Does the standard definition of anti-Semitism squelch free speech . . . or just hate speech?

Dear Friend of FLAME:

Many opponents of Israel try to disconnect the Jewish people’s long-standing relationship with the Land of Israel as a way of delegitimizing the modern State of Israel and Zionism. They claim the Jewish people today are not descended from the ancient Hebrews and Israelites and thus try to weaken the case for Zionism and the reestablishment of Jewish sovereignty in its ancestral homeland.

The claims do not come from any one community and have been diffused throughout the years by white-supremacists, radical Islamists, far-left and far-right conspiracists, Japanese doomsday cults and parts of the African-American community, whether the Nation of Islam or the Black Hebrew Israelites.

Many of these generally opposing groups lean on the so-called “Khazar Myth,” which posits that all or a majority of today’s Ashkenazi Jews are descended from the Khazars, a multi-ethnic conglomerate of mostly Turkic peoples originally from the central Caucasus, who, according to this theory, at some point in history mass-converted to Judaism. This position tries to prove that a large part of world Jewry has no roots in the Land of Israel.

However, this theory has found no support among any serious historians, archaeologists or geneticists. It rests on no evidence except the need of some to disconnect the Jewish people from the Land of Israel. Indeed, linguist Alexander Beider concludes in his excellent article that “Globally speaking, all arguments suggested by the proponents of the Khazarian theory are either highly speculative or wrong. They cannot be taken seriously.”

Indeed, the Khazar Myth’s only purpose seems to be the delegitimization of Zionism.

This, and other theories about the origins of the Jewish people outside of the Land of Israel, are merely political arguments that try to use distorted history, utilizing inaccurate archeological and genetic proofs to make these false claims. They also ignore the overwhelming evidence that shows a direct link between the Jews living today around the world and their ancestors who lived in the Land of Israel during the First and Second Temple periods.

Firstly, and most importantly, there has been an unbroken presence of Jews in the Land of Israel since the destruction of Jewish sovereignty and the sack of Jerusalem in the first century CE. These Jews who managed to remain, against all odds, in the Land of Israel for two millennia, were joined by various communities and individuals from around the Diaspora during the first few centuries after the dispersion until the 20th century.

All these Jews had a clear linguistic, cultural and traditional line of transition completely unique to every Jewish community around the world. For example, a Jew from Yemen and a Jew from Poland would have different characteristics and accents, but they would use similar prayer books, religious treatises and traditions. They would be able to relatively seamlessly pray and practice their religion in each other’s community.

Digging a little deeper, several genetic tests and research have proven that disparate and different Jewish communities in the four corners of the earth share common DNA markers. Studies of autosomal DNA, which look at the entire DNA mixture, show that Jewish populations have tended to form relatively closely related goups in independent communities, with most in a community sharing significant ancestry.

Obviously, there were always converts to Judaism and sad episodes of rape, which has caused outside contributions to the Jewish gene pool.

Nevertheless, for populations of the Jewish Diaspora, the genetic composition of Ashkenazi, Sephardi, and Mizrahi Jewish populations show significant shared Middle Eastern ancestry. These results, according to prominent geneticist Doron Behar and many other academic experts in 2010, show a remarkable consistency “with a historical formulation of the Jewish people as descending from ancient Hebrew and Israelites of the Levant” and “the dispersion of the people of ancient Israel throughout the Old World”.

In addition, Jewish communities around the world all show a very specific and unbroken connection to Israel. Every synagogue faces towards Jerusalem, and rare is the prayer or blessing that does not invoke a return to Israel or Jerusalem. Many festivals end with the hope: “Next year in a rebuilt Jerusalem.”

Almost every event in the Jewish lifecycle remembers the connection of the Jews to Israel, whether it is the breaking of the glass under the wedding canopy to remember the destruction of Jerusalem, or the dirt from the Holy Land that is supposed to be buried with every Jew in any cemetery in the world.

The Jewish connection to the Land of Israel was unbreakable and a return to the land was always the central focus of Jews and Jewish communities for thousands of years. Israel was the religious, civil and national center for all Jews at all times.

Perhaps what rankles opponents of the State of Israel and Zionism is the fact that the Jews are the only people who can demonstrate indigeneity in the Land of Israel as the place where its culture, language and civilization were formed.

No other people speak or use Hebrew or have their singular focus on the sliver of land immediately at the eastern end of the Mediterranean. No other religion or people’s holy books mentions Israel, Zion or Jerusalem nearly as many times as the Torah. The Quran does not mention them at all.

These are unbreakable bonds, and the most up-to-date historic and archaeological work discovers new artifacts and proofs every day of the ineffable Jewish connection to the Land of Israel. No serious person can claim that Jews never lived in the Land of Israel, though some still try, attempting to sever the connection between today’s Jews and the ancient Hebrews and Israelites.

These lies need to be debunked because they are widespread and have been raised in recent weeks by well-known celebrities, like actor and rapper Ice Cube, comedian Nick Cannon and American football players DeSean Jackson and Larry Johnson. Their evidence is never more than distorted propaganda that has already been debunked by serious researchers.

I hope as you discuss Israel and the Jewish people, you will point out to friends, family, colleagues and your elected representatives that Israel and the Jewish people are inexorably connected, and those who try and disconnect them do so because of malice and demonstrate their hatred for the Jewish State. Because anti-Semitism never rests, these fabrications will keep spreading unless we continue to demonstrate with fact, history and reason why they have no basis in truth. The Jewish people’s connection to Israel is unique, unbroken and consistent. Our traditions and miraculous history can be seen as a continuous love affair between a people and its ancestral homeland.

I hope you’ll also take a minute, while you have this material front and center, to visit FLAME’s lively Facebook page and review the P.S. immediately below. It describes FLAME’s new hasbarah campaign—which explains the sad, but true reasons Palestinians continue to fail at forming their own nation state.

Best regards,

Jim Sinkinson
President, Facts and Logic About the Middle East (FLAME)

P.S.

Some American and European politicians argue that Israel’s intention to apply sovereignty to the militarily critical Jordan Valley would inhibit formation of a Palestinian state. Nothing is further from the truth. The Palestinians don’t have a state—despite numerous offers of land for peace by Israel—because the Arab group simply hasn’t mustered an adequate strategy, political unity or leadership. They’re simply unable to say yes. To clarify this point, FLAME has created a new hasbarah message called “What’s Stopping a Palestinian State?” I hope you’ll review this convincing, fact-based paid editorial, which will run in USA Today, the Washington Post, and other media nationwide. It spells out specific reasons the Palestinians have failed to create a sovereign state and why it’s time for the world—and Israel—to move on. This piece will also be sent to all members of Congress, Vice President Pence and President Trump. If you agree that this kind of public relations effort on Israel’s behalf is critical, I urge you to support us. Remember: FLAME’s powerful ability to influence public opinion—and U.S. support of Israel—comes from individuals like you, one by one. I hope you’ll consider giving a donation now, as you’re able—with $500, $250, $100, or even $18. (Remember, your donation to FLAME is tax deductible.) To donate online, just go to donate now. Now, more than ever, we need your support to ensure that the American people, the U.S. Congress and President Trump stay committed to realistic policies in relation to Israel, Iran and the entire Middle East. As of today, more than 15,000 Israel supporters receive the FLAME Hotline at no charge every week. If you’re not yet a subscriber, won’t you join us in receiving these timely updates, so you can more effectively tell the truth about Israel? Just go to free subscription.

Dear Friend of FLAME:

In 2016, the 31 member states of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) created a non-legally binding “working definition” of anti-Semitism. This definition was subsequently adopted or endorsed by several nations and many organizations worldwide, including the UK, France, Germany and Canada, and the U.S. Department of Education, as the basis for understanding the boundaries of Jew-hatred.

This definition has since become a lightning-rod for anti-Semites and anti-Zionists who have claimed it inherently stifles criticism of the State of Israel and thus, free speech.

These critics ignore the actual language of the definition, which clearly states that criticism of Israel will only be defined as anti-Semitic if it applies “double standards by requiring of it a behavior not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation.” In other words, if someone is singling out Israel, above other nations—using double standards, demonizing and delegitimizing it—then that would meet the criteria of anti-Semitism. Otherwise, it does not.

Firstly, it is absurd to state that any criticism of Israel’s actions constitutes anti-Semitism, because Israel is regularly criticized by decision-makers and opinion-shapers around the world every day, not least by Israeli citizens, where freedom of speech, open and free elections and the right to demonstrate are utilized frequently.

Regularly, foreign governments or international institutions release communiques and statements criticizing Israel for some action or event, and clearly the overwhelming majority are from nations that Israel has full relations with, so cannot be described as anti-Semitic.

Supporters of Israel must, nonetheless, debunk the “straw man argument” that Israel and its supporters cry anti-Semitism every time the nation is criticized. This argument is itself intended to devalue the offense of racism against Jews.

In fact, no Israeli representative or pro-Israel supporter has ever claimed that all, or even most, criticism of Israel is not legitimate or unwelcome as part of rigorous democratic debate regarding the Jewish state.

Yet the problem remains that there has never been clarity about what constitutes anti-Semitism. Unfortunately, its perpetrators would prefer it remain that way, so their actions are not liable for criminal or civil recourse or social recriminations.

There is obviously a desperate need for an internationally recognized definition of anti-Semitism in order to combat this scourge.

Anti-Semitism remains the only form of prejudice—really a form of racism because it relates to bigoted prejudice against a certain people—that is more likely to be defined by the perpetrators than the victims.

As a glaring example, bordering on the absurd, the “Patriarch of Anti-Semitism”, Wilhelm Marr, the 19th Century German publicist, who proudly coined the self-identifying term later said, “One cannot today criticize Jews without being called an anti-Semite.” This demonstrates that even the proudest and open of Jew-haters recoiled at being defined as an anti-Semite.

In fact, the whole idea that perpetrators define the nature of a racist attack, and not the victims, contradicts societal norms. In 1999, after the killing of a black teenager in the UK, a subsequent official inquiry defined a racist attack as “any incident which is perceived to be racist by the victim.” The Jewish community appears to be the only one not allowed to define prejudice against it. Definitions of racisms against other peoples, or Islamophobia, have never received the level or breadth of attacks that the definition of anti-Semitism receives.

Those who seek to defend their anti-Semitic statements disparage the definition by using deflection and distraction in claiming it is impossible to criticize Israel. This has been branded the “Livingstone Formulation,” named after the former London Mayor Ken Livingstone, who constantly made anti-Semitic references and claimed he was merely critiquing Israel’s actions.

Many polls and surveys have demonstrated a direct link between those who hold anti-Semitic beliefs about Jews in general and dislike for Israel. A recent report by the AMCHA Initiative titled “Understanding Campus Antisemitism in 2019 and Its Lessons for Pandemic and Post-Pandemic US Campuses,” reports a rise in harassment of Jewish students on college campuses is linked to anti-Zionist activism. Where BDS and other anti-Israel activities are the highest are also the places where Jews are more regularly harassed and attacked.

A good way to understand whether criticism or attacks on Israel fall foul of the line that separates genuine debate and anti-Semitism are the “three Ds” or the “3D test” of anti-Semitism, ( delegitimization, demonization and double standards), which is a set of criteria created in 2004 by former “Prisoner of Zion” Natan Sharansky, to distinguish legitimate criticism of Israel from anti-Semitism.

The previous lack of a unified and vigorous definition meant that anti-Semites could continue to act with immunity and impunity knowing they would not be prosecuted for their actions. Thus, criticizing the IHRA definition is an important defense for those engaged in Jew-hatred.

Even online, Jews do not receive the same level of protection as other targeted groups. Facebook’s Director of Content Policy Stakeholder Engagement, Peter Stern, recently attested to the usefulness of the IHRA working definition when Facebook first developed its hate speech policy.

However, Mr. Stern admitted that Facebook does not have a policy aimed at combatting online anti-Semitism. He further admitted that Facebook does not embrace full adoption of the IHRA definition specifically because it condemns modern manifestations of anti-Semitism relating to Israel.

Others, like the New York Times, have regularly critiqued the IHRA definition on the basis that it stifles debate and stands against freedom of expression, which wouldn’t sound hollow if the NYT wasn’t itself embroiled in accusations by former editors of “self-censorship” and a “new McCarthyism.”

The good news is that we today have the IHRA definition—a strong, logical and insightful one. Yet what remains is for this definition to be enforced more widely by institutions, politicians, celebrities and thought leaders.

Today, disparagement of black people as black people is socially and politically unacceptable—as it should be—and violators pay by dearly, often by losing their jobs and status. That same standard is not observed when it comes to anti-Semitism. Just look at how Mel Gibson has been “rehabilitated” in Hollywood and how Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan continues to rub shoulders with senior American politicians and celebrities, even after referring to Jews as cockroaches and calling Jews “satanic.” No racism is acceptable, and no moral person should accept anti-Semites.

I hope you will point out to friends, family, colleagues and your elected representatives that while fair-minded criticism of Israel is welcome, condemnation of the Jewish state using delegitimization, double standards and demonization is always anti-Semitic.

Comparing Israel to Nazi Germany (when there is no affinity), claiming only Israel is a colonial state (among dozens of states ratified by the U.N. in the mid-20^th century), accusing Israel of apartheid (when none exists), asserting that today’s Jews are not related to the ancient Israelites (when DNA, language and culture link them inarguably)—these are not criticisms, they are examples of anti-Semitism, and their perpetrators should be roundly condemned.

I hope you’ll also take a minute, while you have this material front and center, to visit FLAME’s lively Facebook page and review the P.S. immediately below. It describes FLAME’s new hasbarah campaign—which explains the sad, but true reasons Palestinians continue to fail at forming their own nation state.

Best regards,

Jim Sinkinson
President, Facts and Logic About the Middle East (FLAME)

P.S.

Some American and European politicians argue that Israel’s intention to apply sovereignty to the militarily critical Jordan Valley would inhibit formation of a Palestinian state. Nothing is further from the truth. The Palestinians don’t have a state—despite numerous offers of land for peace by Israel—because the Arab group simply hasn’t mustered an adequate strategy, political unity or leadership. They’re simply unable to say yes. To clarify this point, FLAME has created a new hasbarah message called “What’s Stopping a Palestinian State?” I hope you’ll review this convincing, fact-based paid editorial, which will run in USA Today, the Washington Post, and other media nationwide. It spells out specific reasons the Palestinians have failed to create a sovereign state and why it’s time for the world—and Israel—to move on. This piece will also be sent to all members of Congress, Vice President Pence and President Trump. If you agree that this kind of public relations effort on Israel’s behalf is critical, I urge you to support us. Remember: FLAME’s powerful ability to influence public opinion—and U.S. support of Israel—comes from individuals like you, one by one. I hope you’ll consider giving a donation now, as you’re able—with $500, $250, $100, or even $18. (Remember, your donation to FLAME is tax deductible.) To donate online, just go to donate now. Now, more than ever, we need your support to ensure that the American people, the U.S. Congress and President Trump stay committed to realistic policies in relation to Israel, Iran and the entire Middle East. As of today, more than 15,000 Israel supporters receive the FLAME Hotline at no charge every week. If you’re not yet a subscriber, won’t you join us in receiving these timely updates, so you can more effectively tell the truth about Israel? Just go to free subscription.