials, at their disposal.

    In another dispatch, also dated two months before Britain’s guarantee to Poland, from the Polish Ambassador in Paris to the Polish Foreign Office stated:

    As Ambassador Bullitt puts it: “If a war breaks out, we probably would not participate in it at the beginning, but we would finish it.”…One thing, however, appears to be certain, namely that President Roosevelt’s policy in the immediate future will tend to…weaken Britain’s tendencies toward a compromise [over Poland].

    Hoover confirms that documentation from the U.S. State Department on this had not yet been released. However, based on conversation Hoover later had with Ambassador Kennedy, the U.S. positions portrayed in these dispatches were confirmed. During the war, Hoover met with Kennedy approximately 20 times. Kennedy apparently profoundly disagreed with Roosevelt’s foreign policy.

    Hoover would document his conversations with the various people he met with. An example is provided of Hoover’s meeting with Kennedy on May 15, 1945. Kennedy indicated he had over 900 dispatches which he could not print without consent of the U.S. Government. He hoped one day to receive such permission as it was Kennedy’s intention to write a book that would:

    …put an entirely different color on the process of how America got into the war and would prove the betrayal of the American people by Franklin D, Roosevelt.

    …Roosevelt and Bullitt were the major factors in the British making their guarantees to Poland and becoming involved in the war. Kennedy said that Bullitt, under instructions from Roosevelt, was constantly urging the Poles not to make terms with the Germans and that he Kennedy, under instructions from Roosevelt, was constantly urging the British to make guarantees to the Poles.

    He said that after Chamberlain had given these guarantees, Chamberlain told him (Kennedy) that he hoped the Americans and the Jews would now be satisfied but that he (Chamberlain) felt that he had signed the doom of civilization.

    Kennedy said that if it had not been for Roosevelt the British would not have made this most gigantic blunder in history.

    Kennedy told me that he thought Roosevelt was in communication with Churchill, who was the leader of the opposition to Chamberlain, before Chamberlain was thrown out of office….

    James Forrestal, Under Secretary of the Navy, documented in his diaries a substantially similar conversation with Kennedy.

    Read More
    • Replies: @KA
    So what you are suggesting in essence that countries dealing with US should look into the recent history of US before embracing any American suggestion.
    Well in modern times Saddam paid some dear prices for the invasion of Kuwait. In a much slower motion Pakistan paid for supporting Mujaheddin. These are large collateral of US policy
    To understand this funny world, America will ask to look at age old rivalries between Vietnam and Chi a, China and Japan, Japan and S Korea, Phillipines and Mindanao, Shia and Sunni, Pakistan and India, Poland and Russia Egypt and somebody. But it would call it conspiracy theory if you looked into US entanglements under the radar under the table,out on the " dark side" . Cameron has decided to call any entertaining of any thought suggesting any of the above is simply terrorism and be done with !
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  4. KA says:
    @fnn

    Thus, similar to the fervor that preceded the Second World War, “Onward Christian Soldiers” has yet again become the rallying cry for those who seek to embroil the United States and other Western nations in another major conflict—an unnecessary “Clash of Civilizations”—likely to accomplish little beyond further advancing the hegemonic designs of Israel.
     
    History seems to keep repeating itself. Ladies and Gentlemen, former president Herbert Hoover:

    http://bionicmosquito.blogspot.com/2012/05/poland-as-pawn-hoover-identifies.html


    Hoover begins by outlining the behind-the-scenes actions of Roosevelt in convincing Britain to offer the infamous guarantee to Poland, and additionally to convince Poland to not negotiate with either Germany or Russia.

    President Roosevelt had on January 4, 1939 announced what had amounted to a revolution in American foreign Policy. He proposed action by the United States “stronger than words and less than war” on activities of foreign nations with which he disagreed.

    The President at once took action under this new policy with respect to Hitler’s demand of March 21, 1939 on Poland.

    The U.S. Ambassador to Britain, Joseph P. Kennedy, played a supporting role in implementing Roosevelt’s desires. He regularly urged firmness on the part of Britain when it came to dealing with the Germans. The German Charge d’Affaires in London confirmed Kennedy’s position, informing his government on March 20 that:

    …Kennedy…is playing a leading part. He is said to be in personal contact with the Missions of all the States involved, and to be attempting to encourage them to adopt a firm attitude by promising that the United States…would support them by all means (short of war”).

    Further American activities were disclosed after the Germans had invaded Poland in September 1939 and seized the Polish Foreign Office records. The Germans released a mass of documents which certainly indicated that the American Ambassador to France, William C. Bullitt, who could only act on Mr. Roosevelt’s authority, had made a profusion of oral assurances to officials of Poland and France which they could only interpret as a promise of assistance of some kind of force from the United States.

    When these documents were published, their authenticity was denied by both Bullitt and by the Polish Ambassador to the U.S. The Polish Ambassador later informed Hoover that he denied their authenticity at the request of the State Department. Further, Hoover has evidence of the authenticity of these German-released documents via Polish Embassy documents later given to the Hoover Institute. Besides minor differences in translations, these documents confirmed those released by the Germans as authentic. Hoover goes on to quote from a sampling of these documents – documents received directly from the Polish Embassy in Washington. From the Polish Ambassador Potocki to the Polish Foreign Office, dated two months before the British guarantee to Poland, in which he summarizes his conversations with U.S. Ambassador Bullitt:

    …2) the war preparations of the United States on land, sea, and air, which will proceed in an accelerated tempo and will cost the colossal sum of $1,250,000,000. 3) the definite opinion of the President that France and Britain should abandon all policy of compromise with the totalitarian countries and should not enter into any discussion with them which might be directed towards any territorial changes. 4) a moral assurance that the United States is abandoning the policy of isolation and is ready, in case of war, to participate actively on the side of Great Britain and France, placing all its resources, financial and in raw materials, at their disposal.

    In another dispatch, also dated two months before Britain’s guarantee to Poland, from the Polish Ambassador in Paris to the Polish Foreign Office stated:

    As Ambassador Bullitt puts it: “If a war breaks out, we probably would not participate in it at the beginning, but we would finish it.”…One thing, however, appears to be certain, namely that President Roosevelt’s policy in the immediate future will tend to…weaken Britain’s tendencies toward a compromise [over Poland].

    Hoover confirms that documentation from the U.S. State Department on this had not yet been released. However, based on conversation Hoover later had with Ambassador Kennedy, the U.S. positions portrayed in these dispatches were confirmed. During the war, Hoover met with Kennedy approximately 20 times. Kennedy apparently profoundly disagreed with Roosevelt’s foreign policy.

    Hoover would document his conversations with the various people he met with. An example is provided of Hoover’s meeting with Kennedy on May 15, 1945. Kennedy indicated he had over 900 dispatches which he could not print without consent of the U.S. Government. He hoped one day to receive such permission as it was Kennedy’s intention to write a book that would:

    …put an entirely different color on the process of how America got into the war and would prove the betrayal of the American people by Franklin D, Roosevelt.

    …Roosevelt and Bullitt were the major factors in the British making their guarantees to Poland and becoming involved in the war. Kennedy said that Bullitt, under instructions from Roosevelt, was constantly urging the Poles not to make terms with the Germans and that he Kennedy, under instructions from Roosevelt, was constantly urging the British to make guarantees to the Poles.

    He said that after Chamberlain had given these guarantees, Chamberlain told him (Kennedy) that he hoped the Americans and the Jews would now be satisfied but that he (Chamberlain) felt that he had signed the doom of civilization.

    Kennedy said that if it had not been for Roosevelt the British would not have made this most gigantic blunder in history.

    Kennedy told me that he thought Roosevelt was in communication with Churchill, who was the leader of the opposition to Chamberlain, before Chamberlain was thrown out of office….

    James Forrestal, Under Secretary of the Navy, documented in his diaries a substantially similar conversation with Kennedy.
     

    So what you are suggesting in essence that countries dealing with US should look into the recent history of US before embracing any American suggestion.
    Well in modern times Saddam paid some dear prices for the invasion of Kuwait. In a much slower motion Pakistan paid for supporting Mujaheddin. These are large collateral of US policy
    To understand this funny world, America will ask to look at age old rivalries between Vietnam and Chi a, China and Japan, Japan and S Korea, Phillipines and Mindanao, Shia and Sunni, Pakistan and India, Poland and Russia Egypt and somebody. But it would call it conspiracy theory if you looked into US entanglements under the radar under the table,out on the ” dark side” . Cameron has decided to call any entertaining of any thought suggesting any of the above is simply terrorism and be done with !

    Read More
    • Replies: @Bill Jones
    We are faced by the simple fact that the vomiting of the state of Israel on the people of Palestine was the greatest single foreign policy mistake since Wilson's ramming the US into the Great War.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  5. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    This hits the nail right on the head. Since 9/11, and probably well before, world events have been manipulated to suit a specific tribal group. Are people finally waking up (e.g., Kirchner)?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  6. noizpots says:

    Well written expose. The question remains – why are these Jewish leaders now co-opting the Christian case? Well clearly, it must be “good for the Jews”… perhaps further incitement of the Christian Zionist contingent to rally them behind the (Israeli) flag? The problem, as all readers of this author know, is that in reality the Zionist cause is antithetical to that of true Christians. Indeed, ridding Syria of Assad will inevitably have precisely the same effect as ridding Iraq of Saddam, and Libya of Qaddafi. But that’s what the PNAC and FPI crowd wants, doncha know.

    Read More
    • Replies: @KA
    We can be sure that the tribal goons would build IDM ( in defense of Muslim) to rekindle violence in many parts of the world after the Balkanization of ME is completed as per the plans of Herzl to Oren / Netanhu through the scripts of Yoded Yinon . Some F* up Muslim from somewhere would show up and join . The target countries would be India, China, Mynamaar,or Ethiopia or Sri Lanka . The targets would be chosen in a way as to continue selling weapons to both sides ,maintain the tension,,create focus away from where it should be ( immediate neighborhood
    ) and expand financially and politically across the globe.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  7. I’m basically with Pat Condell …

    Read More
    • Replies: @KA
    Or to paraphrase it -" I am basically with Hitler .."
    , @KA
    Pat Condell is with this Rabbi?

    "
    "Last Thursday Rabbi Shalom Lewis of Congregation Etz Chaim in the Atlanta suburb of Marietta, Georgia gave what can only be understood as a call to genocide in his Rosh Hashanah sermon to welcome in the Jewish new year. The sermon, republished in full below, calls for a war on Islam and Muslims worldwide. Lewis says a “holy crusade” against Islam is needed to”exterminate it utterly and absolutely.

    Three years ago Rabbi Lewis gave a very similar sermon on Rosh Hashanah, again attacking Muslims and comparing them to Nazis. In fact he fashions this speech as a sequel to the earlier one:

    The enemy has eyes and ears. Fingers and toes. Speaks with lips. Runs with legs. Eats. Drinks. Has the face of a human being – but, has a much different heart and a much different soul. Three years ago on this bima, on this very same day, standing at this podium, I cried out, “Ehr Kumpt – they are coming.” 3 years later on this bima, on this very same day, standing at this podium, I cry out not “Ehr Kumpt – they are coming,” I cry out, “Ehr daw – they are here.” The fury of ultimate evil is upon us and we must act – not to contain it. Not to degrade it. Not to manage it. Not to tolerate it, but to exterminate it utterly and absolutely.

    It’s important to note that while Rabbi Lewis says only a small minority of Muslims worldwide should be considered “committed Islamists” he says nearly all Muslims are guilty. “Most Muslims are not terrorists – but it does not matter.”


    - See more at: http://mondoweiss.net/2014/10/genocidal-atlanta-hashanah#sthash.R1YcOFLc.dpuf


    BTW US did not allow certain rapper to continue flight to US. It did not allow certain religious scholar from Europe to take a job in US.
    Britain calls some the speeches by clerics against Jews as intolerant .Blair wants to eradicate Islam's intolerance of Jews and other faiths by force.

    Some Palestinians have been taken to jail in US for remarks dubbed as antisemitism , but taken under visa rules violation.
    , @Virtual Lab
    A dusty needle stuck in a zionist groove, not so terrific indeed
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  8. rod1963 says:

    No, the Jews do not support Christians, look at Cruz’s tone deaf IDC speech in front of a bunch of ME Christians that went over like a lead balloon. What did he think would happen by just talking about the poor persecuted Jews in front of Christians who are watching their villages and towns be eradicated by Muslim fanatics supported by the U.S. and Israel.

    However the Jews do support Christians who do their dirty work in the ME – namely fighting and dying so no Jewish boy has to die. Beyond that Jews have nothing but contempt if not outright hostility for Christians if their attitudes and behaviors in the U.S. by their constant lawsuits against Christians by Jewish organizations like the ADL and ACLU.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  9. KA says:
    @noizpots
    Well written expose. The question remains - why are these Jewish leaders now co-opting the Christian case? Well clearly, it must be "good for the Jews"... perhaps further incitement of the Christian Zionist contingent to rally them behind the (Israeli) flag? The problem, as all readers of this author know, is that in reality the Zionist cause is antithetical to that of true Christians. Indeed, ridding Syria of Assad will inevitably have precisely the same effect as ridding Iraq of Saddam, and Libya of Qaddafi. But that's what the PNAC and FPI crowd wants, doncha know.

    We can be sure that the tribal goons would build IDM ( in defense of Muslim) to rekindle violence in many parts of the world after the Balkanization of ME is completed as per the plans of Herzl to Oren / Netanhu through the scripts of Yoded Yinon . Some F* up Muslim from somewhere would show up and join . The target countries would be India, China, Mynamaar,or Ethiopia or Sri Lanka . The targets would be chosen in a way as to continue selling weapons to both sides ,maintain the tension,,create focus away from where it should be ( immediate neighborhood
    ) and expand financially and politically across the globe.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  10. Pete says:

    “The best way to control the opposition is to lead it ourselves.” ― Vladimir Ilich Lenin

    The ultimate insult – Christians cannot be allowed to defend themselves.

    Nothing righteous can happen in Washington DC with the Zionist in charge.

    Every issue in America is tainted by Zionist interests.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  11. Excellent and timely article! Israel and its supporters have a long history of pretending to support other people’s struggles, real or imagined, when it has been useful to Israel’s interests.

    What should be noted and what is excluded from the US media (for obvious reasons) is that the leading Christian party in Lebanon, the Free Patriotic Movement, under former general and president, Michael Aoun, has been in an alliance with Hezbollah for the better part of a decade and their alliance received 55% of the popular vote in Lebanon’s last national election. According to Aoun, “were it not for Hezbollah, Israel would over-run the country.”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  12. michael says:

    Yemenis and other settled and integrated Jews were needed to bring a European centric experiment to fruition . Ashkenazi and Litvek didn’t know arid farming, kibuttzism could not confer millenia of information on a group with perhaps no real Jewish DNA(Khazars).

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  13. PeterB says:

    Secular dictators Assad and Hussein have provided the best protection for religious minorities such as the Christians. The US and it’s allies have gotten rid of one and are trying to do away with the other. Throwing the entire region into chaos and sponsoring jihadi extremists can do the people of the region no good. If the US cared one whit about Christians or anyone else it wouldn’t have embarked upon this ruinous policy and it’s not clear what it thinks it is accomplishing. Did Cruz think he was in a Texas evangelical mega-church? Is he that dumb or did he overestimate his salesmanship skills?
    Hezbollah is always written about as some great threat to Israel. It’s really a relatively small group within a small country. It was formed as a response to the Israeli occupation of Shia areas in Lebanon. It can’t project it’s power outside Lebanon. Perhaps having some modest capability of defending itself is why it’s portrayed as a threat.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  14. @KA
    So what you are suggesting in essence that countries dealing with US should look into the recent history of US before embracing any American suggestion.
    Well in modern times Saddam paid some dear prices for the invasion of Kuwait. In a much slower motion Pakistan paid for supporting Mujaheddin. These are large collateral of US policy
    To understand this funny world, America will ask to look at age old rivalries between Vietnam and Chi a, China and Japan, Japan and S Korea, Phillipines and Mindanao, Shia and Sunni, Pakistan and India, Poland and Russia Egypt and somebody. But it would call it conspiracy theory if you looked into US entanglements under the radar under the table,out on the " dark side" . Cameron has decided to call any entertaining of any thought suggesting any of the above is simply terrorism and be done with !

    We are faced by the simple fact that the vomiting of the state of Israel on the people of Palestine was the greatest single foreign policy mistake since Wilson’s ramming the US into the Great War.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  15. TomB says:

    A little off-topic but did everyone see the Israeli announcement, timed to the tee coming out just before Netanyahu shook hand upon meeting with Obama, announcing the expansion of some sensitive Jerusalem settlement by some 6,500 homes?

    I.e., “Hello Mr, President, fuck you, and how’s your wife and family? ”

    Hilarious.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  16. Anonymous says: • Website • Disclaimer

    Maidhc, you hit the nail on the head with this, imagined, sentence:

    “Why can’t the world just stop fussing about Israeli war crimes in Palestine and focus their anger instead on Christian suffering in other parts of the Middle East?”

    The Israelis would take up the cause of Justice for Outer Mongolian Goatherds, if they thought it would divert the world’s attention away from their inhuman behaviour towards the Palestinians. If their sudden concern for Christians were not so palpably false and Christians were not in such great peril, it would be laughable.

    Read More
    • Replies: @schmenz
    Well said, Mr Lawson.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  17. Sam J. says:

    Tom Not Terrific says,”I’m basically with Pat Condell”

    Cordell says that shouting down people is book burning. Wow. Didn’t the Jews do a lot of that? The whole 60′s free speech movement was all about shutting up the other guy not free speech. Didn’t they close several schools? Weren’t groups actively focused on overthrowing the US gov. Jewish? When that Spanish sports guy talked about the Jews wasn’t he fired the next day? Haven’t academics been fired for talking about the Jews? (I could go on…but I’ll stop here).

    Condell says it’s not about religion or territory. They just hate the Jews. Well why do they? Big mystery. It’s in the air or lollipops? Tight pants? He conveniently skips the part where every country that the Jews have lived in they eventually throw them out. Maybe it’s not the Arabs or Muslims or Christens or Baals. Maybe it’s the Jews. The Jews frequently like to use the expression,” everybody can’t be wrong”. Maybe in this case it fits. Maybe Jewish behavior is like that of the Talmud. Every thing that belongs to others is yours. Every one will eventually serve you. Lying and cheating others is ok. Everyone else is an animal and Jews are the only humans. Come to think of it. That’s exactly the same behavior of clinical psychopaths. Maybe people hate the Jews because they act exactly like a tribe of psychopaths. Even worse while acting like this they tell everyone that “they are the light of the world”. That’s psychopathic behavior too.

    Condell asked if we would give up Israeli technology. Well I’ll do with out if we could get rid of trillions of unbacked derivatives, bank bail outs, mass immigration, Federal Reserve, discrimination against Whites in jobs and education, constant brainwashing that Whites are evil, hiding the mass robbery, rape and murder of White people, stealing of our military tech and selling it to China, (I could go on but I’ll stop here).

    Condell says the Palestinians refused to sign measures for a two state solution. Ha. You used to be able to get away with lies like this but not now. The deal they offered them was one state. Two states on paper only. Israel would control everything in Palestine. That’s what they have now. The Palestinians lost nothing. They have now what they were promised.

    Condell says they wouldn’t have to build barriers if the Palestinians didn’t hate them so much. Uh…where are the barriers? Mostly on Palestinian lands. They’ve steadily taken more and more. Maybe that would, (I know it’s hard to believe), foster hatred?

    Condell says the Palestinians are hiding behind their Women and Children. Well where else can they go? The area left to them is so small there’s no where else to go. Not that it matters we have videos of Israelis shooting Palestinian kids in the back and firing artillery at them so it wouldn’t matter where the Women and Children went they would still kill them.

    “Jew hatred seems to be written in our DNA because it keeps coming back…” I’ve covered this. All societies who have lived with Jews eventually come to hate them. I would be glad to support an Israeli state if THEY WOULD ALL GO THERE. Even to the extent of screwing the Palestinians good but only if they all go there. The Israeli state now is just a launching point for psychopathic gangsterism. Rather like a pirate hang out where the criminals hang out before going out to pillage the planet.

    The Holohoax of course. If by the Holocaust you mean the Germans put six million Jews in trains, took them to camps, gassed, then burnt them in ovens to ash I don’t believe it. There isn’t evidence for it. There weren’t enough gas chambers, ovens, fuel to burn them, transport to get them there, etc. I just don’t believe it. Of course I didn’t watch all the movies made by Jews about it so I could be mistaken. The Jews always remind us of the statement by Hitler about the Big Lie. Unfortunately for history they never make it clear that Hitler was talking about the Jews. The Jews were the ones relying on the Big Lie and he was commenting on it.

    Condell says that people don’t know what it’s like to live on a thin strip of land that others want to wipe them out. Well he’s got me there but I do live on a thick strip of land, USA, and know what it like to have others want to wipe me out. I guess it’s the thinness that makes them special.

    Condell says later that it’s a war of religious hatred. Before he said they just hated them for no reason. Changed I guess while he was making the video.

    Condell says if we have an ounce of Humanity we should support Israel. I though only Jews were Human? Shouldn’t we, as animals, support the other animals?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  18. Ryan says:
    @Thomas O. Meehan
    With the Zionists taking over the work of defending Christian interests it's only a matter of time till everything will be fine, right? I have every confidence in the Israel's willingness to fight for Christian rights right down to the last Christian.

    Is that why in 2006 Israel bombed the Christian areas of Beirut killing scores of civilians as they always do?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Thomas O. Meehan
    Yes of course! How better to defend Christians than to bomb them?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  19. Karl says:

    >> Indeed, ridding Syria of Assad

    none of you can show me an authenticated quote from the Hebrew newspapers, in which a member of the Israel state-security organs, suggests getting rid of Assad.

    none of you.

    Read More
    • Replies: @KA
    Ask the Rabbi to translate to Hebrew
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  20. TomB says:

    Eliezer Ben-Yehuda wrote:

    none of you can show me an authenticated quote from the Hebrew newspapers, in which a member of the Israel state-security organs, suggests getting rid of Assad.

    Well, there’s this, embedded in a story from the NY Times dated 9/5/13:

    “This is a playoff situation in which you need both teams to lose, but at least you don’t want one to win — we’ll settle for a tie,” said Alon Pinkas, a former Israeli consul general in New York. “Let them both bleed, hemorrhage to death: that’s the strategic thinking here. As long as this lingers, there’s no real threat from Syria.”

    (http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/06/world/middleeast/israel-backs-limited-strike-against-syria.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0)

    Now of course one might play cute by observing it’s not (ostensibly!) from a “Hebrew” newspaper, and at the time he uttered the quote the author *was* “only” Israel’s past consul general, but otherwise seems to me to fit the bill rather perfectly. Certainly wanting both teams “to lose” more than “suggests getting rid of Assad,” as does the wish to let Assad’s side to bleed “to death.”

    But of course at some level of cuteness displayed by a challenger over a response to their challenge—which I think I met here by arguing the above—same just confirms all the more that the challenge has indeed been met. Elsewise why the cuteness?

    Moreover, substantively, what Eliezer Ben-Yehuda is suggesting of course is that Israel hasn’t been pushing for our intervention in Syria. And thus his challenge would seem a smart if consciously tricky one because if it was the *last* thing it would want to do is to advertise that, right?

    But here then, from that same NY Times story cited above by Judy Rudroren (who is jewish, whose husband is *in* the IDF, and who is otherwise regularly slammed as being biased towards Israel), this is what she further reported:

    This spring, when an Israeli official called for an international response to what he said were earlier Syrian chemical attacks, he was muzzled and reprimanded for appearing to pressure the White House.

    Next up Mr. Ben-Yehuda, telling us it’s an anti-semitic libel to say that Israel has been pushing us to go to war against Iran?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Gypsy
    Good job, Tom!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  21. schmenz says:
    @Anonymous
    Maidhc, you hit the nail on the head with this, imagined, sentence:

    "Why can’t the world just stop fussing about Israeli war crimes in Palestine and focus their anger instead on Christian suffering in other parts of the Middle East?"

    The Israelis would take up the cause of Justice for Outer Mongolian Goatherds, if they thought it would divert the world's attention away from their inhuman behaviour towards the Palestinians. If their sudden concern for Christians were not so palpably false and Christians were not in such great peril, it would be laughable.

    Well said, Mr Lawson.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  22. Gypsy says:

    I’d like to add to the author’s (he of the lovely Celtic name!) work that Saddam Hussein deeply respected and yes, protected christians, and included them in his cabinet (along with women.) Yet we Amerikans ousted and murdered him for the benefit of IsraHell. And yes, the majority of the Iraqi people wish he were still in power. So put that in your crackpipe and smoke it, Cruz…you blithering moron. I can’t think of a term strong enough to express your stupidity.
    I remember a time when christians tended to perceive jews as “those people who murdered our lord”. I grew up catholic in the 1960′s: I certainly cannot recall anything positive being said in all my years of parochial schooling about the jews. All that changed when terrorist/ IsraHelli PM Yitzhak Shamir decided to make “allies” of Amerikan christians to benefit IsraHell, purchasing the “reverend” and professional con man Jerry Falwell his own Lear jet. Falwell took the bait and ran (or flew), with the end result that evangelical christians were encouraged to support the jews and IsraHell. Which leads us to today.
    Another fact that the author may have considered is that the christian Palestinians and other christian residents of the Levant tended to be more concentrated in cities and towns; were merchants as opposed to farmers and therefore tended to be more well-off than their muslim brethren, and were more likely to be able to LEAVE rather than tolerate IsraHell’s atrocities. At one point, about one-third of the Palestinian people were christian.
    Not that it makes a hill of beans worth of difference. As a Wiccan, I find the muslim people to be far less hypocritical than christians, and certainly less so than the jews.
    All in all, a stunningly accurate essay.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  23. Gypsy says:
    @TomB
    Eliezer Ben-Yehuda wrote:

    none of you can show me an authenticated quote from the Hebrew newspapers, in which a member of the Israel state-security organs, suggests getting rid of Assad.
     
    Well, there's this, embedded in a story from the NY Times dated 9/5/13:

    “This is a playoff situation in which you need both teams to lose, but at least you don’t want one to win — we’ll settle for a tie,” said Alon Pinkas, a former Israeli consul general in New York. “Let them both bleed, hemorrhage to death: that’s the strategic thinking here. As long as this lingers, there’s no real threat from Syria.”

    (http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/06/world/middleeast/israel-backs-limited-strike-against-syria.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0)

    Now of course one might play cute by observing it's not (ostensibly!) from a "Hebrew" newspaper, and at the time he uttered the quote the author *was* "only" Israel's past consul general, but otherwise seems to me to fit the bill rather perfectly. Certainly wanting both teams "to lose" more than "suggests getting rid of Assad," as does the wish to let Assad's side to bleed "to death."

    But of course at some level of cuteness displayed by a challenger over a response to their challenge—which I think I met here by arguing the above—same just confirms all the more that the challenge has indeed been met. Elsewise why the cuteness?

    Moreover, substantively, what Eliezer Ben-Yehuda is suggesting of course is that Israel hasn't been pushing for our intervention in Syria. And thus his challenge would seem a smart if consciously tricky one because if it was the *last* thing it would want to do is to advertise that, right?

    But here then, from that same NY Times story cited above by Judy Rudroren (who is jewish, whose husband is *in* the IDF, and who is otherwise regularly slammed as being biased towards Israel), this is what she further reported:


    This spring, when an Israeli official called for an international response to what he said were earlier Syrian chemical attacks, he was muzzled and reprimanded for appearing to pressure the White House.
     
    Next up Mr. Ben-Yehuda, telling us it's an anti-semitic libel to say that Israel has been pushing us to go to war against Iran?

    Good job, Tom!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  24. @Ryan
    Is that why in 2006 Israel bombed the Christian areas of Beirut killing scores of civilians as they always do?

    Yes of course! How better to defend Christians than to bomb them?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  25. KA says:
    @Karl
    >> Indeed, ridding Syria of Assad

    none of you can show me an authenticated quote from the Hebrew newspapers, in which a member of the Israel state-security organs, suggests getting rid of Assad.

    none of you.

    Ask the Rabbi to translate to Hebrew

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  26. KA says:
    @Tom Not Terrific
    I'm basically with Pat Condell ...

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HHC8KC5cLs8

    Or to paraphrase it -” I am basically with Hitler ..”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  27. KA says:
    @Tom Not Terrific
    I'm basically with Pat Condell ...

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HHC8KC5cLs8

    Pat Condell is with this Rabbi?


    “Last Thursday Rabbi Shalom Lewis of Congregation Etz Chaim in the Atlanta suburb of Marietta, Georgia gave what can only be understood as a call to genocide in his Rosh Hashanah sermon to welcome in the Jewish new year. The sermon, republished in full below, calls for a war on Islam and Muslims worldwide. Lewis says a “holy crusade” against Islam is needed to”exterminate it utterly and absolutely.

    Three years ago Rabbi Lewis gave a very similar sermon on Rosh Hashanah, again attacking Muslims and comparing them to Nazis. In fact he fashions this speech as a sequel to the earlier one:

    The enemy has eyes and ears. Fingers and toes. Speaks with lips. Runs with legs. Eats. Drinks. Has the face of a human being – but, has a much different heart and a much different soul. Three years ago on this bima, on this very same day, standing at this podium, I cried out, “Ehr Kumpt – they are coming.” 3 years later on this bima, on this very same day, standing at this podium, I cry out not “Ehr Kumpt – they are coming,” I cry out, “Ehr daw – they are here.” The fury of ultimate evil is upon us and we must act – not to contain it. Not to degrade it. Not to manage it. Not to tolerate it, but to exterminate it utterly and absolutely.

    It’s important to note that while Rabbi Lewis says only a small minority of Muslims worldwide should be considered “committed Islamists” he says nearly all Muslims are guilty. “Most Muslims are not terrorists – but it does not matter.”

    - See more at: http://mondoweiss.net/2014/10/genocidal-atlanta-hashanah#sthash.R1YcOFLc.dpuf

    BTW US did not allow certain rapper to continue flight to US. It did not allow certain religious scholar from Europe to take a job in US.
    Britain calls some the speeches by clerics against Jews as intolerant .Blair wants to eradicate Islam’s intolerance of Jews and other faiths by force.

    Some Palestinians have been taken to jail in US for remarks dubbed as antisemitism , but taken under visa rules violation.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  28. KA says:

    Do they have any role in hacking also? Are they saving American economy as well on the side when not defending Christians?

    http://www.tomatobubble.com/index.html

    Just before 911, an intelligence report came out from US basically saying Israel had the motives and the means of attacking US and then blame it on Arabs.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  29. […] officer currently executive director of the Council for the National Interest, links to my article on the “In Defense of Christians” D.C. Summit in his latest UNZ Review […]

    Read More
  30. @Tom Not Terrific
    I'm basically with Pat Condell ...

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HHC8KC5cLs8

    A dusty needle stuck in a zionist groove, not so terrific indeed

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  31. […] The Unz - Having long since captured the sympathies of America’s evangelical Christians, Israel’s friends have recently been attempting to show empathy for the persecuted Christian churches of the Arab World in what appears to be a concerted effort to garner support for Tel Aviv’s regional aspirations. Only founded earlier this year, a previously obscure non-profit organization called “In Defense of Christians” suddenly attracted international headlines during its inaugural summit (Sept. 9-11). The stated purpose of the three-day Washington, D.C. gathering was to raise awareness about the plight of beleaguered Middle Eastern Christian communities whose continued existence is threatened by the advance of the Islamic State, or ISIS, and other takfiri groups. […]

    Read More
Current Commenter says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS
PastClassics
The unspoken statistical reality of urban crime over the last quarter century.
The “war hero” candidate buried information about POWs left behind in Vietnam.
The major media overlooked Communist spies and Madoff’s fraud. What are they missing today?
What Was John McCain's True Wartime Record in Vietnam?