Friday, January 31, 2020

‘I don’t believe this anymore’: What it’s like to escape an abusive, right-wing religion 
(AMERICAN HOMEGROWN PROTESTANT EVANGELICAL FUNDAMENTALISTS)
January 31, 2020 By Valerie Tarico- Commentary


Americans are leaving their religions at a faster rate than ever before, and that means more are looking for help with the transition. People who are casually religious may walk away and not look back. But for others religion is at the very heart of their identity, worldview and community, and having a safe place to process doubts can be a metaphorical godsend.

“Reclaimers,” people who are actively working to rebuild their lives after a period of religious immersion, may struggle with harmful ideas and emotions from the beliefs they once held or the behavior of fellow believers. Alternately, they may find that leaving is lonely and disorienting. Marlene Winell, a human development consultant who assists people leaving their religion, coined the term Religious Trauma Syndrome to describe a pattern she saw in some clients, in particular those leaving closed, authoritarian, fear-based communities. But even doubters who don’t experience this level of distress may find themselves feeling confused, afraid, self-doubting or overwhelmed.

Since 2009, a small nonprofit called Recovering From Religion, has worked to serve this population by establishing peer support groups, organizing “Recovering Your Sexuality” classes, and providing a matchmaking service for clients seeking therapists who are committed to a secular approach. In March, Recovering From Religion launched a hotline, 1-84-I-DoubtIt, staffed by a cadre of volunteers trained in listening and crisis triage techniques. From years of daily emails and calls to their office, the staff knew there was an unmet need. Even so, they were caught off guard by the response—over 1,000 calls in the first six weeks.

In this interview, Sarah Morehead, executive director of Recovering From Religion, talks about why her work is a personal passion and about the recovery hotline itself.

Valerie Tarico: Your commitment to supporting people in religious transitions comes from your own transition, which started with you as a life-long member of the Southern Baptist Convention and ended with you as an atheist.

Sarah Morehead: Yes. It was a long journey. Twelve years ago, I separated from my Promise Keeper husband. He had been violent toward me, but when he turned that on our kids, it was over for me. I found myself strapped financially, and in desperation I went to the benevolence committee at my church and asked for $600 to help pay the bills. This was a huge, successful mega-church, and the benevolence committee was their mechanism for helping members in need. The committee—all men—said they needed to pray about my request, and that regardless I needed to go to counseling about how to be a more godly wife so that I could lead my husband back to Christ through my submissiveness. They said this even though they knew he was physically abusive. Then, after praying, they let me know that Jesus wasn’t keen on them giving me the money.

As I was leaving I pushed open the church door and bumped into someone etching decorations on the outside, and I had an odd thought. I had just heard that God didn’t want me to have the $600 but this etching on the doors was totally cool with him. I couldn’t put my finger on it at the time, but that was the point that it stopped adding up. You question one piece and then another and then another. Eventually my conscience outweighed my creedal viewpoint.

VT: The heart of your Christianity was belief in God and his word and your relationship to Jesus. But this question of compassion and support is what rattled you and created that first crack.

SM: It was a combination—the disorienting lack of support on the inside and then equally disorienting support from an outsider. We had neighbors, two men who lived caddy-corner across the alley. We kept our children away from their children because they had a flag that I thought was satanic. Now I know it was just pagan. They would have bonfires in their back yard, and it was terrifying to me.

After I got home from the church, there was a knock at the door and it was one of the guys from across the alley way. He said, “We don’t talk much but I know there’s a lot going on for you guys and here is a casserole.” It was one of the more surreal moments in my life. I remember standing there and in my mind asking God what he was trying to tell me. Would Satan tempt me through the kindness of macaroni and cheese?

Our homeschool support groups pulled away when they heard of the divorce, and then when they learned I wasn’t going to that church anymore they stopped letting their kids hang out with my kids. It was very isolating and scary because I didn’t know anyone, other than the neighbor I had met, who had really survived this idea of reconsidering religion.

VT: You were really on your own.

SM: The only people who had the courage to say that they didn’t have all of the answers were this couple, who as it turned out were gay—of course they were, but it took me a while to figure that out because they couldn’t be gay because they were nice and gay people were pedophiles.

VT: So there you were, trying to juggle the loss of your faith and your entire community, while taking care of your children, who were also dealing with abandonment.

SM: The loss of my faith wasn’t all at once, as it isn’t for many people. At first the changes were tiny. I remember the moment when I had the epiphany that American Baptists might not burn in hell. Later, Bible-believing Christianity stopped working for me, but for a long time I thought that was a problem with me, not with the religion. I was probably destined for hell, but I just couldn’t figure it out. Eventually I tried out more liberal religious viewpoints, like the Unitarian Church. When I finally realized I don’t believe this anymore, I didn’t know where I fit.

I had come on this huge, huge journey with no map, and I didn’t know where I was. But you go on the internet and connect with people who are struggling, people who are going through the same things. So, that’s my motivation. There are people who are scared and lonely and afraid and who think they are the only person on the planet who can’t figure it out. The relief some of these people experience when I talk to them—being able to offer them that bridge when there’s nowhere else to go—that is one of the most rewarding things imaginable.

VT: So tell me about Recovering From Religion—the organization.

SM: It was founded by Psychologist Darrel Ray in 2009, after he wrote The God Virus. The book kicked off conversations that made the need apparent, so he started the network of peer support groups. But his time was limited. I came on board in 2011 and started developing it into a cohesive program.


The hotline project came about because of the emails that we get daily. People need someone to talk to, and the groups themselves—we will never have enough locations that everyone has somewhere to go. So we thought, what if everyone could call and talk with one person, just someone respectful? There’s a lot out there that mocks religion and hates on religion. There’s a place for that, but for people who are gently feeling out where they are, they need a place that lets them have one foot in and out.

VT: You feel strongly about giving people space to be where they are at.

SM: We created a tool called the spectrum of belief and disbelief. It ranges from polytheism to atheism, so that people can consider where they want to be. Maybe a caller thinks, there’s something out there but it doesn’t tell me how to have sex and I don’t have to tithe. If that’s where people are at we respect that. The relationship and the person matter more than the religion.

I’m huge on boundaries. Religion takes away boundaries—you tell children from day one that there’s something out there that can see their thoughts—so people in recovery are just learning that they can have boundaries and ideas and limits and can say, no you don’t have access to that part of me. We want to give that back.

VT: So how do you train volunteers for the hotline?

SM: We have a training program vetted by two psychologists to make sure we stay within the bounds of peer support. It’s about 10 hours of training—software and process and simulated calls. Our volunteers don’t provide counseling; it’s really active listening. If the person has a belief in God we don’t question or challenge that. If they say they don’t believe but want somewhere to go, then we might help them create an action plan. When people have safe way to explore their doubts they often do start letting go and they feel good and empowered and that’s a really cool thing to have happen, but we are serious about simply providing respectful support, so we provide careful training and oversight.

We have sophisticated (and I might add, expensive!) call management technology. It’s the same system used by the Trevor Project which works to prevent suicide for gay youth. The system lets both callers and volunteers remain anonymous, and a supervisor can move between calls without being intrusive. All calls are monitored to some extent. We can flag calls if there are any concerns and review them and then provide feedback. There are a lot of pieces to this, which is why it took us two years to get this up and running.

VT: So tell me about that unexpected grand slam opening.

SM: We opened March 1 from 6pm-midnight during the week and 24 hours on the weekend. Within six weeks we had 1,000 calls come in! A thousand calls was a big surprise. Imagine trying to figure out how to staff for call volume when you have no idea what to expect. We estimated based on contacts to the office line. But it’s different when people actually see a banner that says 1-84-I-DoubtIt.

We are getting calls from all demographics, all ages. Some of the calls leave you in tears. People feel so isolated and alone because religion has permeated every aspect of their community. We get calls from people who are being threatened that their kids will be taken away because of their nonbelief. We get calls from teens who are being kicked out because they’ve decided they’re not the same religion as their parents.

We had one lady who called and said that she saw the hotline article on CNN, and she held onto the number for three weeks. She said that it was the first time in her life that she said the word atheist even though she had been for years. Isolation, desperation—people get trapped in their circumstances and for a whole lot of reasons many can’t just pick up and move. Most people don’t want to be famous or activists. They just want to be able to not go to church and have it be ok.

VT: Sometimes you try to hook callers up with other resources, especially resources in their own communities. What are the biggest service gaps? What do you wish existed?

SM: We’ve been out for two months, and we’ll have a better assessment after a year. Right now we’re still in the discovery process. For example, we just got introduced to Footsteps, which supports people leaving Orthodox Judaism. So, we’re not at the point of saying this doesn’t exist, we need it; we’re saying this is probably out there, let’s find it.

When people call in crisis or with urgent needs that are beyond our scope, then processing questions about religion takes back burner to managing that need. If they are in active crisis when they call, like active domestic violence, or suicidal, there are fantastic crisis-trained hotlines out there. We try to keep them on the line and give them the number and make sure they are connected.

Alternately, they may be in urgent need of a place to stay. We refer to social service networks in their area if they are comfortable sharing their location or to general crisis services, if they are not.

VT: What’s your next big challenge?

SM: The challenge is maintaining the staff at a rate that can take all the calls. We have about 40 volunteers in training. We will be expanding to 24/7 and then will integrate an online system that lets us take calls from around the world. Right now our volunteers are everywhere, but we only serve Canada and the U.S. We want to be a resource to people who aren’t local to North America.

Funding is also a huge challenge. None of the staffing or supervision is paid, including my position, which isn’t sustainable indefinitely. Here is the really hard part about funding: The people we are helping are unable to fund the service. We can’t ask for money when, for example, a caller is struggling to keep their business and all of their clients are at their church. So we are going to need support from the secular community as a whole and people who see the value in what we do.

Also, donor development is really tough for many former fundies. We’ve been drilled from day one that you don’t ask for money. Yes, there’s the hypocrisy that you give all of your money to the church, but you don’t ask for things for yourself. Former minister Teresa McBain and much loved atheist blogger Neil Carter have joined the team. But we’re very wary of the flashy, believe-in-us mentality, so we’re trying to find the right balance. We’re working with people who have more skill in that regard than we do.

Thursday, January 30, 2020

‘They want to kill our cows’: Trump says liberals kill cows and ‘you’re next’ — forgetting where steaks come from

TAKING A LINE OF ATTACK FROM HIS OLD PAL MODI OF INDIA
 


January 30, 2020 By Sarah K. Burris

President Donald Trump bizarrely proclaimed that Democrats want to kill your cows,” while at a speech in Iowa Thursday evening.

Trump, who never met a Big Mac he didn’t like, is known for frequently spending his Saturday nights at his Washington hotel eating a “well-done” steak with ketchup.

Trump then warned that if Democrats want to kill cows, then “you’re next,” threatened.

The Green New Deal talks about methane that often comes from cows, which is presumed that cows have flatulence, in fact it’s cow belches that cause methane emissions. One of the greatest producers of methane, far surpassing that of cows, are termites, who eat and expel massive quantities of wood.

It’s unclear whether Trump actually believes that Democrats want to kill humans as part of the Green New Deal, but he provided no proof of it.

Aside from vegetarians, many Democrats, like hamburgers and steaks. Former presidential candidate Beto O’Rourke made Whataburger one of the key campaign stops during his Senate race.



You can watch the video below — and see some of the tweets:

Trump: "They want to kill our cows. That means you're next."

Me: [unironically chomping into a Farmer Boys burger]

 
#TrumpRallyIA pic.twitter.com/53rTSbANHV
— Santa Claus, CEO (@SantaInc) January 31, 2020

“That’s a real beauty,” says Trump of @aoc.
Goes on to summarize the Green New Deal as “they want to kill our cows.”
— Niall Stanage (@NiallStanage) January 31, 2020

Trump mentions @AOC at his rally, the mention of her name generates boos. He brings up the Green New Deal.
“They want to kill our cows, that means you’re next,” he said.
— Jake Webster (@JakeDaveWebster) January 

Trump rifts on @AOC's GND: "They want to kill our cows. You want to know why?…Want to know why? They want to kill your cows–that means your next."
— Philip Wegmann (@PhilipWegmann) January 31, 2020

Jeeze, he's in Iowa, he should be saying "They want to kill our cows. You know why?"
A. Bacon
— J Hougen (@HougenJ) January 31, 2020

@SenJoniErnst
Just wanted you to know who you're playing political suicide for Joni.
"They want to kill our cows. That means you're next." — Donald Trump, just now, in Iowa.
Are you really going to stand behind these comments?
— Gemini Ginger (@ICanBeAHandful) January 31, 2020

Trump is losing what little mind capacity he had!!! This is as dumb a statement as any that has ever come from anyone in the oval office!!!

‘They want to kill our cows’: Trump says liberals kill cows and ‘you’re next’ — forgetting where steaks come from https://t.co/ASnuHwytuT
— Bad Karma – #ProudToBeScum (@BadKarmaIn2020) January 31, 2020

@realDonaldTrump Dumbest jackass on the planet. Are those burgers from McDonalds he eats all the time plant based? Even his crowd thought he looked stupid. https://t.co/0aI3FDo3RV
— Shirley Little (@ShirleyLittle51) January 31, 2020

Trump: "They want to kill our cows. You know why?"
A: Steaks. https://t.co/BCSU3qsgln
— Bill Kristol (@BillKristol) January 31, 2020



‘You can’t make this up!’: Senate erupts in laughter when Adam Schiff reveals DOJ lawyers just completely contradicted Trump’s impeachment defense

January 30, 2020 By Cody Fenwick, AlterNet - Commentary


To defend against Democratic allegations of an illicit cover-up, President Donald Trump’s lawyers have argued fervently that the second article of impeachment in the Senate trial charging him with obstructing Congress is completely unwarranted. Instead of charging Trump with obstructing Congress, they’ve argued, Democrats should have taken the president to court to enforce subpoenas of his aides and requests for documents.

But on Thursday, a Justice Department attorney — who, ostensibly, works for the president — completely contradicted this argument.

There’s long been a tension in the president’s impeachment defense and his administration’s position in court, as many have pointed out. Trump’s impeachment attorneys have argued that Congress shouldn’t have charged Trump with obstructing their investigation but instead worked out disputes in the judicial branch. But when Congress has taken the administration to court to enforce its subpoenas, Justice Department attorneys have argued that judges can’t resolve the dispute between the legislative branch and the executive.

Basically, combining these two arguments, Trump’s lawyers are saying Congress should go to court to enforce its subpoenas, and then it should lose in court — essentially implying that lawmakers should have no power at all to compel evidence from the executive branch. If this were true, the power of impeachment would essentially be nullified.

Previously, some Trump administration lawyers have been reluctant to say in court whether Congress could or should use the impeachment to enforce its subpoenas, instead urging that lawmakers could withhold funds from the administration to exert pressure for compliance. But on Thursday, in an ongoing fight over the 2020 Census, Justice Department lawyer James Burnham said that the House can legitimately use its impeachment powers to respond to a president who defies subpoenas, as CNN reported.

Trump lawyer Jay Sekulow has argued, however, that the proper place to resolve the dispute over subpoenas is courts and not impeachment, according to Politico.

“The president’s opponents, in their rush to impeach, have refused to wait for judicial review,” Sekulow argued to the Senate.

And legal scholar John Turley, who testified on behalf of Republicans in the House impeachment proceedings, warned against “making a high crime and misdemeanor out of going to the courts.”

House impeachment manager Adam Schiff (D-CA) pointed out the glaring inconsistency and hypocrisy on Thursday in his remarks to the Senate, drawing laughter from the audience.

“Today, while we’ve been debating whether a president can be impeached for essentially bogus claims of privilege, for attempting to use the courts to cover up misconduct, the Justice Department in resisting subpoenas is in court today … because, as we know, they’re in here arguing Congress must go to court to enforce its subpoenas, but they’re in the court saying ‘Congress, thou shalt not do that,’” he explained. “So the judge says: ‘If the Congress can’t enforce its subpoenas in court, then what remedy is there?’ And the Justice Department lawyer’s response is ‘Impeachment! Impeachment!’”

At that, the Senate chamber burst into laughter.

“You can’t make it up!” Schiff said. “What more evidence do we need of the bad faith of this effort to cover up?”

SCHIFF: "While we've been debating whether POTUS can be impeached for bogus claims of privilege, the DOJ is resisting subpoenas in court today… the judge says 'if Congress can't enforce its subpoenas, what remedy is there,' & DOJ's response is impeachment! You can't make it up" pic.twitter.com/Tim1HHDgBO

— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) January 30, 2020

Trump’s lawyers have tried to suggest that the House manager’s position is itself similarly contradictory because they’ve tried to enforce their subpoenas through both the courts and through impeachment. But there’s nothing incongruous about believing that House subpoenas can be enforced through two different avenues.

What’s so duplicitous about the Trump lawyers’ position is that it means that House subpoenas would be entirely unenforceable, not even worth the paper they’re printed on — but they refuse to admit this outright.


Senate stunned as Schiff reveals DOJ just argued in court that defying subpoenas is an impeachable offense
January 30, 2020 By Sarah K. Burris


President Donald Trump’s Justice Department appeared in court Thursday as part of the Houses’ ongoing attempt to enforce subpoenas for information they’ve sought in other cases.

Schiff quoted the DOJ legal team’s argument in court that judges “have no place to enforce subpoenas because of the impeachment power.”

It’s a point that Schiff has pointed is in constant contradiction with the case the White House has made in the impeachment proceedings. The White House lawyers have said that the House impeachment investigation needed to play out in court. They claimed that subpoenas for witnesses and documents must take place in the courtroom because the judicial branch is an essential check on the legislative branch.

Yet, in court, they claimed that the judicial branch has no place.

“Schiff stunned the room just now when he informed senators that JUST TODAY, as Trump’s lawyers argue in the Senate the House should’ve gone to court to enforce subpoenas, DOJ lawyers argued in COURT that judges have no place to enforce subpoenas because of the impeachment power,” Crooked Media Brian Beutler.

Schiff stunned the room just now when he informed senators that JUST TODAY, as Trump’s lawyers argue in the Senate the House should’ve gone to court to enforce subpoenas, DOJ lawyers argued in COURT that judges have no place to enforce subpoenas because of the impeachment power
— Brian Beutler (@brianbeutler) January 30, 2020


SCHIFF: "While we've been debating whether POTUS can be impeached for bogus claims of privilege, the DOJ is resisting subpoenas in court today… the judge says 'if Congress can't enforce its subpoenas, what remedy is there,' & DOJ's response is impeachment! You can't make it up" pic.twitter.com/Tim1HHDgBO
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) January 30, 2020


 GIG CAPITALISM MONOPOLY IN AMERICAN HEALTHCARE GROWING
MEET THE NEW BOSSES

The FBI is reportedly probing a notorious Israeli spyware company that was linked to the Jeff Bezos phone hack

NSO has also been accused of supplying software used to surveil Jamal Khashoggi before his murder by Saudi Arabia in October 2018.
Samantha Lee/Business Insider


The FBI Israel's NSO Group over the use of its software for hacks of US citizens and companies, according to Reuters.

The Israeli spyware company has been linked to several high-profile hacks, most recently to an attack on the phone of Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos.

NSO has also been accused of supplying software used to surveil Jamal Khashoggi before his murder by Saudi Arabia in October 2018.

The FBI is probing the use of spyware from the Israeli company NSO Group, which has been linked to hacks on Saudi dissidents and US companies, according to the Reuters news agency.

The investigation began in 2017, when FBI officials wanted to work out whether NSO possessed code which could infect people's phones, according to a source who was interviewed by the FBI.

News of an FBI investigation into the company follows reports that the iPhone of Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos was hacked by Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman.

The Guardian first reported earlier this month that bin Salman helped steal data from Bezos' phone after sending an unsolicited video that contained a malicious file in 2018.

The hack is believed to have happened after the two men spoke on WhatsApp on May 1, 2018, weeks after meeting at a dinner in Los Angeles.

Saudi Arabia has denied that bin Salman was involved, and called the allegations "absurd."

Last week, a United Nations report said that bin Salman likely was involved in hacking Bezos' phone. It said that a forensic analysis of the phone said it was "likely" to have been carried out with the sort of software NSO has.

NSO Group did not immediately respond to Business Insider's request for more information.

The spyware firm has been linked to several high-profile hacks in recent years.

Researchers at Citizen Lab at the University of Toronto's Munk School identified 36 operators that used NSO Group's technology on targets in 45 countries.
In May 2019, WhatsApp was hacked, and, according to The Financial Times, the hackers installed sophisticated NSO spyware on an unknown number of phones.

In June 2018, Omar Abdulaziz, a Saudi activist in exile in Canada, had his phone targeted with NSO spyware by Saudi agents.

Abdulaziz said in a lawsuit filed in December 2018 that the same spyware was used to target Saudi dissident Jamal Khashoggi, who was murdered by Saudi agents in October 2018.

And on Tuesday, New York Times Beirut bureau chief Ben Hubbard reported that his phone had been targeted by Saudi agents. He said technology researchers determined the attack was also likely carried out with NSO technology.

---30---

SET PHASERS TO STUN


CHILE 2020 LASER PENS AGAINST THE POLICE
A TACTIC ALSO USED BY HONG KONG PROTESTERS

MELANIA AT IMPEACHMENT HEARINGS


GOATS IN TREES MORROCO


Jimmy Carter declares that Trump’s plan for Israelis and Palestinians violates international law

 January 30, 2020  By Agence France-Presse

Jimmy Carter said Thursday that President Donald Trump’s Middle East plan would violate international law and urged the United Nations to stop Israel from annexing Palestinian land.

“The new US plan undercuts prospects for a just peace between Israelis and Palestinians,” the former US president said in a statement.


“If implemented, the plan will doom the only viable solution to this long-running conflict, the two-state solution,” said Carter, who brokered the landmark 1978 Camp David Accords that brought peace between Israel and Egypt.

He urged UN member-states “to adhere to UN Security Council resolutions and to reject any unilateral Israeli implementation of the proposal by grabbing more Palestinian land.”

His office said in a statement that Trump’s plan, unveiled Tuesday, “breaches international law regarding self-determination, the acquisition of land by force, and annexation of occupied territories.”

“By calling Israel ‘the nation-state of the Jewish people,’ the plan also encourages the denial of equal rights to the Palestinian citizens of Israel,” it said.

Trump presented his long-awaited plan Tuesday alongside Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, his close ally, who shortly afterward signalled he would seek to annex a large part of the West Bank.

Trump’s plan recognizes Israeli sovereignty over most of its West Bank settlements and the Jordan Valley, as well as an undivided Jerusalem.

The plan also backs a Palestinian state with a capital on the outskirts of Jerusalem but says the Palestinian leadership must recognize Israel as a Jewish homeland and agree to a demilitarized state.

The 95-year-old Carter, the longest-living president in US history, has frequently spoken out since losing re-election in 1980 and has won the Nobel Peace Prize for his humanitarian work.

In his recent years, he has frequently faced criticism from pro-Israel supporters for his views on the conflict, especially his use of the word “apartheid” to describe the Jewish state’s potential future without a peace deal.


© 2020 AFP
God put Trump in White House, says US ambassador to Israel


David Friedman calls Israeli control of occupied Palestinian territory an ‘opportunity for Biblical tourism’

Alex Woodward New York

Friday 31 January 2020 

The US ambassador to Israel believes Donald Trump was sent by God to occupy the White House, following the president’s proposal to cement Israeli rule over Jerusalem and end a decades-long conflict with Palestinians.

Asked by the Christian Broadcast Network whether the president was “heaven-sent for you guys”, David Friedman said he believed that “God runs the world, and that would apply to the president”.

He added: “The president supports Israel because I think it fits with his essential understanding of who’s right and who’s wrong, who’s surviving against the odds, who’s creating democracy in a sea of challenges around it.”

Mr Brody asked whether Mr Friedman, who is Jewish, believed that “God puts people in certain places in certain times, for such a time as this”.

He replied: “I think God puts persons in places for certain times, at all times.”

Palestinian protests against President Trump's Middle East peace plan

“And Trump is exhibit A of this?” Mr Brody asked.

Mr Friedman said: “He sure is.”



The diplomat said Mr Trump had ”surrounded himself” with supporters of Tel Aviv’s agenda, describing the president’s son-in-law Jared Kushner, one of the architects of the Israeli plan, as well as Mike Pence and Mike Pompeo, as “Israel’s best friends.” Mr Kushner is Jewish while Mr Pence and Mr Pompeo are both hard-line evangelical Christians.


“But above them all,” Mr Friedman said, “the president has really been Israel’s best friend.”
The 181-page plan effectively caters to demands Israel has made under Benjamin Netanyahu, and has been roundly rejected by Palestinian leaders. The plan would carve out a fractured Palestinian state in Gaza and the West Bank and would allow Israel to annex the Jordan Valley and all occupied territory, including areas containing settlements that are illegal under international law.

In line with White House policy introduced in 2017, Jerusalem would be recognized as Israel’s capital and would be under Israeli control, with a Palestinian capital created in the eastern outskirts of the holy city

The plan also would deny Palestinian refugees the right to return to lands they had fled or were forced from decades ago that are now inside Israel.

Asked how the US Christian evangelical community influenced the plan’s drafting, Mr Friedman said he had an “enormous amount in common” with the community, which his boss has courted assiduously. “They’re believers. They believe in the divinity of the land of Israel.”

Since his 2016 campaign, Mr Trump has cultivated the support of right-wing American evangelical groups and pastors, boasting of his administration’s anti-abortion stance and conservative judicial appointments. The president also launched an “Evangelicals for Trump” campaign this year as he seeks re-election.

Mr Friedman said Israeli control over Palestinian land would open a massive tourism industry for Christian evangelicals.

Benjamin Netanyahu says Donald Trump has been ‘the greatest friend Israel has ever had in the White House’

The ambassador claimed that Jewish and Christian holy sites that are currently within Palestinian territory - including Shiloh, Hebron and Al-Bireh – were “completely neglected” and that the US would help assert Israeli control over them. Those areas also contain Muslim holy sites.

Israel “has not obtained sovereignty over those territories”, he said. ”Our plan contemplates that Israel will.”

“You’re talking about opening up the Bible and bringing it back to life,” said Mr Friedman, who called the Trump plan ”an opportunity for biblical tourism that will grow and flourish in profound ways”.