Bush hails Israel's "chosen people" as Arabs lament

<snip>

"President George W. Bush told Israelis on Thursday they were a "chosen people" who can forever count on American support against enemies like Hamas and Iran.

On a day when Palestinians remembered homes and land lost as Israel was created in 1948, Bush made only fleeting reference to their aspirations for a state of their own in a speech marking Israel's 60th anniversary that was laced with references to God.

Basking in ovations on the second day of a farewell visit to a country where his presidency is hailed as a golden age, Bush again said little of the talks he has sponsored in recent months between Israel and the Palestinians, which he hopes can bring a deal on a Palestinian state before he leaves office in January.

Speaking of the "promise of God" for a "homeland for the chosen people" in Israel, Bush told the Israeli parliament after a visit to the Roman-era Jewish fortress at Masada: "Masada shall never fall again, and America will always stand with you."

He predicted the defeat of Islamist enemies Hamas, Hezbollah and al Qaeda in a "battle of good and evil."

more

Bush is pathetic

declared some kind of religious war? :scared:

view of all evangelicals that God gave Israel to the Jews thousands of years ago when Moses took them to the Promised Land.

The more serious problem is the evangelicals who believe that God gave Palestine to the Muslims as waqf over a thousand years ago when it was conquered as part of the Islamic expansion.

please explain the meaning of that word as I have never heard it before.
Thanks.

'a "chosen people" who can forever count on American support against enemies like Hamas and Iran'

That isn't exactly what 'chosen people' means. And most Israelis are not nearly as obsessed with the Bible as Bush is. He seems to think he's the Burning Bush, and that God is speaking through him!

Christians support Israel..
Yitzhak Benhorin Published: 04.14.08, 23:22 / Israel News

WASHINGTON – A new survey conducted by a Washington DC-based evangelical organization among American Christians has found that 82% of them believe they have a moral obligation to support the Jews and Israel. The poll, conducted among Catholics and Protestants alike, tested their stance on Jerusalem's future and ways to deal with the Iranian nuclear threat.

The subjects were asked whether they thought a country created in the West bank and Gaza would be democratic and peaceful, or a terrorist state. Thirty-two percent thought it would become a terrorist state, 24% thought it would be democratic and peaceful, and 44% said they didn't know. Fifty percent said they believed Jerusalem should remain unified, 17% supported dividing it between two states, and 33% remained undecided.

According to the poll, 65% of American Christians are convinced that Iran is developing nuclear weapons, which its leaders will attempt to use in order to destroy Israel. A similar percentage said that the US presidential candidates' Middle East stance would constitute a major factor in their vote for president in August, in contrast to 13%, who said that the issue would not affect their vote.

The poll also found that 45% of American Christians would support the presidential candidate that promised not to pressure Israel into conceding on issues that would endanger its security, and to protect the US from the Islamic terrorist threat and Israel from the Iranian threat. Only nine percent said they would not support such a candidate, and 29% said these issues would not affect their vote.

If the poll does indeed reflect the prevailing opinion in the US, then the Tourism Ministry should consider making some improvements, as half of those polled said they would like to visit Christian sites in Israel, but only a small percentage has done so to date.
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3531796,00.html

oh yeah an unnamed DC based evangelical group, could it be The Family Research Council?

http://www.mediatransparency.org/story.php?storyID=141

http://www.frc.org/

And they claim to represent American Christians as in all? LOL, if this is the group no wonder they were "unnamed" until 2000 they were headed by John Hagee

who the Washington DC group was.

Very interesting the way that first sentence was constructed by the Reuters reporters.

Look at the way the Reuters reporters begin this article:

"President George W. Bush told Israelis on Thursday they were a "chosen people" who can forever count on American support against enemies like Hamas and Iran."

<end of quote>

He is "telling" Israelis they are a "chosen people"? That really seems an inaccurate, or at the very least, poorly constructed way of characterizing what he said.

Here is the paragraph from the speech that contains the phrase "chosen people":

"We gather to mark a momentous occasion. Sixty years ago in Tel Aviv, David Ben-Gurion proclaimed Israel's independence, founded on the "natural right of the Jewish people to be masters of their own fate." What followed was more than the establishment of a new country. It was the redemption of an ancient promise given to Abraham and Moses and David — a homeland for the chosen people Eretz Yisrael."

<end of quote>

That is the only instance in the four-page speech where the phrase "chosen people" is used.

twice and what stood out was the emphasis on Jerusalem, and so I googled DC evangelical group the one most mentioned and supposedly the biggest was FRC, so I do not question their numbers but more they polling Christian conservatives.

as the Bible says it must not and will not be divided.

Where do you stand on this issue?

I didn't mean "Who says that Americans support Israel?" or even "Who says that Israelis support America?" but "Who says that all Israelis think that the Bush presidency is a golden age?" It may well be that most have a relatively favourable view of almost *any* current American president; but I would doubt that so many think that Bush is the greatest.

What Israeli hailed Bush's presidency as a "golden age"?

I see no statement to that effect referenced in the article.

It appears to have been an invention of the Reuters reporter.

but I suppose it's "nice" someone thinks his reign was a golden age, did not think it was the country he reigned over though.

This article is somewhat misleading.

I'm not sure why Oberliner is insisting he didn't say the 'chosen people' bit, as he did. I've been told that referring to Jews as the chosen people is antisemitic, so maybe it depends on whether it's Bush saying it or not. Regardless, the speech is puerile and I don't know about anyone else, but any time Bush mentions the word 'peace', it reminds me of how brutally conservative types bastardise the meaning of that word...

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5gHfbEvHEtbbkQsJG_M1W8BWz1S6AD90M6OD80

Bush did use the term 'chosen people', but in the context of "in 1948 the chosen people got their homeland", not "America supports you as the chosen people". There's a difference, which wasn't made clear in the news report - though I don't like religion being inserted in political speeches.

"Chosen people" isn't antisemitic when used literally or as a Bible quote (note: the Biblical meaning is "chosen to perform certain duties" not "chosen because you're the best".). It is antisemitic when used sarcastically or with the implication: "those Jews are so arrogant; they think they're specially chosen".

As regards the Bush speech, it is is mostly waffle or 'inspirational' truisms. There are some bits that jump out, however:

'The fight against terror and extremism is the defining challenge of our time. It is more than a clash of arms. It is a clash of visions, a great ideological struggle. On the one side are those who defend the ideals of justice and dignity with the power of reason and truth. On the other side are those who pursue a narrow vision of cruelty and control by committing murder, inciting fear, and spreading lies.'

In a sense there is indeed such a 'clash of visions'. But it is not primarily between different political or religious sides. It is between those who seek peaceful solutions and those who wish to impose their vision on others through violence. And Bush and Cheney are among 'those who pursue a narrow vision of cruelty and control by committing (or at least instigating) murder, inciting fear and spreading lies'. What else is the Iraq war?


'In truth, the men who carry out these savage acts serve no higher goal than their own desire for power. They accept no God before themselves. And they reserve a special hatred for the most ardent defenders of liberty, including Americans and Israelis.'

This is true in a sense, but they (Al Quaeda and similar terrorists) hate Americans and Israelis because they are rivals for power, and because they are convenient targets, as Westerners and Jews, for their particular brands of xenophobia. Not because they are 'defenders of liberty'.




'Some seem to believe that we should negotiate with the terrorists and radicals, as if some ingenious argument will persuade them they have been wrong all along. We have heard this foolish delusion before. As Nazi tanks crossed into Poland in 1939, an American senator declared: "Lord, if I could only have talked to Hitler, all this might have been avoided." We have an obligation to call this what it is -- the false comfort of appeasement, which has been repeatedly discredited by history. (Applause.)'

Sometimes negotiations work; sometimes they don't. And talking to one's enemy does not necessarily mean agreeing to all their terms. Churchill, who was certainly no pacifist or appeaser, nevertheless said that "Jaw jaw is preferable to war war". These remarks are not just insulting to Obama, Carter and the Democrats; more importantly, they are insulting to the memories of Menachem Begin (and Anwar Sadat), Yitzhak Rabin, and others who have worked for peace in the Middle East.

In any case, I believe that Bush has now moved on from Israel and is doing a bit of appeasement with the Saudi leaders?

Here is part of what I posted:

He is "telling" Israelis they are a "chosen people"? That really seems an inaccurate, or at the very least, poorly constructed way of characterizing what he said.

Here is the paragraph from the speech that contains the phrase "chosen people":

"We gather to mark a momentous occasion. Sixty years ago in Tel Aviv, David Ben-Gurion proclaimed Israel's independence, founded on the "natural right of the Jewish people to be masters of their own fate." What followed was more than the establishment of a new country. It was the redemption of an ancient promise given to Abraham and Moses and David — a homeland for the chosen people Eretz Yisrael."

<end of quote>

That is the only instance in the four-page speech where the phrase "chosen people" is used.

What Bush did not say was that "Israelis were a "chosen people" who can forever count on American support against enemies like Hamas and Iran."

This was the opening sentence of the Reuters article.

Einstein: Nothing 'chosen' about the Jews, Bible 'childish' legends

<snip>

"Albert Einstein, writing in 1954, dismissed Judaism and other religions as "an incarnation of the most childish superstitions," though he said he gladly belonged to the Jewish people and felt a deep affinity for the Jews' "mentality," excerpts published on Tuesday showed.

Einstein also said he saw nothing "chosen" about the Jews, and that they were no better than other peoples "although they are protected from the worst cancers by a lack of power."

The renowned physicist, who died a little more than a year after writing the letter, also had tough words for God and the Bible, according to the text published by the British The Guardian daily.

"The word God is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of honourable, but still primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty childish," the letter was quoted as saying. "No interpretation no matter how subtle can (for me) change this."

more