Skip to comments.Towards a Lasting Middle East Peace
Posted on 01/20/2002 8:45:33 AM PST by Demidog
At the National Press Club, Washington DC , 11 December 2001
With G-Ds help May the Creator grant that my words find favor in His eyes.
Each days news brings with it horrible tales of suffering from the Holy Land . The death toll on both sides mounts steadily. Indeed, so overwhelming is the seemingly never-ending stream of death and mayhem that it requires an exceptionally bloody day to merit significant media consideration. We have all grown accustomed to the fact that the Israeli state and its Palestinian opponents are locked in mortal combat. So it has been, so it is and so, it seems, it always will be.
Indeed, this pessimistic prognosis seems rooted in a century of precedent. The first Jewish settlers who came to Palestine with the intention of establishing a sovereign Jewish state there arrived towards the end of the nineteenth century. Palestinian nationalism then generally subsumed under the title Arab nationalism but soon to assume its more particularistic title began to flourish at about the same time.
The clash of these movements was played out through various wars, atrocities, revolutions and dispossessions throughout the twentieth century. Various strains of ideology in these rival nationalisms have attempted to bring the matter to closure, either by force of arms or, at times, by recourse to the negotiating table.
All these efforts, be they military or compromise oriented, have one fact in common. Their result is always the same. They have failed failed utterly and totally. We may delude ourselves by yet dreaming, as many do, that there is one final war or one last peace plan which can calm all those concerned. Unfortunately there is no indication that such is the case.
We of Neturei Karta International find the toll of dead and wounded on both sides to be intolerable. We feel that it is high time for a radical departure from the assumptions that have governed and, effectively stifled free debate on the subject.
Our perspective is far from new. It is the centuries old view of the Torah. It was once universally shared by all Jews and it is only our peoples recent flirtation with assorted secularist dogmas that have caused it to be forgotten of late in some quarters.
Simply stated The essence of Judaism is our faith -- our belief that G-d spoke to Moses and the assembled multitudes at Sinai and there gave His Revelation to the world. This was, is and always will be, Judaism.
The Jewish exile from the Holy Land , which followed the Roman destruction of the Second Temple close to two thousand years ago, was always viewed by our people as a Divine punishment. The state of exile in which we found ourselves was not seen as the result of military or political weakness. Rather, the Creator had decreed that until such time as He would chose to redeem the world, world Jewry was to remain in exile. The only possible means to alter what was and is a metaphysical state are spiritual. Repentance, prayer, Torah study, deeds of kindness and the like could hasten redemption. Nothing else would be effective. Any other means of ending exile is metaphysically doomed to failure.
Zionism was a movement dedicated to altering this traditional view of redemption. It posited that political maneuvering; revolutionary terror, war and dispossession would yield Jewish salvation.
Nothing could be further from the truths of Judaism.
However, Zionism not only broke with the teachings of our faith, it also entered upon a campaign, now over one hundred years old, to persuade and, eventually, force, when possible, Jews to abandon their allegiance to G-d and the Torah and recreate themselves as secular nationalists.
The Zionist movement was not only a heretical departure from Judaism and a practical attempt to lure Jews from their Torah. It was also monstrously blind to the indigenous inhabitants of the Holy Land . In the 1890s, less than 5% of the Holy Land s population was Jewish, yet, Theodore Herzl had the nerve to describe his movement as that of a people without a land for a land without a people.
Time and again both Revisionist and Labor Zionists, the former overtly and the latter under the clouds of deceptive rhetoric, have sought the elimination of the Palestinian people from their state. They have dispossessed thousands and refused them the right of return or minimum compensation. They have kept the people of Gaza and the West Bank stripped of basic political and human rights and denied them the dignity of self-determination.
This aggression has plunged the region into its never-ending spiral of bloodshed.
Sad to say, the bloody results of Zionism were not unexpected. They were foretold in the Talmud. There we read that a human based attempt to return en masse to the Holy Land would result in terrifying loss of life. This is an unpleasant truth but its seems quite validated by the past centurys events.
People of the Press, I have come before you today to offer a new perspective on the Middle East, a new explanation as to why all previous attempts at peace making have failed. It is our belief that they are inherently doomed to fail. All of them share one fatal assumption. They find it axiomatic that the state of Israel should exist. And, in contrast to the plain evidence of the past half-century of Jewish history they see its existence as a positive development for the Jewish people.
Only blind dogma could at this date see Israel as something good for the Jewish people. Established as a so-called safe haven it has consistently over the past five decades been the most dangerous place on the face of the earth for a Jew to live. It has been the source of tens of thousands of Jewish deaths, of families torn apart and has left a trail of grieving widows, orphans and friends in its wake.
Not to mention the countless thousands of Jewish souls diverted from religion. And our Rabbis state If you cause one to sin, it is worse than killing him.
And, let us not forget that this tale of physical Jewish suffering is far magnified among the Palestinian people, a nation condemned to poverty, persecution, homelessness, all pervasive hopelessness and all too often, a far too premature, death.
This web of pain, the cries and tears of the grieving, demand of us as Jews that we return to the wellsprings of our faith. We must accept our task to serve G-d in humility and peace. This is the essence of a Jew.
And, when so doing we will inevitably reject the bizarre and malicious doctrines of Zionism, the falsification of Judaism.
We will realize that defying the Divine decree of exile is doomed to bloody failure.
We will realize that our peoples hopes cannot be built by shattering those of another people.
We will demand and with G-ds, help live to see the peaceful dismantling of the state. We will return the land to those who dwelt upon it for centuries, the Palestinian people. Under their sovereignty, we will work towards a just solution to any Jewish Palestinian problems created by the brief period of Zionist ascendancy.
There are Im sure some skeptics here in the audience who feel that a Palestinian state would represent a threat to the Jewish people. My friends, I have been there time and time again as Neturei Karta International has visited Palestinian and Islamic organizations and I have been greeted with extraordinary warmth and brotherly concern. We have visited Iran , been hosts of the government. We were allowed to speak in Iran to both Jewish and non-Jewish audiences, without any prior censorship. We have discovered time after time, that Muslims in general actually yearn for good relations with Jews and, that when the evil face of Zionism is stripped away, the naturally good relations between our peoples bubbles to the surface.
Actully history bears witness that through out the centuries Muslim countries were extremely hospitable to the Jews. In fact as a general rule the Jews faired far better in those countries than in other host lands.
And in Palestine alone our grandparent have testified to the fact that the Muslims and Jews lived in peace and harmony up until the advent of Zionism.
Many stories of the close friendship that existed at that time circulate in the Jewish communities, for instance, baby sitting each others children was a daily occurrence
We also operate a web site. There isnt a day goes by when we dont receive e- mails from around the Islamic world. They are all positive. They bless, express love and brotherhood. Often they credit us with having cured them of anti Jewish sentiments. From Yemen to Great Britain the delight these people experience in finding anti Zionist Jews is palpable.
This then is the image we offer as an alternative to the current horror of a Jewish people free of the need to kill and be killed, free to pursue their Divine task of Torah practice and free to live in peace and respect with all men. May the Creator grant that we all be worthy of seeing that day. And ultimately the day when all will recognize the one G-D and serve Him in harmony. AMEN
..."But the speech wasn't Farrakhan's biggest problem. The biggest obstacle to his effort to recast the Nation as mainstream, unprejudiced, and philo-Semitic came from an unlikely source: Jews. At this year's convention, Farrakhan proudly unveiled a new weapon meant to finally vanquish the charges of anti-Semitism that have dogged him for so long. He flew in, from Jerusalem and Brooklyn, several ultraorthodox rabbis from the Neturei Karta sect to vouch for his newfound appreciation of the Jewish people. But Farrakhan's Jews didn't quite seem to appreciate the Jewish people much themselves. In fact, the rabbis were a little behind the times. They hadn't come to support the new Farrakhan; they had come because they liked the old Farrakhan.http://www.thenewrepublic.com/031300/pollack031300.html
Neturei Karta, which believes that Zionism violates Jewish law, has a long history of backing political figures precisely because they denounce the Jewish state; Yasir Arafat has been an ally since the 1970s. The group has even called the Holocaust God's punishment for the Jewish settlement of Palestine. So, instead of playing up Farrakhan's newfound tolerance, Rabbi David Weiss told the United Center crowd that Israel was an "abomination of God." Bellowed Weiss, "We apologize for the chutzpah, the nerve of the Zionist leaders who attack the honorable Minister Farrakhan. All those who have called you an anti-Semite, let them be shamed.... All those who say they are Jews who speak ill of Mr. Farrakhan are not Jews." The old Louis Farrakhan couldn't have said it better himself."
How typical that you would use the few anti-Zionist Jews as useful idiots for your cause. How pathetic.... Kinda like me posting material from Christians who do not believe Jesus never existed.
There are such folks you know. Try a Christian Zionist website. Now those folks are to be admired.
Treacherous liars of a feather stick together.
The past 50 years have been a golden age, a renaissance for Jews. They have a haven and a place to live in freedom, and not a some barely tolerated minority. They are not subject to the whims of some king or dictator, but now can chart their own destiny in their own liberated homeland.
And this man wants to go back to living under the thumb of the Muslims? Pay the dhimmi tax and hope his children don't "offend" the neighbors so much that they are killed without recourse or retaliation? He's nuts. Of course the Muslims tell him how much they love him. Doesn't a mugger like someone that looks like an easy mark as opposed to someone prepared to defend themself?
He sounds exactly like the people that said "better we should have lived as slaves in Egypt than left to wander and die in the desert". He doesn't deserve freedom or safety.
Not in the slightest.
And what about this belief is untrue?
...With the permission of the ruling Turks, where they met up with Jewish communities that had been there for thousands of years....
Where they also employed itinerant Arabs from throughout the Middle East to work on those very settlements. These Arabs without Historical roots in the Levant are the progenitors of the bulk of the so-called "Palestinian people" today.
Palestinian nationalism then generally subsumed under the title Arab nationalism but soon to assume its more particularistic title began to flourish at about the same time.
No, Arab Jew hatred, which later metastasized as the fraudulent movement of "Palestinian nationalism" didn't gain momentum until after Turkish rule was broken by the British toward the end of WWI.
Because it smacks of reality. Iran wants the elimination of Israel. So does this rabbi.
Why was the American Tokyo Rose welcomed by Japan in WWII? Because she was a treacherous liar and served the needs of our enemies.
And so it goes with this lying rabbi and Iran, whose government is a terrorist-sponsor, blood enemy of Israel.
And if it was merely a hatred of Jews that was the motivation behind it, there would be no Jewish Iranians (clearly there are as this rabbi went to speak to them and was welcomed by Iran).
What of his point that the policies of political Zionism is a violation of the Judaic Law?
In a press conference in Chicago Monday, Rabbi David Weiss, of the Neturei Karta group, praised Farrakhan as a man dedicated to "the bettering of mankind" and said that until the Zionist movement, Jews had always lived in peace with their neighbors.
Fact one Israelis want to be left alone to live in peace
Fact two Palestinains want to kill and wipe out Israelis
Fact three all violence that occurs is premised upon these facts--
fact 3A) When Palestinains attack Israelis it is unprovoked
fact 3B) When Israelis attack it is in retaliation for Palestinian's unsolicited attacks.
Israel should do one of two things--
1) Every time a Palestinian attacks they should carpet bomb 1000 Palestinain homes. At some point the cost will appear too great or they will run out of suicided bombers.
2) The Israelies should impose a "peace settlement" of their own. Give the Palestinians a "state" by parting with as much land as they feel they can safely part with. Seal the borders and warn that any hostile action by any members of this "state" will be viewed as an act of war and dealt with accordingly.
Israel shouldn't be forced to put up with Palestinains any more than we should be forced to put up with Al Qaeda.
Demidog, explain to me how you know that his view is the correct one?
Back in the 70's on the then Israeli 50 shekel note there was a picture of Theodor Hertzl. I asked one of the Neturei Karta leaders if he would have anything to do with Hertzl? He spit and said,"G-d forbid!" I asked him if he could change a hundred pound bill. He whipped out a fifty, two twenties, and a ten. I said to him, I see you have no problem with Hertzl when he's in your pocket. BTW- this same "Rabbi" sent King Hussein a wedding present and was declared Jordan's Minister to the Jews.
What you are attempting is guilt by association. It doesn't rebut his message though.
I am willing to concede that point. Sharon is another matter. He is provoking war.
I am not a scholar of the Torah. Explain to me how you know his view is incorrect.
Based on discourses of the Lubavitcher Rebbe, Rabbi Menachem M. Schneerson
What right do we have to the Holy Land? In the beginning G-d Created Heaven and Earth
(1)....Rashi's commentary on this very first statement of the Torah follows:
"..It was not necessary to begin the Torah (whose main objective is to teach commandments) with this verse.... And what is, therefore, the reason that it begins with Genesis? Because if the nations of the world will say to Israel: 'You are robbers because you have conquered with force the lands of the seven nations (of Canaan) they (Israel) can answer: 'He created it (as described in Genesis) and gave it to whomever was proper in His eyes. Of His own will He gave it to them (the non-Jews) and of his own will He took it from them and gave it to us!'
Actually it is not necessary to use this quotation from Torah to establish the tenure rights of the people Israel for the land of Israel. This point is made strongly and continually elsewhere in the Torah - even to the extent of identifying the people and the land as one. The accomplishment of Rashi's explanation, quoted above, is to publicize the fact to all people - and to emphasize that the giving of the land is nothing less than an expression of the Divine will.
No one denies that the land of Israel was once in gentile hands. Indeed, this fact is conceded in Psalms: "The power of His work He has declared to His people in giving them the heritage of the nations." (2) By the will of the Al-mighty, the land was once the heritage of the nations, and by the will of the Al-mighty it was given to His people.
What should be the overall outlook and attitude for the Jewish statesman or diplomat in representing Israel's case before the members of any other nation?
The Right Way: The Jew chosen to represent his people must be aware that although we are still in exile, before the advent of the Messianic era, nonetheless we must not adopt a servile attitude before others. On the contrary, our representative's attitude must imply: "Listen, I am a Jew. I am a representative of the Jewish people. I am a representative of Yiddishkeit, and the following are my rightful demands.
" True, we are in exile amongst the nations of the world. We do not rule over them and consequently we cannot dictate to them. The Al-mighty has seen to it that in our present Galus (exile) we do have to approach other nations for our needs. It is therefore necessary to speak their language and to address them diplomatically. But the Jewish representative does not have to ask for the Holy Land; he must declare clearly that the Land belongs to us by Divine Right.
This uniquely Jewish combination of openness, firmness, and diplomacy is an ancient heritage of Israel from our forefather Avraham (Abraham). Avraham asked the Hittites politely to give him a burying-place for his wife in Hebron. Avraham declared, "I am a stranger and a sojourner with you." (3) The Midrash interprets: "If you agree to my request, you can regard me as a stranger (who is entirely dependent upon your good will). But if not, I am a sojourner (settler and citizen) and can take what I desire by right - since G-d has promised this land to me and my children." (4) Avraham's diplomacy was to be polite and to imply to the Hittites that the conditions could be discussed. If money was an issue, he was ready to pay 400 full shekels of silver. But the actual granting of the land could not be argued - for his right to the Holy Land was a Divine Mandate.
The Wrong Way: Instead of declaring firmly that the Holy Land is ours by Divine fiat, some approach the representatives of other nations in an entirely different manner. They say that there was a certain non-Jew, Lord Balfour by name, who lived in London and who issued a "paper" in 1917, declaring that the Jews should have the Holy Land as a "national home". One who presents such a claim based on non-Jewish sources automatically implies that he has no proof from Jewish sources! The statesmen from the other nation can retort, "Very well, one non-Jew indeed issued such a paper, but 140 non-Jews now say the reverse. That person (Lord Balfour) had no right to make such a declaration over the Holy Land." The statesman does not know how right he is. "That person," indeed had no rights over the Holy Land! For it was the Al-mighty's desire to give the Holy Land originally as "a heritage to the nations" and it was His Divine will to take it away from them and give it to his people Israel.
When we ask other nations for arms it is indeed necessary that we "pray for the welfare of the city," (5) and that our request be channeled through their government - for we are still in Galus. However, the content of our request dare not be couched in false terms, or based upon claims that have no spiritual validity, for two reasons - first and foremost, for this is the opposite of Torah, and secondly, because the results of such a request will be counter-productive. The above wrong approach (which, tragically, has been used in presenting our case for the Holy Land during all these years) has led to the current situation, in which the whole basis for our claim to the Holy Land vacillates. This is not all surprising, for it was built on a shaky foundation, built on a "paper" issued by a non- Jew who dwelt in London.
What kind of an overlord was he over the Jews? What kind of authority did he have over "the land upon which the eyes of G-d your G-d, gaze from the beginning of the year till year's end"? (6) Our representatives pursuing this false approach inquire of other non-Jews: "Where are the borders of our Holy Land? Up to which geographical boundary does the inheritance of the Jews extend? What are the inner allusions of the "paper" issued by the non-Jew in London?"
Why follow such a weak path? We have an ironclad claim: "The power of His work he has declared to His people in giving them the heritage of the nations." (2) Why rely on diplomatic counseling? Why make compromises, plots, conspiracies? Why "Wheel and Deal" and make business transactions as regards what belongs to other nations and what belongs to Israel? The Al- mighty in His Torah has clearly indicated the borders of the Land of Israel,......This is the land etc...to its borders
(7) This is the one single approach which has until now not even been tried. All other versions of diplomacy and statesmanship have been tried and have failed. We have tried behind the scenes diplomacy and financial transactions; we have sought the confidence of influential leaders etc. etc., and today we see to what state of affairs this has led. The only approach which the non-Jews deep down really understand is one based upon our Holy Torah which they also regard with reverence as "the Bible."
When a Jewish representative abandons this approach, he abandons his own wealth; he abandons the source of his strength, he abandons his true claim.
What would a sincere, strong stand accomplish?
One example of what a strong stand could accomplish can be seen from the events of the recent past, when the Premier of Egypt, Mr. Sadat , suddenly suggested a proposal of peace and came on a mission of peace to visit Israel. What was it that motivated him to suggest a peaceful approach? It was his observation that the Jews were beginning to speak with strength, and were not displaying any fear of the nations. He observed that the name of G-d was being invoked with ever-increasing frequency and intensity in statements issuing from the Holy Land. There were those in Israel who were beginning to adopt the ancient cry, "We encamp in the name of our G-d."(8) This had a profound effect upon Sadat. (Though his physical intelligence might not have perceived the importance of this renewal of attachment to G-dly values, his soul perceived it.) Sadat was aware, furthermore, that Jewish soldiers stood on the borders and had the capacity to destroy his armies. He saw that they had chariots and horses and all the implements of war. He was instilled with fear; an honest analysis of the situation told him that it would not pay for him to start a war with these Jews. This is the reason he came with a peace proposal.
From this episode - and many others - it is evident that only when we take a strong, fearless, and uncompromising stand that we can have any beneficial effect upon our relations with other nations.
What is it that instills fear into the hearts of our nation's compromisers?
We are told by the Torah that there might come a time in our bitter exile when some of our people will be possessed by an illogical fear, a "faintness of heart". They will flee - imagining that they are under pursuit by an enemy - when in reality they are fleeing from the sound of a leaf driven by the wind.(9) Today we see the unfortunate fulfillment of this prophecy. There are some of us who allow themselves to be frightened by threats issued by other nations: they stand in fear and trembling. But who is it that they fear - a torn leaf driven by the wind! For when a member of another nation attempts to rob a Jew of something connected with Torah and Mitzvos, something which is his rightful property, the person is violatining one of the basic seven Noahide laws for all humanity.(10) By this violation he severs the inner G-dly source of his own vitality. He is no longer a leaf connected to a tree, but a leaf torn from a tree, driven here and there by the wind. Yet these faint-hearted individuals are so terrified of the "torn leaf" that they attempt to instill their brother Jews with a similar fear.
Who qualifies as an "expert" to decide policies for defense of the Holy Land?
The answer to this question is crystal clear. According to the law of the Torah if a person is sick and must take advice regarding his therapy (for example whether or not he should undergo an operation) he can take into account neither the opinion of "good friends", nor of neighbors, relatives, plumbers, electricians, nor even of learned professors of philosophy, history, mathematics, etc. etc. The one and only individual qualified to give an opinion on this matter is an expert in the field - a doctor. In exactly the same way, the only person whose opinion is to be considered as regards retaining or returning parts of the Holy Land is a military expert, a general in the field.
The opinion of all the politicians, diplomats and statesmen in the world carries no weight whatsoever in this question according to the Torah . At stake in the doctor's decision is the life of one individual; at stake in the expert's decision are the lives of hundreds and thousands of our people! In the three wars that have been fought in the Middle East we have seen time and again that the military experts, the generals in the field, declared unequivocally that if such-and-such an area were given back to the enemy it would bring about loss of life. Along came the politicians and said that "because of political considerations we dare not anger other nations; we must listen to them and return this territory." Later, this dastardly action cost tens and hundreds of Jewish fatalities. This distorted attitude reached a nadir of debasement in the Yom Kippur war, when our representatives, knowing of the impending invasion by their enemies, informed Washington (knowing that this information would immediately become known all over the world) that they would not start a war! Even more, they gave assurances that they would not even make an effective mobilization before being attacked. They did not deceive Washington either; they indeed kept their word. They did not make the necessary military preparations - an act which cost our nation hundredsof fatalities!
From a Torah perspective, what is the central issue today in regards to the defense of the Holy Land?
The Issue: The issue is Pikuach Nefesh, danger to life. Make no mistake about it. From a Torah perspective nothing else is the real issue here: the interpretation, significance or wording of UN Resolution No. 242 is not the issue. The central issue is Pikuach Nefesh, the endangering of the lives of all the inhabitants of the Holy Land posed by the proposed return of certain areas of land.
Torah Law Speaks: The following is the definitive verdict of our Divine Torah law, as expressed in the Shulchan Aruch.(11) If a band of idolators have surrounded a Jewish City (on the Shabbos), if their intention is only to rob, we may not desecrate the shabbos to defend our property. If their intention is to kill - or even if their intention is unknown, but there is reason to suspect that it might be to kill - then, even if they have not yet arrived, but are only preparing their attack, we are to go forth against them with weapons and we may desecrate the Shabbos for this purpose. However, if the city in question is close to the coast, then even where their intention is only to rob 'straw and stubble', we desecrate the Shabbos to defend the city against them, for if we will not do so, they might capture this (strategic) city - and from there it might be easy for them to conquer the land.
The ruling is clear, and the current circumstances in the Middle East are far more severe than those portrayed in the above passage, for the following reasons: First, every point on the map of the Holy Land, every settlement, can be considered as "a city close to the coast (or border)" due to the extremely vulnerable nature of Israel's geography.
An enemy could obviously conquer the hinterland far more easily once it has captured any strong point near the border. Second, there is no question of the invading enemies having their eyes only on despoiling "straw and stubble"; they announce their murderous goals very openly!
A question could be posed about this Torah ruling. The desire is to rescue the Jews from the hands of their enemies. Since we are the "smallest of all the nations", we need the Al-mighty's help in our battle. If so, why should we take weapons and desecrate the Shabbos? Should we not better recite Tehillim (Psalms) for our deliverance, or engage in Torah Study etc.? The unequivocal ruling of the Shulchan Aruch is resoundingly clear. The Al-mighty desires that, in this case, we should go forth against them well armed, and, if necessary, we are to desecrate the Shabbos for this purpose. The course of action mandated by the Torah is one manner of serving G-d. Just as one must study Torah and fulfill the Mitzvos so must he perform his bounden duty with regard to the prevention of danger to life.
How much of the territory of the Holy Land can we give back?
Not one step!
The situation currently in the Holy Land is strange; it is exceedingly worrying; it is completely incomprehensible. Everyone knows that to return areas on the West bank of the Jordan River to the Arabs is a danger to life. We do not need to hear this from the greatest expert. All we have to do is look at the map and see how close the west bank of the Jordan is to the sea, and to note who is present on the eastern side of the Jordan and who is to be found on ships in the Mediterranean ... It then becomes immediately obvious that this is a situation of real imminent danger to life. (When Jewish representatives unrolled a map in the Oval Office of the president of the United States and pointed out to him the distance of the territories in question to the sea, and the ease with which an enemy could cut through those areas, the President agreed that return of those areas to the enemy constituted PIKUACH NEFESH. endangering the lives of the inhabitants of the Holy Land.)
Yet, in spite of the clarity and obviousness of the danger, on which issues do we hear discussion today? The discussion centers around such irrelevant issues as the U.N. Resolution 242 (which was unfortunately signed by those of our people who were "fearful and faint-hearted"). What difference does the interpretation of this piece of paper make? The issue here is DANGER TO LIFE. The issue is PIKUACH NEFESH. There is not a single expert who disagrees with the analysis that return of the territories under discussion involves danger to life. In such a circumstance, when the lives of three million Jews are in danger, what possible difference does the "meaning" or "interpretation" of the resolution make? The simplest person understands that if his wife and family are in circumstances where their very lives are endangered, such a situation overrules and overrides ALL other considerations. BSome claim that a "promise" was secretly made to return some areas. This claim is totally without meaning - for no-one can promise to give away something which does not belong to him! The Holy Land - all of it - belongs to the Al-mighty. The Al-mighty has given it to every individual Jew and to all of us together as a nation, but He has given it to us "in trust", in a manner that it must remain OUR eternal inheritance. How could anyone have "promised" to give any of it away? It was not his to give.
What should be done now to protect Israel?
To establish defensive Jewish settlements along the entire eastern border!
First Duty: Our very first duty is to prevent enemy infiltration of our borders, and there is no other effective way to do this than to close and protect those borders. The situation has deteriorated so badly, that for lack of a proper response to this demand of Torah, the authorities have come up with the following ridiculous explanation: Since the ultimate intention is to eventually build cities in the west bank area (the area of Judea (Yehuda) and Samaria (Shomron)) such construction and planning will take a long time; we cannot rush into it; it must be done slowly and deliberately, and eventually, at some unspecified time, these cities will be built.
This is a total evasion of the issue; "cities" or "villages" are not the issue. In fact, the nature of any building per se is not under discussion. What is at issue here is the DEFENSE of all the people who dwell in the Holy Land for which purpose we do not need cities, we need lines of defense! We must post a sentry, arm him , and give him all the encouragement and support necessary to show him that he is doing the greatest Mitzva - that of protecting our sons and our daughters. CLOUDING THE ISSUE: Let not anyone confuse and cloud the issue with talk of what "was promised" or what was "not promised" All this is irrelevant discussion. The Land of Israel is an eternal inheritance given to the eternal people by the Eternal G-d Who is the supreme King of Kings of all countries of the world (subconsciously, members of all the other nations realize this too). Let us immediately settle the entire land of Israel to its borders without a storm of publicity or news. Quietly and resolutely let it be done, and then we will be on the road to true peace, for through this action we will frustrate and annul all the pressure being brought to bear upon us. The nations of the world will see that an action has been taken, a concrete action, and "the actions of a Bais Din (Court of Torah law ) are final; nothing can be done to change them post facto." (12)
With whom could Israel sign a valid peace treaty now?
With no one!
There are some who are foolish enough to declare that if we will return areas of Judea and samaria (on the west bank of the Jordan river) we will attain peace. Those who cry for "peace" and "peace now" center the discussion whether it is worthwhile to take such-and-such a step "for peace" or not. Is it worthwhile to "trade territory for peace" etc. and other such meaningless discussions - meaningless because the supposed "peace discussions" are to take place with one, upon whom (everyone knows) peace does NOT depend on at all. Is he then supposed to persuade Saudi Arabia to make peace? He has no say WHATSOEVER in their opinions. Is he supposed to conclude a peace agreement on behalf of Iraq or Jordan or the P.L.O.? What nonsense! They despise him! Yet in order to attain this illusory and non-existent possibility of "peace", some are ready to bow and prostrate themselves before Egypt's Premier in order to "find favor in his eyes." They are ready to persuade him that he should take back everything which can be returned to him in the Sinai, in Judea and Samaria etc. They are ready to make CONCESSIONS WHICH WILL PLACE THE LIVES OF MILLIONS OF JEWS IN MORTAL DANGER!
They say, "Why are you not ready to give back territory for peace?" We must reply that NO ONE CAN OFFER A VALID PEACE TREATY. IT IS SIMPLY NOT WITHIN THEIR POWER. IT IS NOT WITHIN THE POWER OF WASHINGTON, IT IS NOT WITHIN THE POWER OF EGYPT - IT IS NOT EVEN WITHIN THE POWER OF ARAFAT YEMACH SH'MO (MAY HIS NAME BE ERASED). FOR EVEN HE HAS SEVERE PROBLEMS FROM THOSE TO THE RIGHT AND TO THE LEFT WITHIN HIS ORGANIZATION.
It is worth emphasizing that point again and again:
Currently no one is able to offer a real peace. All they can offer is the willingness to sign a piece of paper; they say quite openly that the significance of the signature on this piece of paper is that if and when .... If everyone concerned will be in the proper mood... if.... if... then we will begin to speak about peace, and we will begin to ask all the various enemies of the Jews what their conditions are. And we all know very well what their conditions are - may heaven protect us against them!
REFERENCES: Based on excerpts form unedited transcripts of discourses delivered on 11 Nissan 5736 (1976), 24 Teves 5738(1978), Mevorchinm Adar I 5738 (1978), Mevorchim Nissan 5738 (1978), and others. (1) Genessis 1:1; (2) Psalms 111:6; (3) Genesis 23:4; (4) Viz. Rashi ibid.; (5) Jeremiah 29:7; (6) Deuteronomy 11:12; (7) Numbers 34:2; (8) Psalms 20:6; (9) Leviticus 26:36; (10) Viz. Maimonides Hilchos Melachim Chap. 9:9; (11) Shulchan Aruch Admur, Orach Chayim 239:6; (12)Viz. Baba Metzia 17a
Does that mean Hillary would agree with you?
So what. The Founders of this nation were considered ultra fringe at one time as well. I'm not saying that I think everything this fellow says is true. And in fact I welcome folks to bring out references from the Torah that would rebut him. But simply to say that because people overwhelmingly disagree is proof of the falseness of his statements is not sufficient.
See post #31
Read the entire article, doofus. That's not what the Rebbe said. What he said was that the military should be the sole authority in matters of national defense.
Only blind dogma could at this date see Israel as something good for the Jewish people. Established as a so-called safe haven it has consistently over the past five decades been the most dangerous place on the face of the earth for a Jew to live. It has been the source of tens of thousands of Jewish deaths, of families torn apart and has left a trail of grieving widows, orphans and friends in its wake.
Remarkable indeed, in the number and variety of distortions of facts and history.
Also remarkable in its understanding (or lack thereof) of the Muslim/Arab mentality. What is the point of this speech?
That if the Jews acquiesce to living as second class citizens in an all-Islamic Midde East everyone will be happy?
Are we talking insanity here? or just old fashioned senility? What?
Aliyah up to the Arab Conquest
During the time of the Second Temple, there were many immigrants to Eretz Yisrael. Aliyah, mainly of scholars from Babylon, did not cease after the destruction of the Second Temple (70 C.E.). This flow of aliyah ended in 520 when Mar Zutra, descendant of the exilarch in Babylon, settled in Tiberias and was appointed head of the Academy.
Now this was LONG before any Hertzl, long before any *Zionist* movement, so there is his great lie which makes everything else a lie.
To take his claim that the Torah explicitly forbids a mass aliyah is like saying the sun revolves around the earth. To say that Zionism causes us to forsake our religion and our faith is an insult to any Jew of faith. The man is speaking to individuals who not only are not Jewish, but like most people, have no concept of Judaism except what these derelicts preach...which in ITSELF is forbidden by Torah Law and Mosaic Law.
So you have a man who breaks all the rules of Torah Law telling others that Aliyah is against Torah Law.
From the Arab Conquest to the Ottoman Conquest
There is little information on aliyah in the next few centuries, the period of the Muslim Conquest (636 - 638). In the 11th century, important arrivals included Solomon ben Judah, from Morocco, head of the Academy in Jerusalem and Ramleh; and the Nasi Daniel beb. Azariah, a scion of the exilarchs of Babylon. In the late 12th century, more Jews from North Africa arrived as a result of the persecutions there.
Persecutions of Jews in Europe also contributed to aliyah. The most important immigration of this wave was that of the "300 French and English rabbis" who went to Eretz Yisrael in 1210-1211. In about 1260, there were more olim from these countries. The most important aliyah in this century was that of Nahmanides in 1267. Since his arrival, settlement is said to have been continuous in Jerusalem.
In the late 13th century, aliyah ceased as a result of the fierce battles between the Crusaders and the Muslims. In the 14th century Jews came from Spain and Germany. A number of Italian Jews arrived in Eretz Yisrael in the 15th century and made their mark on the Jewish community. Immigrants from Mesopotamia, Persia, India, China, Yemen, and North Africa are also mentioned in this century.
So, we've gotten to the 15th century all without Hertzl. All without losing the faith, because it is the FAITH that Israel is HOME that guides Aliyah. Until you understand that, you will never understand Aliyah. It has nothing to do with politics and EVERYTHING to do with faith.
There have been many more Aliyahs since those days, many more before Hertzl and many after. It will continue because ISRAEL is where the Moschiach will arrive. That is the faith. That is the reason. And Israel will be there when the time comes.
My friends, I have been there time and time again as Neturei Karta International has visited Palestinian and Islamic organizations and I have been greeted with extraordinary warmth and brotherly concern...
No doubt, as useful idiots always are; until they cease being useful. Who is this delusional character? If a Muslim set out to impersonate a Jew who believes that Islam is a friendly warm and fuzzy culture, I can't think of a better propaganda job than this clown is doing.
You want to review the Torah? Why change the subject from the essence of the problem: ISLAM
Pick any positive statement about islam in this article, and historical facts and current behavior will prove the opposite.
Every single positive statement.
I am unaware this is what he has claimed. Where did he say that it would be against the Torah for Jews to live in that region?
Which ones? Or am I simply to take your word for it that this is true even though you haven't been speicifc?
Other than the fact that namecalling is the recourse of the intellectual disarmed, I can't think of a single reason.
Bigotry? pointing out a murderer is bigotry?
I always assumed that doublespeak would be the exclusive province of government in a topsy turvy satirical world, but it looks like individuals have devolved into nonsense too. Interesting.