Does the H.R. 6090 bill, also called “The Antisemitism Awareness Act of 2023”, BAN THE BIBLE?

H. R. 6090

AN ACT

To provide for the consideration of a definition of antisemitism set forth by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance for the enforcement of Federal antidiscrimination laws concerning education programs or activities, and for other purposes.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Antisemitism Aware3 ness Act of 2023’’.

SEC. 2. SENSE OF CONGRESS.

It is the sense of Congress that—

(1) title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. 2000d et seq.), prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, and national origin in programs and activities receiving Federal financial assistance;
(2) while such title does not cover discrimination based solely on religion, individuals who face discrimination based on actual or perceived shared ancestry or ethnic characteristics do not lose protection under such title for also being members of a group that share a common religion;
(3) discrimination against Jews may give rise to a violation of such title when the discrimination is based on race, color, or national origin, which can include discrimination based on actual or perceived shared ancestry or ethnic characteristics;
(4) it is the policy of the United States to enforce such title against prohibited forms of discrimination rooted in antisemitism as vigorously as against all other forms of discrimination prohibited by such title; and
(5) as noted in the U.S. National Strategy to Counter Antisemitism issued by the White House on May 25, 2023, it is critical to—
(A) increase awareness and understanding of antisemitism, including its threat to America;
(B) improve safety and security for Jewish communities;
(C) reverse the normalization of antisemitism and counter antisemitic discrimination; and
(D) expand communication and collaboration between communities.

SEC. 3. FINDINGS.

Congress finds the following:

(1) Antisemitism is on the rise in the United States and is impacting Jewish students in K–12 schools, colleges, and universities.
(2) The International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (referred to in this Act as the ‘‘IHRA’’) Working Definition of Antisemitism is a vital tool which helps individuals understand and identify the various manifestations of antisemitism.
(3) On December 11, 2019, Executive Order 13899 extended protections against discrimination under the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to individuals subjected to antisemitism on college and university campuses and tasked Federal agencies to consider the IHRA Working Definition of Antisemitism when enforcing title VI of such Act.
(4) Since 2018, the Department of Education has used the IHRA Working Definition of Antisemitism when investigating violations of that title VI.
(5) The use of alternative definitions of antisemitism impairs enforcement efforts by adding multiple standards and may fail to identify many of the modern manifestations of antisemitism.
(6) The White House released the first-ever United States National Strategy to Counter Antisemitism on May 25, 2023, making clear that the fight against this hate is a national, bipartisan priority that must be successfully conducted through a whole-of-government-and-society approach.

SEC. 4. DEFINITIONS.

For purposes of this Act, the term ‘‘definition of antisemitism’’—

(1) means the definition of antisemitism adopted on May 26, 2016, by the IHRA, of which the United States is a member, which definition has been adopted by the Department of State; and
(2) includes the ‘‘[c]ontemporary examples of antisemitism’’ identified in the IHRA definition.

SEC. 5. RULE OF CONSTRUCTION FOR TITLE VI OF THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT OF 1964.

In reviewing, investigating, or deciding whether there has been a violation of title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. 2000d et seq.) on the basis of race, color, or national origin, based on an individual’s actual or perceived shared Jewish ancestry or Jewish ethnic characteristics, the Department of Education shall take into consideration the definition of antisemitism as part of the Department’s assessment of whether the practice was motivated by antisemitic intent.

SEC. 6. OTHER RULES OF CONSTRUCTION.

(a) GENERAL RULE OF CONSTRUCTION.—Nothing in this Act shall be construed—
(1) to expand the authority of the Secretary of Education;
(2) to alter the standards pursuant to which the Department of Education makes a determination that harassing conduct amounts to actionable discrimination; or
(3) to diminish or infringe upon the rights protected under any other provision of law that is in effect as of the date of enactment of this Act.
(b) CONSTITUTIONAL PROTECTIONS.—Nothing in this Act shall be construed to diminish or infringe upon any right protected under the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.

Passed the House of Representatives May 1, 2024.
Attest:

Clerk.

In the spirit of the Stockholm Declaration that states: “With humanity still scarred by …antisemitism and xenophobia the international community shares a solemn responsibility to fight those evils” the committee on Antisemitism and Holocaust Denial called the IHRA Plenary in Budapest 2015 to adopt the following working definition of antisemitism.

On 26 May 2016, the Plenary in Bucharest decided to:

Adopt the following non-legally binding working definition of antisemitism:

“Antisemitism is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of antisemitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities.”

To guide IHRA in its work, the following examples may serve as illustrations:

Manifestations might include the targeting of the state of Israel, conceived as a Jewish collectivity. However, criticism of Israel similar to that leveled against any other country cannot be regarded as antisemitic. Antisemitism frequently charges Jews with conspiring to harm humanity, and it is often used to blame Jews for “why things go wrong.” It is expressed in speech, writing, visual forms and action, and employs sinister stereotypes and negative character traits.

Contemporary examples of antisemitism in public life, the media, schools, the workplace, and in the religious sphere could, taking into account the overall context, include, but are not limited to:

• Calling for, aiding, or justifying the killing or harming of Jews in the name of a radical ideology or an extremist view of religion.
• Making mendacious, dehumanizing, demonizing, or stereotypical allegations about Jews as such or the power of Jews as collective — such as, especially but not exclusively, the myth about a world Jewish conspiracy or of Jews controlling the media, economy, government or other societal institutions.
• Accusing Jews as a people of being responsible for real or imagined wrongdoing committed by a single Jewish person or group, or even for acts committed by non- Jews.
• Denying the fact, scope, mechanisms (e.g. gas chambers) or intentionality of the genocide of the Jewish people at the hands of National Socialist Germany and its supporters and accomplices during World War II (the Holocaust).
• Accusing the Jews as a people, or Israel as a state, of inventing or exaggerating the Holocaust.
• Accusing Jewish citizens of being more loyal to Israel, or to the alleged priorities of Jews worldwide, than to the interests of their own nations.
• Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor.
• Applying double standards by requiring of it a behavior not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation.
• Using the symbols and images associated with classic antisemitism (e.g., claims of Jews killing Jesus or blood libel) to characterize Israel or Israelis.
• Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis.
• Holding Jews collectively responsible for actions of the state of Israel.
  Antisemitic acts are criminal when they are so defined by law (for example, denial of the Holocaust or distribution of antisemitic materials in some countries).
  
  Criminal acts are antisemitic when the targets of attacks, whether they are people or property – such as buildings, schools, places of worship and cemeteries – are selected because they are, or are perceived to be, Jewish or linked to Jews.
  Antisemitic discrimination is the denial to Jews of opportunities or services available to others and is illegal in many countries.
  
  (End of article)

WHAT ROAD DID ISRAEL TAKE?

Now let us pick up the story with Exodus 13:17: “And it came to
pass, when Pharaoh had let the people go, that God led them not through
the way of the land of the Philistines.” Here we have the first of
several highways named.

In ancient Egypt there were major roads which went out of Egypt.

One was “the way of the Red Sea” which was southeast from the Delta.
Another was “the way of Etham,” or “the wilderness of Shur” which went
from Egypt through Beersheba. It was the road by which Jacob came down
into Egypt. The third is “the way of the land of the Philistines” which
went up from the coast through Gaza by the Mediterranean. See the
accompanying map.

As Israel was proceeding north through Old Cairo, they could have
easily taken the way, or the highway of the Philistines — the
Philistine highway.

Many assume that this road must have been by the Mediterranean.
They are wrong! The way of the land of the Philistines extended far
into Egypt.

While the Israelites were still in Egypt, they could have traveled
by the road that led northward to the land of the Philistines. But,
instead of taking that, near as it was, God said, “Lest peradventure
the people repent when they see war, and return to Egypt,” God led the
people about through the way of the wilderness of the Red Sea.

This is another road. This is the most southerly of the three
major roads in Egypt. Instead of taking the northerly route which would
have taken them through the land of the Philistines, or the middle
route in an easterly direction through Beersheba, they took the road
leading southeast into Sinai and Arabia. God led them, not straight
north, but through the way of the Red Sea.

-End Quote-

“GERMANY in Prophecy!

Notice an amazing prophecy about the Middle East in Psalm 83:1-8. It is a time of war. “Hold not Thy peace, and be not still, O God. For, lo, Thine enemies … have taken crafty counsel against Thy people.” They have dealt treacherously with Judah and Israel — with the Jews and with America and Britain! We are God’s people, Israel. The Jews are merely the tribe of Judah. But to continue:

“They have said, ‘Come, and let us cut them off from being a nation.’” Isn’t this exactly what the Iraqi leaders have said? “For they have consulted together with one consent: they are confederate against Thee …”

What nations are these in confederation against God’s people? Here is the answer of this prophecy! Here is what is yet going to take shape in the Middle East!

“Edom (Turkey), and the Ishmaelites (Saudi Arabia); Moab (part of Jordan), and the Hagarenes (part of Arabia); Gebal (this is the ancient name for Byblos in Lebanon), and Ammon (Jordan) and Amalek (part of the Turks); the Philistines (the displaced Moslems from Palestine) with the inhabitants of Tyre; ASSUR IS JOINED WITH THEM: they have helped the children of Lot.”

Who is Assur? GERMANY!

So Germany — NOT atheistic, communist Russia — is ultimately going to support an Arab union against the Jews and against Israel — Britain and America! This is what prophecy foretells. This is God’s warning to us today.”

-End Quote-

“What We Need Most Is Peace”

A Palestinian Speaks Out  

By Adnan Abu Odeh, Minister to the Royal Court of Jordan  

The Plain Truth, January 1986  

From time to time, the editorial staff of The Plain Truth endeavors to bring to the attention of its audience the views and opinions of leading personalities who have, or will have, a significant impact upon the world in the months and years ahead.  

One such individual is Adnan Abu Odeh, former Minister of Information and now Minister to the Royal Court of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan. Mr. Abu Odeh is a frequent traveler with His Majesty King Hussein. The following vigorous address was presented in the Ambassador Auditorium, Pasadena, California, before 1,200 assembled guests on the occasion of His Majesty King Hussein’s 1985 visit to the U.S.  

In my talk I am going to address two historical aspects of the Middle East conflict, and one political.  

The historical aspects are related to the questions: How did the Middle East conflict arise and how has it developed? While the political side is to deal with the situation as it is now.  

Why should I go back to history? Because one cannot really understand the present complex situation without going back into history.  

The 19th century, in the West, was the golden age of colonization. Great Britain was spreading all over the world. The French, the Portuguese, the Spanish, the Dutch, later even the Germans and the Italians, spread abroad. All these countries were Christian.  

There was a Muslim country at that time, which was an extension of the Middle Ages and maintained Islamic domination over some parts of the world. That was the Ottoman Empire. During that golden age of power, of colonization, strength and imperialism, the Ottoman Empire was called Old Turkey.  

Turkey at that time was ruling all Arab Asia. What we know now as Israel, Jordan, Palestine, Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, parts of Saudi Arabia, North Yemen, were the limits of Turkey’s domination in Asia in terms of geography. In the previous century the Turks held North Africa. And, as you know, one of their sultan’s troops reached as far as Vienna.  

Turkey in the 19th century faced Christian Europe, which had started the Industrial Revolution. The balance changed in this world with the Industrial Revolution and as a result the Ottoman Empire started to retreat in favor of Christian countries. Any major European country was able to put an end to the Ottoman Empire in the 19th century. But because of the rivalry among the Europeans, Ottoman Turkey continued to live until World War I. That’s when what is called Old Turkey ceased.  

During her old age the European rivals did not choose to put an end to Turkey until it had been ripe. The European countries were competing among themselves over the legacy they would get from Turkey.  

Among those who thought of getting their share of the legacy of Turkey were the Jews of Europe. In Christian Europe the Jews were not always treated well, especially in East Europe. That is a well known fact. In thinking of the future their leading intellectuals sought to find a place where they could build a Jewish national home.  

The world was spread before them. Some suggested to them to go to Uganda in Africa, some to other places. But the leaders prevailed upon the others and insisted that the place should be Palestine. It was more attractive since there is a historical attachment to this part of the world. It is mentioned in the Bible as the promised land. The leaders of the Jews could mobilize them around this objective much better than to mobilize them around a national home in Africa or Latin America, for example.  

So they started to work. Their leaders succeeded in establishing very good relationships with the British leadership at that time. During World War I, when Turkey was being defeated and retreating to Turkey proper, the Zionist leaders were capable of having the British give what is known in the history of the Palestinian conflict as the Balfour Declaration. That was on November 2, 1917.  

The Balfour Declaration was tantamount to pledge on behalf of the British government at that time to help the Jews build their national home in Palestine. The British, with the French, divided the booty of the war. The British made the point that Palestine should be part of their share of the booty. So Palestine, Jordan and Iraq came under British mandate. Syria and Lebanon came under French mandate.  

That’s again history. This division later on was legitimized by the League of Nations when they gave the British and the French this right of mandating these areas.  

To make their promises to the Zionist leaders materialize, the first one whom the British appointed to be high commissioner in Palestine was a Briton named Herbert Samuel, who was a Jewish Zionist.  

With his appointment the British policy of building a Jewish homeland in Palestine started. As a result of this foreign policy, a conflict started to develop between Arabs and Jews. The Jewish community in Palestine by the end of the war in 1918, constituted only 17 percent of the population — 83 percent being Arabs.  

Jews and Arabs lived for ages together. And I must stress that the Jews lived with the Arab Muslims much better than they lived with Christians in Europe. The Jews contributed to our [Islamic Arabic] civilization in many places, simply because Islam takes more from Judaism than it takes from Christianity. A big percentage of our holy book is about Judaism.  

The Jews were not our enemy when the Islamic Empire started to expand. Our enemies in the Middle Ages were Christian Europeans, Byzantines, and not Jews. So Jews were with us. And Jews suffered like we did in Spain when the Spaniards expelled the Arabs from Spain by the end of the 15th century. Both the Jews and the Arabs suffered because the Jews cooperated with the Arabs in occupying and in developing Spain. So there is, in history, a big area of cooperation between Arab Muslims and Jews.  

With the British in Palestine, with their policies starting to materialize on the ground, Palestine Arabs began to realize that they were facing something new. The British government was trying to impose upon them the other community with which they had been coexisting for a long time.  

As a result of that, in the ’20s and the ’30s many clashes took place between Arabs and the British. In 1936 an Arab rebellion erupted in Palestine, and it continued for three years till the beginning of World War II. The British in 1939 were smart enough to know how to put an end to this revolution by various means: by giving promises to the Arabs on one hand, and by dividing them on the other hand. So the rebellion was quelled. And we witnessed in the region World War II. The war was not fought on our land [on Arab soil], but we received some of its effects and its impact in our land.  

Now we come to more recent events in history, the pogroms and the Holocaust of World War II. Nazism was cruel, inhuman. Nazis killed many civilians in Europe, and in particular, the Jewish community. That was bound to create a very human sympathy and attachment to the Jewish cause in Europe and in the world.  

But nobody thought of who was going to pay the price at that time. The Zionist leaders were, as always, very smart and they made use of sympathy. “You see our plight in Europe. You see how the Jews are suffering,” they said. With that they started to promote the urgency for building a Jewish state in Palestine.  

To do that during the war, the Allies, who were fighting the Nazis, helped Jews in Eastern Europe and Western Europe to escape to Palestine. So during the early ’40s, we witnessed in Palestine the illegal immigration of Jews from Europe.  

In 1948, when the British mandate came to an end, Palestine had two big communities: Arabs, who were one million, and Jews, who at that time were about 600,000. Once again the Jews and their friends in the world pushed their cause and asked for the establishment of a national Jewish home. The world believed the Jewish people suffered enough. Their suffering should be stopped. The answer: a state.  

The war ended in 1945. In 1947 the United Nations took, or adopted, what is known in the history of the Palestinian question as the partitioning plan which envisaged two states: a Jewish state and an Arab state, with Jerusalem and the area around it corpus separatum. That is a Latin phrase meaning something separate, or having its own status.  

Another problem started. In 1947, when the United Nations adopted the partitioning plan, the Jews in Palestine owned only 5.6 percent of Palestinian territory. The Palestinian Arabs owned between 92-93 percent. And the other property was owned by foreigners — the Church of Russia, for example. Just imagine two communities. One is one million, and the other is 600,000. The one million own 92 percent of the territory; the others own 5.6 percent of the territory. Yet the partitioning plan allocated the Jews 54 percent of Palestine, and the rest was allocated for the Arabs!  

That, by itself, created a very imbalanced position, a very unfair position, which drove the Arabs to refuse this partitioning plan. It was a very unfair deal. They couldn’t bear it. They thought that they should hold to their territory to secure their rights even if they had to fight for that.  

When they went to fighting, the Arab states sided with the Palestinians. That was the war of 1948, the result of which was the establishment of the state of Israel on a land much larger than what the partitioning plan gave the Jews in Palestine. As a result of the war they got 76 percent of the land. So in almost nine months the Jewish community in Palestine, previously having 5.6 percent of the land, got 76 percent of the land.  

And here the conflict takes another turn. The state of Israel is established. The Arabs are unhappy with this fact. The Palestinians are now in the diaspora! For the first time we have Palestinians switching places with Jews — Jews coming from the diaspora to a state, Palestinians getting out of their country to the diaspora. As a result of the war an armistice agreement was reached between the belligerents.  

Then the conflict took another turn. The Israelis adopted a position of calling for peace with the Arabs in the ’50s. The Arabs said, “No, because you have taken our land. Give us back our land, then we accept peace.” The Arabs, being believers in hell and paradise, couldn’t see gray. They insisted that unless they get back their territory, there could be no peace. Of course, in such a situation, Israel, created in an Arab environment, was besieged. The Arab states were larger in number, wealthier, but weaker in terms of politics and armament. Under such a situation war was bound to erupt someday.  

And this war came in 1967. In June 1967 the Israelis occupied all mandatory Palestine. They added to it Sinai and the Golan Heights. The result of the 1967 war was enormously important. After the war the Arabs got disillusioned for the first time. They started to believe that Israel really does exist. Until then they did not want to believe that it existed. The Israelis were now seen as a strong people.  

This development laid the grounds for the Arabs to change gradually their attitudes over the last years. So Israel is there. Israel does exist.  

On the eve of the 1967 war, the Israelis were calling for reaching a peaceful settlement, within their borders. That was before they got the West Bank and Gaza and the other Arab areas. After the war when the Arabs said, “OK, let’s sit down and talk,” the Israelis said, “No, we have other views now.”  

This victory created in the Israeli psyche what I might call the rhythm of victory. They won the first war. They won the second war. (It is demonstrated in a territory in their hands.) They changed their minds. “Why should we reach peace on the previous terms after taking all the land of Palestine? After all, this is the promised land.”  

Thus began the mixing of historical allusions and religious aspirations with realpolitik and human dimensions. The Palestinian national rights were blurred. Then confusion in Tel Aviv started to emerge, the result of which is that the religious right in Israel began to emerge. To make their ideas materialize in Palestine — in the promised land — they started to build settlements. At the beginning they researched the Bible for locations of religious significance. They went there to build a settlement and to bring Israelis to live there. That was at the beginning, a religious movement.  

This religious movement was soon supported by political parties. Settlements were first built in the name of security. Other settlements were built on economic grounds. As a result the West Bank became an open area for the well-organized efforts of the settlers.  

On our side we were warning, shouting out, going to the United Nations, going to the United States. Many U.N. resolutions have been taken to condemn this movement as being illegal, as another form of aggression, but nobody would listen.  

When we presented the question of settlements to the American people, very few of them could understand our position. Most of the Americans cannot understand our position simply because of the cultural parallel between the settlements in Israel and the foundation of the United States of America. After all, the United States was built the same way. People came to America to settle.  

This affinity between the Israeli mind and the American cultural heritage made you Americans a very hard target to talk to. You couldn’t understand what we are saying. To you, “It is a good sign that people can settle and develop. After all, our founding fathers did the same.”  

Another area which made it difficult for us to present our case to you is the Judeo-Christian heritage, which is a part of your culture. Islam to you is something strange, except perhaps for scholars who care to know about Islam. After the oil embargo in 1973, some people other than scholars started to look into Islam, not out of trying to know the common heritage between nations, but out of new economic considerations resulting from the oil embargo.  

In the last decade the Arabs became weaker; the Israelis became stronger. Their grip on the territories became tighter. They now have 160 settlements on the West Bank alone. The ex-Vice Mayor of Jerusalem wrote a book, published in 1984. In his book The West Bank Data Project, Mr. Benvenesti suggests that it is too late to talk about a West Bank. It has become part of the state of Israel. He was, however, criticizing that situation because he had other ideas.  

In Israel, as a result of not reaching peace, as a result of maintaining their occupation on the West Bank and building settlements, Israelis are facing now a big question. “What kind of Israel do we want? Is this the Israel we had conceived of? Is this the Israel which our Zionist fathers thought of?”  

The answer to these questions is no, because Israel on all mandatory Palestine is not and cannot be a purely Jewish state. In mandatory Palestine, there are around five million people, two million Arabs and three million Israelis. On the basis of the current growth rate, of the Arabs and the Israelis, the Arabs will be equal to the Jews in 10 to 15 years’ time.  

Now this is a dilemma in Israel itself. Those who are raising this question in Israel are asking, “What kind of state do we want? If we have to continue maintaining our occupation, it means either we have to become a bi-national state, which is against the basic ideas of Zionism, or we shall have an apartheid state, having Arabs as a community apart, third-rate citizens.”  

In answer to this dilemma there are two schools of thought in Israel. One is on the right, represented mainly by the Likud Party, and the other is represented mainly by the Labor Party.  

The Likud says the problem is simple: Now we have the land. We have on this land a foreign community. They are Palestinians who have been there for thousands of years. This foreign community we can handle. They are an extension of the Arab bulk in the east, on the south, on the north — especially the east. Jordan. If they can live with us, “and on our land,” they may. If they cannot live with us, they go eastward to their base.  

Politically speaking, this implies the possibility of expelling 500,000 Palestinians at once. Why? Historically the mass exodus from Palestine among the Arabs took place only in wars. Once in 1948 and once in 1967. To squeeze them out by pressure, as the case is now, is not enough to get as many Palestinians out as possible. So if Israelis have to get them out, they have to resort to other measures.  

Two years ago one of the Likud ministers came up with a project in which he suggested that a new big camp or town be built in the Jordan Valley north of the Dead Sea, to bring there the Palestinian refugees now on the West Bank. “That would make Israeli planning easier in cities like Bethlehem and Ramallah, because present refugee camps are close to those cities. It would also be for security reasons.”  

It was obvious that what he meant by that plan is to bring those Palestinians near the River Jordan, four or five kilometers from our cease-fire line, so one day, by scaring them out, these Palestinians will move — having each his bundle in his hand — to the river. It takes a maximum of one hour to reach the bank, and the refugees would be in Jordan. That’s one innovative way to get rid of the Palestinians.  

We made a big noise about it in the United Nations, and in conferences here and there. The objective of this project is quite clear.  

The Israeli government has undergone a change now. There is a unity government, with the prime minister presently from Labor. The answer of the Labor Party to this question is what the prime minister calls the territorial compromise. In other words, the West Bank is to be divided between Israel and Jordan as a result of direct negotiations between the two governments. Jordan refuses this.  

The position of Jordan is that we cannot speak for the Palestinians because any negotiations imply, among other things, compromises. We cannot compromise any of the Palestinian rights, including their right of self-determination. If we do so, whatever peace we reach will be shaky. It will not be durable. It will give way to another dispute in the area.  

The Palestinian leadership is the PLO. The Palestinians adhere to the PLO as their representative. The PLO has no competitor.  

[In 1985] Arafat reached an accord with King Hussein. This accord says the PLO is prepared to go for a peaceful settlement on the basis of United Nations resolutions. For the first time in 20 years the PLO changes its previous position in public. With this position the PLO’s approach to solving the problem has drastically changed. It stands now for a negotiated settlement.  

The PLO, after its military defeat in Lebanon, after the long-suffering of the Palestinian people in Lebanon and in the occupied territories, believes it has no option but the option of peace. Now the Arabs and the PLO stand for just peace; nevertheless, both Israel and the United States of America refuse to consider the PLO as the Palestinian interlocutor in whatever negotiations might take place.  

Jordan now is trying to explain the sincerity of the position of the Palestinian representatives in the United States — that has been one of my tasks — on the basis that we believe in redeemability, not only in religion but also in politics. People can be redeemed. Yes, there are some of the Palestinians who — like General Ariel Sharon and Rabbi Kahane in Israel — don’t want peace. But 90 percent of the Palestinians want peace. Let’s remember that war can be made by one crazy man, but peace needs at least two wise men to sit down together.  

So we are extending our hands for a peaceful settlement. The Israeli populace want peace, too. I believe in the sincerity of the majority of Israelis who call for peace, but the problem is what kind of peace? The competition among their political leaders makes some of them say, “No, we will take all of Palestine and then have peace.” We tell them, “Look, you cannot take my land and make peace with me. The principle is land for peace.” Many Israelis believe in this, and these Israelis in particular constitute our hope for the future.  

In any case, when we talk about peace in the Middle East, with Israelis or their friends, let’s always remember the better prospects of the future, rather than the bitter hang-ups of the past. A conflict that goes on for 60 years must have precipitated bitterness and distrust. What we need is trust between us and the Israelis. Trust in the future and trust in our commitment to peace.  

Whatever peaceful settlement we reach in the future should be such that can ensure a real, permanent, durable peace for the area.  

Peace to be durable should be based on 1) a balanced resolution of the conflict; 2) justice; 3) the recognition of the national rights of the Palestinians for the right of Israel to exist in recognized and secure borders; 4) the participation of the representatives of the Palestinian people in the peace negotiations; 5) the recognition of the attachment of Arabs and Jews to Jerusalem without prejudicing the Arab sovereign right over Arab Jerusalem. I am a Palestinian myself, born in 1933. In 1939, the end of the Palestinian rebellion, I had a bad experience related to the Palestinian problem. It has continued to live with me since then. Since 6 years of age I can see that I have not been living my normal life. But I am not an exclusive case.  

Like me, there are millions, both among Israelis and Palestinians, who don’t live a normal life. Normal life cannot be lived if people don’t live in peace. That’s not normal life. I look forward to the day when I, my family and myself, sit down together in our living room and talk about vacations, culture, books, drama, music, rather than about prisoners, bombs, killings, reprisals, deportees, arrests — these terms of nonsense — of suffering, of depicting life as meaningless and a source of devastation.  

What we in the area, both Arabs and Israelis — Palestinians, Jordanians, Israelis and Lebanese now need most is peace in order to get back to the normal life we have been missing for 60 years.  “

“Let who grow into this promised multitude? Let whose descendants become that numerous seed, which shall number into billions? Not Judah, the father of the Jews—note it!—but Ephraim and Manasseh! Why have the eyes and understanding of church leaders and Bible students been blinded to this plain fact of Scripture?

Notice, Israel did not confer this blessing on just one, but on both—“Bless the lads,” he said. This blessing went upon them jointly. “Let my name be named on them” was part of this blessing. His name was Israel. Hence, it was the descendants of these lads, not the descendants of Judah, or the Jews, who were named Israel. How clear it is that the name Israel was to be indelibly stamped on Ephraim and Manasseh!

A shocking fact—and yet plainly proved, right before your eyes! And remember, this scripture needs no “interpretation” or “special meaning” or “hidden symbolism” for you to understand! Here is the plain, simple statement that Jacob’s name, which was changed to Israel, would become the very possession and property—the label on the peoples of Ephraim and Manasseh!

Who, then, according to your Bible, is the real Israel (racially and nationally) of today?

Ephraim and Manasseh!

Ephraim and Manasseh together received the right to the name Israel. It was to become the national name of their descendants. And their descendants were never Jews! Fix this fact firmly in your mind!

Thus it is that many of the prophecies about “Israel” or “Jacob” do not refer to Jews or to any of the nations that are today the descendants of the other tribes of Israel. Mark that well! Few, indeed, are the clergymen, theologians, or professed Bible scholars who know that today. Many refuse to know it!

Together the descendants of these two lads, Ephraim and Manasseh, were to grow into the promised multitude—the nation and company of nations. These national blessings are poured upon them jointly. These are the collective blessings which the lads together received—but not the other tribes! “

“So now, if twentieth-century Ephraim and Manasseh—Britain and America—refuse to turn to God in obedience—refuse to live the way that causes, retains, and increases blessings, God will punish them in a manner far more intense—and even strip entirely from them this colossal, unprecedented national blessing—returning them to captivity and slavery—as continuing verses of this prophecy show.

Do you think so great a fall could not come to so great powers as Britain and America? Do you say, “It can’t happen here?” Do you think the great God who was able to give them such unprecedented world leadership and power and wealth is not able to take it away from them and throw them, like their ancient forefathers, back into slavery?

You need to open your eyes to the fact that Britain’s sun already has set! You need to wake up to the fact that the United States, even still possessing unmatched power, is afraid—fears—to use it, just as God said: “I will break the pride of your power”; that the United States has stopped winning wars—that America was unable, with all its vast power, to conquer little North Vietnam! The United States is fast riding to the greatest fall that ever befell any nation!

The handwriting is on the wall!

You need, now, to understand the remainder of this prophecy of Leviticus 26—and also of Deuteronomy 28—and the many other prophecies relating to them and events soon to violently affect your life!”

There Is a Way of Escape

By Herbert W. Armstrong  

The Plain Truth March 1984  

The television movie on nuclear war, The Day After, has shaken a world from its complacent indifferent slumber. Too many people were getting used to violence and war and threats of war.  

The world was too busy pursuing material goods to be much concerned about the oncoming NUCLEAR World War III that WILL, unless prevented by Almighty God, simply erase human life from this planet!  

Soft words and pretty speeches did not arouse people out of this pleasant dream. It took a jolt! When we attempted to warn our readers with words strong enough to arouse, I received letters saying: “Cancel my subscription! That article frightened me.” YES, IF YOU ARE TO CONTINUE TO LIVE, you need to be frightened-enough to take the action that will SAVE YOUR LIFE!  

But, you say, what can I do? Well, there is something you must do IF you are to escape the agonies of and probable terrifying death in, the coming prophesied Great Tribulation!  

YES, YOU CAN ESCAPE ALL THIS!  

That is what we are trying to make our readers understand!  

God Almighty will intervene. He will prevent entire cosmocide! But he will not intervene to stop the carnage until man has come to the very end of his rope! So long as man thinks he can save himself, without God, the Eternal will let him go on trying. God will not intervene” until man’s last hope is gone. God will never allow man to accuse him, saying: “Your intervention was unnecessary and tyrannical! We could have saved ourselves if you had not used your arbitrary God-power to intervene.”  

God’s final last-minute intervention will FOLLOW-not prevent-this Great Tribulation that will be World War III.  

But, I repeat, YOU CAN escape ALL THIS!  

It is only those who will not heed who must go through its agony. And remember-God is not going to CAUSE it! MAN HIMSELF will bring it on. But God will protect his own from it!  

Jesus’ young students-his disciples-came to him privately and asked when the end of the world would come, and what would be the sign of his return IN POWER to rule all the earth, in peace.  

These things, Jesus replied, must come first: a false “Christian” religion, whose ministers would falsely claim to be Christ’s ministers, coming in his name, deceiving the MANY. Then wars, climaxing finally into world wars; then famines and disease epidemics and increasing earthquakes. Just before the end, he said, his true Gospel of God’s kingdom would be preached in all the world-not to convert the world, but “for a witness”-AND THEN, he said, shall the END of this world come!  

All these things already have occurred-except that we are now in a recess during the world wars-between World Wars II and III; and that we have so far had only the first forerunners of the famine and disease epidemics and earthquakes. These shall increase greatly.  

And, although Christ’s own Gospel of the kingdom of God has been going out since 1934, through this very magazine and the World Tomorrow broadcast, this message is just now approaching the climactic world-shaking POWER that evidently is implied by the prophecy.  

Then what?  

“Then,” continues Jesus, “shall be GREAT TRIBULATION,” a time of violence, destruction and death greater than anything that ever was, or ever shall be! Jeremiah foretold it (Jeremiah 30). He identified the nations primarily affected. It will be those whom God caused to be named after Jacob-or Israel-the nations descended from the two sons of Joseph. And those are the United States and British peoples of the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and South Africa.  

Ezekiel foretells it (chapters 5:12 and 6:6). Moses describes it (Deuteronomy 28-especially verses 20-24, 32-34 and 49-50; also Leviticus 26, especially verses 16-20). Already these prophecies are beginning to be carried out. Already the “pride of our power” (Lev. 26:19) has been broken. Britain, the former world’s number one power, has been reduced to a second-rate power. And the “PRIDE” of America’s power was certainly broken in Vietnam.  

The Great Tribulation is to be primarily on the United States and the British peoples! Events leading to it are smoldering under cover now, gradually gaining momentum. And then, suddenly, the WORLD WILL EXPLODE into nuclear World War III.  

But let me tell you, I do not expect to be here in its path when it strikes! And YOU need not be one of its multiple-millions of victims!  

Jesus Christ gave the warning (Matthew 24, Mark 13, Luke 21). And when he said, in Luke’s version of his warning: “WATCH YE therefore, and pray always, that ye may be accounted worthy to ESCAPE ALL THESE THINGS that shall come to pass, and to stand before the Son of man” (at his coming-Luke 21:36), he was giving you and me a PROMISE of divine protection from these very things he had been describing-IF we do watch world events AS PROPHESIED, and remain obedient and continually in contact with God through prayer.  

There is another promise of miraculous protection from this Great Tribulation. It is in the third chapter of Revelation. Beginning verse 7 is a description of how the .living Christ would OPEN A DOOR by which his Gospel may go out to all the world as a witness and a warning. That is the very Work being carried on through the World Tomorrow broadcast, The Plain Truth and related literature.  

In verse 10 is Christ’s PROMISE that because we have been faithful WITH HIS WORD, he will also keep us from “the hour of temptation.” But the marginal reading-the correct translation from the original Greek-is “trial” or “Great Tribulation.”  

These events are REAL!  

This world is hurling itself rapidly to the grand-smash CLIMAX of world trouble. Crime, violence, lawlessness, disrespect for authority, are increasing at a RAPID RATE! God help us not to treat this warning lightly.  

Take heed and read in Psalm 91 the further promise of PROTECTION not only through the Great Tribulation, but also the PLAGUES of the Day of the Lord to follow.