Skip to comments.When 'Anti-Semitism' Is Abused: Disagreeing With Israel Doesn't Make One a Bigot
Posted on 01/09/2012 9:10:42 PM PST by Brian Kopp DPM
We were raised to be vigilant. We were taught to fight oppression, admonished to be New Jews strong, muscular, defiant.
We were told to look for the signs, the slogans and the double-speak. We learned at the knee of those with tattooed forearms; knelt at the feet of those who lost brothers and sisters, aunts and uncles, parents, grandparents, lovers, spouses, children.
We have cried, we have wailed, we have lit thousands upon thousands of memorial candles. And we have sworn, again and again, that we would never forget.
That is why when anti-Semitism is falsely applied, we must also stand up and decry it as defamation, as character assault, as unjust. That is why when we debase the term by using it as a rhetorical conceit against those with whom we disagree on policy matters, we have sullied our own promises to our grandparents. For if we dilute the term, if we render the label meaningless, defanged, we have failed ourselves, our legacy, our ancestors, our children.
I am speaking of the recent rise of the bogeyman of anti-Semitism wielded to criticize everyone, from the American ambassador to Belgium (himself the Jewish son of a Holocaust survivor), who was trying to negotiate the uncomfortable lines of Muslim-Jewish conflict in modern Europe, to foreign policy bloggers at Media Matters for America and ThinkProgress, the online magazine housed at the left-leaning Center for American Progress. Jennifer Rubin of The Washington Post, responding to a story about divisions on Israel policy in the Democratic Party, freely called these blogs anti-Semitic. Commentary took up her lead, and The Jerusalem Post than found a historian to ruminate over word choices on the blogs, likening their use to classic anti-Semitism. In the meantime, Elliott Abrams of The Weekly Standard took on Thomas Friedman, beginning his piece, If you were an anti-Semite dedicated to spreading your hatred of Jews .
We should know by now that supporting the State of Israel does not mean uncritical support by all, that Jewish identity is not always under attack when a government of Israel faces criticism. Love for the Jewish state does not, by definition, mean a love for all things the state undertakes. For some that may mean fighting the segregation of women in Beit Shemesh; for others that means pushing for Israel to get out of the territories.
We can we must write about these things. We can argue over borders and refugees, democracy and lack of democracy, worry over the increasingly uncomfortable tension between the ultra-Orthodox and the secular in the state to which so many of us in the Diaspora feel connected.
We can do so because such criticism is not, by definition, anti-Zionism. We can do so because such criticism is not, by definition, anti-Semitism.
There comes a time when we must insist on common sense. We must reject the absurd. There comes a time when we must say, Enough. Real anti-Semitism exists. Real, ugly, hatred of the Jewish people is all too easy to find.
But when we are forced to sift through the thousands of posts of an organization affiliated with the Democratic Party in order to come up with six or seven sentences that may, taken out of context, feel uncomfortable to the community with regard to Israel, that should not lead to pointing fingers, libeling writers and screaming about hate speech. We cannot jump up and shout that these think tanks are harboring anti-Semites or brewing hatred because we disagree with something they have written. We cannot call that anti-Semitism. We can call it policy disagreement.
When we take apart a speech about anti-Semitism by one of our ambassadors who has, through observation and analysis, come to the reasoned conclusion that the ongoing conflict between Israel and the Palestinians, and the failure of the peace process, has an impact on Jewish communities abroad, we should not call for his resignation. Instead, we must acknowledge that when Israel takes an action against the Palestinians whether we agree with that action or not the action may, and often does, reverberate elsewhere. But we cannot call those who acknowledge these things anti-Semitic. We can call that an uncomfortable truth.
And when Haredi men and women put their children in striped pajamas and place a yellow star emblazoned with the word Jude on their chests and parade in the streets of Jerusalem to protest the secular world, we can call that spitting on the graves of our ancestors.
And we can weep that we have lost all perspective.
Sarah Wildman is a columnist for the International Herald Tribune and the Public Broadcasting Service (PBS) and is a contributing editor to the Forward.
“New Israel”???? Israel IS Israel- The spiritual and national homeland of AM Yisrael- the Jewish people.
HaShem specifically said “forever”..... The Land of Israel is HIS sacred bequeath and covenant to the Jewish people - forever lasting, never changing. That is HIS word. Are you suggesting that HaShem breaks HIS Holy word?
It is obvious to anyone who studies world events and the Torah that HaShem keeps HIS word.
To those who hold the view that to criticize the modern secular state in the middle east with that name, Israel, in any way represents de facto anti-semitism, one can only shrug and repeat Sobran's observation:
An anti-Semite used to mean a man who hated Jews. Now it means a man who is hated by Jews. ― Joseph Sobran
Sara, here is the answer to your question: It is a Trojan Horse.
The warnings of this are found in The Torah, The Gematria (hidden codes) of the Torah, The Holy Neviim, The Zohar, Gemora, Midrashim.
Below are a just few links to those ancient warnings. They are by highly knowledgeable, respected, Rabbinic scholars, properly translated into English. Their stunning accuracy will shock you, and you will also find that, Obama’s name, and others, are actually given in a number of places:
Gematria of the Torah: http://www.redemption5768.com/html/articles.html
IDENTIFYING THE EVIL AT THE END OF DAYS-
GLOBAL FINANCIAL EARTHQUAKES SHAKING THE WORLD
THE SECRET OF MASHIACH IS HALF OR PART OF THE
Videos: Rabbi Matityahu Glazerson: Torah Codes
End of Days - Where are we? (parts 1, 2 and 3)
The Holy Neviim: http://www.ishwar.com/judaism/holy_neviim/
Sefer Obadiah1: http://www.ishwar.com/judaism/holy_neviim/book13/
Sefer Joel 4: http://www.ishwar.com/judaism/holy_neviim/book11/book11_004.html
ADL to Rick Santorum: Keep Emphasis on Religion Out of Campaign
New York, NY, January 6, 2012 In response to his comment on a radio show that "we always need a Jesus candidate," the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) today called on Republican presidential candidate Rick Santorum to refrain from overt expressions of religious preferences and beliefs on the campaign trail, stating that "religious appeals to voters are simply unacceptable and un-American."
"Senator Santorum's remark comparing himself to a 'Jesus candidate' was inappropriate and exclusionary. It essentially says that those of other faiths or of no faith whether Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, non-believers or others do not belong," said Abraham H. Foxman, ADL National Director. "Religious appeals to voters are simply unacceptable and un-American. Voters should be encouraged to make their decisions based upon their assessment of the qualifications, integrity and political positions of candidates, not the intensity of their religious beliefs."
The League has long maintained that candidates should feel comfortable explaining their religious convictions to voters, but that there is a point at which an emphasis on religion in a political campaign becomes inappropriate and even unsettling.
Sen. Santorum said Thursday in response to a question from a caller on a radio show that he disagreed the economy was the essential issue of the campaign. The caller commented, "We don't need a Jesus candidate; we need an economic candidate," to which Sen. Santorum replied: "My answer to that was, we always need a Jesus candidate. We need someone who believes in something more than themselves and not just the economy. When we say, "God bless America," do we mean it or do we just say it?"
As a 501c3 non-profit corporation, ADL takes no position on behalf of or in opposition to any candidate for office.
The Anti-Defamation League, founded in 1913, is the world's leading organization fighting anti-Semitism through programs and services that counteract hatred, prejudice and bigotry.
Hello everyone and welcome to The Vortex where lies and falsehoods are trapped and exposed. Im Michael Voris.
Republican presidential hopeful Senator Rick Santorum has ruffled the feathers of the liberal religious establishment .. in this case .. the Jewish anti-defamation league .. also known as the ADL.
In one of the purest pieces of hypocrisy you are likely to read in the arena where politics and religion cross over .. the ADL has issued a press release telling Santorum to shut up about his religion .. which by the way is Roman Catholicism.
The statement says in part .. "religious appeals to voters are simply unacceptable and un-American." First of all, says who? Abe Foxman of the ADL? Who appointed him the arbiter of what can be said by political candidates?
Secondly .. he never seemed to get all upset when candidate Obama was tromping across the country and speaking in every protestant church who would let him in.
He never seemed to get upset when the Clintons were barnstorming across the United States and speaking to every inner-city black Church congregation who would welcome them.
In fact .. Clinton spent soooo much time speaking before church crowds in the inner city, that he was nicknamed the first black president.
So where Foxman comes off saying its un-American and unacceptable is quite the mystery. Perhaps he means its un-American and unacceptable when an actual BELIEVING traditional Christian .. in this case .. Catholic says it.
BTW Am I allowed to say catholic? Just sayin!
Anyway .. this is the default position of the liberal political class .. of which the Jewish Anti-Defamation League is a prominent cheerleader and card-carrying member .. despite their claims to be .. um .. non-partisan.
Just a 5 second scroll through their homepage will reveal that they have come down squarely on the side of every liberal political position known to man .. from partial birth abortion .. to regular abortion to individuals of the same gender engaging in sex with one another and demanding it be called marriage.
Yep ..nary a cause célèbre of the perverted political agenda goes by without the ADL right there with their smug self-righteous pronunciations on whats allowed to be said and whats not.
And of course .. if someone challenges their stance on something .. the liberal elite PR machine kicks into high gear and the dreaded .. conversation ending .. charge of anti-Semitism is leveled against all opposition .. much the same as the charge of racism is leveled against opponents of Obamas.
Well .. while we are on the topic of all these isms .. sure seems to me that the ADL is guilty of propagating the foul social illness of anti-Catholicism. After all .. Rick Santorum is Catholic .. loud and proud about it as a matter of fact .. and he committed the political heresy of using the name Jesus NOT in connection with the liberal agenda.
After years of having quite successfully hijacked Jesus for their own political purposes .. liberals simply cannot stand to see Him spoken about in actual TRUTHFUL terms .. such as his calling out of sin and evil and the consequences of a political and cultural order not conformed to His Divine Will.
Expect more of this condescending bluster as the campaign rolls along. Weve attached a link to their press release on this page.
GOD Love You. Im Michael Voris. http://www.adl.org/PresRele/RelChStSep_90/6212_90.htm
Dear Mr. Foxman,
Get over yourself.
You too are entitled to your opinion.
But in this day, I see far more evidence of anti-Catholicism (often from overt Jewish sources like the ADL nonsense above) than I see evidence of legitimate anti-semitism.
In fact, I see rampant anti-Catholicism masked in a "crusade against anti-semitism."
And there is much Christian truth in the ante Nicean fathers you bemoan as worthy of a neo-Nazi smile.
In fact, I'm beginning to understand the ante Nicean fathers better every time I cross paths with the ADL propagandists, not to mention certain zionists and certain Jewish apologists on this forum.
And there’s the matter of Jesus in the New Testament celebrating ‘Feast of Dedication’ - Chanukah, an exclusively rabbinic holiday.
Did Jesus say, “Blessed are You, Lord our God, King of the Universe, Who has sanctified us with His commandments, and has commanded us to light the Chanukah lamps,” when there’s no Scripture ‘commanding’ it?
Thank you Brian, that was excellent. The ADL chooses to forget the phrase “freedom of religion” doesn’t apply only to them, and those they are fond of. No pity will be given to them. This is as Michael called it: anti-Catholicism.
Yes, please do. I would like to read them in their entirety in context. Please post them from Catholic sources to make sure the problem isn't simply a faulty translation - with links to their context on the Catholic site from which they are excerpted. Thank you for the offer. This will be very helpful.
The Orthodox research center did a good job explaining this in the correct context...
Calling any Church Father anti-Semitic on the basis of ostensibly denigrating references to Jews, therefore, is to fall to intellectual and historiographical simple-mindedness. Applying modern sensitivities and terms regarding race to ancient times, as though there were a direct parallel between modern and ancient circumstances, is inane. This abuse of history is usually advocated by unthinking observers who simply cannot function outside the cognitive dimensions of modernity. My remarks in this regard apply not only to those who find literal anti-Semitism in the Fathers, but also to women, in our times, who, deviating from a true vision of femininity and a Christian understanding of the lofty place of the female in the Church, are quick to characterize statements in the Fathers about the FALLEN nature of women (which are often quite harsh) as symptomatic of a general denigration of females (as though fallen males are not also brutally portrayed in the Fathers). Post-Lapsarian and unrestored nature, whatever the gender of the individual, is corrupt and cannot be described in positive ways. (Restored men and women are another matter, and here equality in Christ prevails, whether as regards race or gender.) A clinical diagnosis of human spiritual ills is not the same thing as prescriptive racism or intolerance. To suggest this is unfair. It is not so much that the Fathers were misogynists or racists as it that those who find misogyny and racism in their writings are possessed by small minds, perplexed spirits, and the whimsical concerns of our age. I am loath to loathe anything; however, such smallness is something that I abhor!
Anybody who pledges loyalty to a senile German monarch shouldn’t talk. Jefferson was right (see my tag line).
Perhaps you would not be so harsh if you understood that the Church teaching is an unbroken continuation of Israel through the New Covenant and Salvation is open to all mankind by the law of love, including Jews.
Catholic Orthodox rightly recognize the Sainthood of Moses and Abraham as Saint Moses and Saint Abraham as well
And from the Catechism..
Catechism 877... "In fact, from the beginning of his ministry, the Lord Jesus instituted the Twelve as "the seeds of the new Israel and the beginning of the sacred hierarchy." Chosen together, they were also sent out together, and their fraternal unity would be at the service of the fraternal communion of all the faithful: they would reflect and witness to the communion of the divine persons."
Who pledges loyalty to a senile German monarch? And Jefferson wasn’t infallible. Christ is High Priest, and we all partake of the priesthood of believers.
Excellent contribution, thank you!
Thank You, Brian, for posting this thread and explaining the Church is not anti Semitic in any way.