This article first appeared in Times of Israel Blogs.
As the dust settles over the hostage-taking incident at a Colleyville, Texas synagogue, we can give thanks that all four hostages are safe and the hostage-taker is dead. The FBI Hostage Rescue Team and local Texas police did an outstanding job.
Not so outstanding was the performance of the FBI Dallas Special Agent in Charge, Matthew DeSarno. As is usually the case when a high-profile case arises, the local top cops handle the press conferences. DeSarno’s comments have raised the ire of many in the Jewish community with his statement that the singular motivation of the gunman, Malik Faisal Akram, was to demand the freedom of convicted terrorist, Aafia Siddiqui, and that it was not specifically related to the Jewish community. (I am paraphrasing.) The FBI suits in Washington have hastened to correct that statement in the face of what was so obvious and the angry reaction.
I noted in watching the video of DeSarno’s statement that he was uncomfortable while making the statement in answer to a question from the press, as evidenced by the rapid blinking of his eyes. Was it his intent to deliberately lie? Was he trying to follow a politically-correct script directed by FBI Hqs? I would like to give DeSarno the benefit of the doubt in handling a sensitive aspect of this case. It may just be that he was struggling to deal with a sensitive subject and unintentionally misstated the facts.
At any rate, while Akram may have been trying to secure the release of Siddiqui, the fact remains that he chose a synagogue. He could have chosen a 7-11 or a Starbucks, but he didn’t; he chose a synagogue. Was he looking for a site near the Fort Worth prison where Siddiqui was being held and also near the Dallas-Fort Worth Airpot? Perhaps, he was envisioning a takeoff from the airport with Siddiqui in tow. The fact remains, however, that Akram chose a synagogue in the area. That fact cannot be explained away by DeSarno, CAIR, or anybody else. While the Jewish community has nothing to do with Siddiqui’s incarceration, it was clearly a target. Why? That leads us into a discussion of the intense Jew-hatred that is embedded in Islamic teaching. Obviously, Agent DeSarno had no wish to discuss that with the media.
But the real disservice in DeSarno’s statement is that telling the Jewish community that it was not under threat is a disservice to their safety. Nothing to see here? Sorry, but there is much to see here. This is very much in line with the unwillingness of European politicians, police, and press to identify Muslim perpetrators when they target Jews or Christians for attack. Who wants a public that is oblivious to the threat they face?
The sad fact is that our Jewish community is under threat, and their synagogues, schools, and institutions must be protected. It is also time for many misguided Jewish leaders and their organizations to admit that the biggest threat is coming from Islamic quarters. Do all Muslims worldwide hate Jews? No. And yes, the Pittsburgh and Poway attacks were not committed by Muslims, but that doesn’t change the fact that Islamic anti-Semitism is real. Instead of engaging in inter-faith events with local imams, many of whom say one thing to their Jewish and Christian counterparts while saying something else to their congregations, these leaders should be speaking out and demanding that their Islamic imam counterparts stop making disparaging remarks about other faiths in their sermons.
It is true that, historically, Jews have been attacked from every direction. Hate is hate, and it must be exposed and countered no matter who the guilty parties are. The truth is all of our communities need to take a look in the mirror when it comes to Jew-hatred. Nobody should be excused from criticism.
13 comments:
I absolutely think that we need to address the fact that there is a lot of anti-Semitic propaganda coming from the Muslim world (while acknowledging that not all Muslims advocate it).
But we need to address that there is much anti-Semitism that's rooted in Christianity. We have a couple thousand years of history to show for it, up to the Holocaust and beyond. Jews were seen as "Christ killers", there were stories of "Blood Libel", and let's not forget the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. Much of these are rooted in the Gospel of John blaming "the Jews" for the execution of Jesus.
Let's also not pretend that much of the right-wing support of Israel is grounded in Fundamentalist Christianity. It's not about supporting the Jewish people so much as seeing them as a prop in their end times scenario, ultimately viewing them as those who must eventually convert or perish. These fundamentalists respect them the way a chess player respects their pawns.
Even the secular world needs to take a long look at what's going on, as plenty of atheists, agnostics, non-religious, etc. can be found making the same bigoted comments against Jews as their religious counterparts.
To paraphrase Jesus, we need to be aware of our planks while noting the specks.
Anti-Semitism, like all forms of bigotry, is toxic and harmful. What makes it worse is that it's usually wrapped up in various conspiracy theories and ideologies in which people identify themselves. In other words, it's baked in to our society (and other societies as well - as you rightly point out about the Islamic world.)
Additional comment: The Protocols of the Elders of Zion were a forgery produced by agents of the Russian tsar around the turn of the 20th century. They have long since been discredited everywhere except in the Islamic world.
I'm aware that "Protocols" is a forgery. My point is that it came out of the Christian world. My understanding is that many of the anti-Semites in the Muslim world use it as a source for their own bigotry.
I'm also aware that not every conservative is motivated to support Israel due to fundamentalist end-times beliefs. But that is a big part of it, and they're firmly entrenched in the Republican party. I personally find the debate over Israel to be one with a lot of bad-faith arguments on both sides. But I didn't directly address Israel because it's besides my point.
I also take issue with notions of "Western Civilization" and "Judeo-Christian principles" as they're very vague. Just saying Judeo-Christian makes as much sense as Judeo-Islamic or Islamo-Christian. All three of these religions trace back to Abraham and have the Ten Commandments. Jesus also figures prominently in the Koran, getting more mentions than Mohammad.
Can you name a specific "value" of the "Western World" that is totally unique to both Judaism and Christianity? (But can't be found in Islam? Or other religions?) Our current forms of government owe more to the Enlightenment than religious doctrine. In fact, I would even say that the Constitution lies in direct contradiction with the 10 Commandments. We are not bound to worship the God of the Old or New Testament, and people cannot be punished for committing blasphemy.
I also find the concept of "true believing Christians" to be as nonsensical as "true-believing Muslims". Many Muslims will tell you that the terrorists and anti-Semites aren't "real Muslims". These are just word games that people are playing.
The fact is that there are good Muslims and good Christians, just as there are bad Muslims and bad Christians. I saw a guy whose entire life is devoted to caring for terminally ill children, and he credits it to his Muslim faith. I consider him a real Muslim. I also consider members of ISIS to be real Muslims. It just means different things to different people. The Nazis and White Christian Nationalists can point to a long history of Christian doctrine to justify their anti-Semitism. They're not just pulling it out of thin air. And waving our hands and saying, "They're not real Christians" doesn't address the heart of the problem.
But my main point is simply this: if we view anti-Semitism as a uniquely "Muslim" problem, that's just as bad as ignoring the anti-Semitism coming out of the Muslim world. The problem is much bigger and more complicated than that.
"I'm also aware that not every conservative is motivated to support Israel due to fundamentalist end-times beliefs. But that is a big part of it, and they're firmly entrenched in the Republican party."
The bottom line is that it is the Republican party and not the Democrat party that supports Israel.
"Can you name a specific "value" of the "Western World" that is totally unique to both Judaism and Christianity? (But can't be found in Islam?"
Yes- Equality, freedom of religion, speech, equal rights for women. True the West has not always lived up to those ideals, but we are striving to do so.
"All three of these religions trace back to Abraham and have the Ten Commandments. Jesus also figures prominently in the Koran, getting more mentions than Mohammad."
Talking points I have heard from smooth-talking Muslim representatives at inter-faith events. It is true that Islam recognizes previous prophets such as Jesus-They just don't like their followers. In my opinion, the reason Jesus is mentioned more often than Mohammad in the Koran-if that is true- is that Mohammad himself was the true author of the Koran. In the early Mecca period of his prophecy, he took a lot of material from the Old and New Testaments.
"Many Muslims will tell you that the terrorists and anti-Semites aren't "real Muslims".
To me that is Taquiyya (deception to advance Islam). In my opinion, ISIS and Al Qaeda are following the teaching of Islam to the letter.
"But my main point is simply this: if we view anti-Semitism as a uniquely "Muslim" problem, that's just as bad as ignoring the anti-Semitism coming out of the Muslim world. The problem is much bigger and more complicated than that."
On that, I basically agree. As I said, Jews have always gotten it from every direction. In my opinion, however, Islam is the biggest source of today's anti-Semitism.
"Equality, freedom of religion, speech, equal rights for women."
This needs to be unpacked a bit here.
First off, notions of "equality" are relatively recent - especially when it comes to women. Even if you can argue that it's a "Western" value, it is decidedly NOT to be found in either the Old Testament or the New Testament. (Paul said that women should never hold any authority over a man, for instance. That's pretty mild compared to what you find in the Old Testament.
So, that doesn't fit the criteria of being both "Western" and unique to Judaism and Christianity.
Freedom of religion? Surely you jest. If the first four Commandments were to become the law of the land, we would be living in a theocracy with as much freedom of religion as you'd find in Mecca (none).
Part of the founding story of this country is people coming to this land was in search of freedom to practice their religion (which ironically would not permit the same for other religions). Where exactly did you think they were coming from? They were coming from Western, Christian nations. How do you think Christianity even spread in the first place? What became of all those temples to Jupiter, Minerva, etc? They were destroyed because the Christian faith explicitly made those pagan religions to be the enemy.
Freedom of religion has come in spite of Christianity, not because of it.
I don't know if this is the oldest example, but Genghis Khan actually passed laws offering freedom of religion. He's hardly Western, and definitely neither Jewish nor Christian.
So, "freedom of religion" is neither "Judeo-Christian" nor "Western".
Lastly, "freedom of speech" is also contradicted by the 10 Commandments, which commands us to not take the Lord's name in vain. Thankfully, that's not a law.
And I don't know the worldwide history, but ancient pagan Greeks endorsed the freedom of speech - so again, not Christian.
So, I stand by what I said. There are no values that are BOTH "Western" AND unique to Judeo-Christian teachings.
Lastly, I'll say that you should look into what actual Muslims say about taquiyya and the history of the concept. You're repeating a right-wing distortion (which is basically doing what they're accusing Muslims are doing). Historically, the concept addressed those who either publicly hid or renounced their Muslim faith because they were in fear of persecution. (Basically, the lie doesn't count against them in the afterlife because they were trying to preserve their own lives.)
You are partly right on taquiyya. Centuries ago, Shia had to use it to protect themselves from Sunnis, which leads us to another whole discussion over why Sunnis and Shia kill each other to this day.
You probably consider Robert Spencer to be biased, but he knows Arabic and is a koranic scholar. Here is what he says.
https://www.jihadwatch.org/2018/04/robert-spencer-in-pj-media-taqiyya-about-taqiyya-in-buzzfeed
As to the shortcomings of Christians and Jews when it comes to respecting the rights of others, we can agree that we as humans always fall short and we can talk all day about the Inquisition, priest sexual abuse of boys etc. But you yourself mentioned the Enlightenment, which Christians and Jews experienced in Europe. Islam was not exposed to the Enlightenment. Might that be a factor to consider?
Regarding taquiyya, I think that just like a lot of other words and concepts, there are probably multiple interpretations. I have no problem believing that there are some untrustworthy Muslims out there who would use it for nefarious purposes. But from my understanding, a lot of Muslims (mostly Sunni) aren't even aware of the concept. (The article you provided indirectly backs this up by saying that it's more of a Shi'a concept.)
As for Islam and the Enlightenment, you might have something there. Although there once was a time when the Islamic world was ahead of the Christian world in terms of science and learning. (That's why we use "Arabic" numbers and algebra.) It seems as though much of the Islamic world regressed (due to internal and external forces). There was even a time when Jews fared better in the Islamic world than the Christian one (think of Spain, for instance when the Christians took control of it again).
There are also a lot of Christians who would be more than happy to drag us back to pre-Enlightenment, just as there are Muslims whose vision of the world is more in line with what I would want.
Regarding the gunman in Colleyville, it's my understanding that he targeted a synagogue because he believed in the notion that "The Jews control everything". He genuinely thought that by holding Jews hostage, he'd be able to get that one person freed, as they're the ones who have the power to do such a thing.
I don't know about you, but I've heard people talk about the "Jews running things" all my life, and they sure as heck weren't Muslims. This circles back to my original point - that much of the anti-Semitism in the Muslim world is built upon the foundations of the anti-Semitism in the West.
This problem needs to be pulled from the roots.
Yes, there was a time when Jews were safer under Islamic rule than under Christian rule, but they were still second class citizens who had to live under the laws of dhimmitude. They had to pay a tax, and their lives and rights were restricted. If you are not familiar with the term, dhimmi, I suggest you check it out.
As for all those great contributions coming out of the Islamic world, most of them were accomplished by Christians and Jews living under them at the time. If you are thinking about that so called Golden Age of Cordoba, it was not so golden for those who lived under subjugation. The idea of non-Muslims living as subjugated peoples is rooted in the Koran (speaking of roots).
With each passing day, we are learning more about the statements of the Colleyville hostage-taker concerning Jews. It has much more to do with just thinking that Jews control the world, an old Jew-hating canard.
Islamic Jew hatred is built upon what is said about Jews in the Koran and the Hadith.
Re: Akram's statements about Jews.......
https://www.thejc.com/news/news/texas-gunman-said-i-want-to-kill-jews-last-year-2IfW7joMSKaHnQdiC5oXXq
How long would you need to think it over between having to pay a special tax or having to face the Inquisition? My point isn't that if we take a long view of these religions (because it's not like any of them are brand new) then we see that neither one of them has a very good track record, and sometimes it's better in one than in the other. And let's not forget where the absolute worst example of hatred against Jewish people came out of.
As for the scientific advances - "most" of them were from Christians and Jews? I'd like to see the stats on that. Here are 15 Muslims that I found with a quick Google search (picking the very first result).
https://www.famousscientists.org/famous-muslim-arab-persian-scientists-and-their-inventions/
I wouldn't be surprised that there were some Christian and Jewish scientists, but most? I'm willing to be convinced, but that sounds like a pretty dubious talking point.
And yes, there is justification for anti-Semitism coming from the Koran and the Hadith. (It should be noted that there is vast disagreement among Muslims as to how much of the Hadith is considered canon - if any.) But it's not like the Koran is the Vedas, coming from a completely separate religious tradition. There is justification for anti-Semitism right there in the New Testament. Christianity predates Islam by about 600 years. It's not even unreasonable to say that Islam started as an offshoot of Christianity (much as Christianity is an offshoot of Judaism) until it became different enough to merit its own distinction.
The roots of anti-Semitism in the Koran stretch back into the Christian tradition. And any Muslim who looks to the Koran to justify their anti-Semitism will find additional justification in the New Testament (which they consider to be inspired but imperfect).
Yes, I would prefer paying a tax (jizya) to being the victim of the Inquisition (which ended many many centuries ago. But did you know that when ISIS overran parts of Iraq and Syria and established their "caliphate", they imposed the jizya on non-Muslims? It was either pay, leave or be killed.
As for the achievements, I refer you to David Wood. He is Christian and critic of Islam, and well-versed in the subject.
http://www.answeringmuslims.com/search?q=muslim+%22achievements%22
In addition, while not ignoring the historical anti-Semitism within Christianity, your apparent reference to Nazi anti-Semitism is a bit off. Nazi anti-Semitism had little to nothing to do with religious issues. Even Jewish converts to Christianity were not recognized by the Nazis. To them (and Hitler) it was all about race and Jewish domination in certain professions like medicine. (Within the universities, the Nazis had their greatest support within the medical departments.)
I would also note that Cathoikcs and Protestants also had a difficult time under Hitler. They were told to stay out of politics and those who did not obey were off to places like Dachau. They even tried to establish their own, pro-Nazi German Christian church.
If you're expecting me to defend ISIS, you've got the wrong person. My only point is that, historically speaking, Christianity has shown plenty of potential for the worst sort of anti-Semitism.
I read David Wood's article, and I find his reasoning pretty specious and selective at best. He doesn't address any specific Islamic scholars or scientists. Also, it's funny that you'd cite a Christian apologist while showing concern for taquiyaa. The whole point of apologetics is a "taquiyaa" of sorts, as their ultimate goal is to defend their faith no matter what the facts reveal. In other words, it's a "start with the conclusion and work backward" mode of thinking.
And I'll defend my assertion about the Nazis while adding a bit of nuance to it. I don't see Nazism as a Christian ideology. It's a hybrid of racial pseudoscience, personality cult, Norse paganism, and a bit of Christianity as well.
However, Nazism took advantage of the built-in anti-Semitism that was present due to the Christians preaching about "Jesus killers" for the past thousand years. Ever read what Martin Luther had to say about the Jews?
"First, to set fire to their synagogues or schools … This is to be done in honor of our Lord and of Christendom, so that God might see that we are Christians …"
That anti-Semitism was baked in. It's not like persecuting Jews was some brand new thing in Europe.
From my understanding, Catholics have a better record of opposing Hitler's policies than the Protestants (ironically enough considering that Hitler himself was raised Catholic). Still, the Catholic church didn't excommunicate him, and there were plenty of Christians who proudly stood by him. I know that Germany is far more secular nowadays, but it was a Christian dominant country back in those days.
So, yes, it wasn't just a matter of faith. That's where the "race science" came into play. But again, the Nazis worked with what Christianity already had there.
Post a Comment