ZIONISM-----safe haven? 2
Caleb Posted - 13 February 2005 7:47
Mod-
1. Sorry if this question has been answered or addressed with elsewhere.
2. I'm a complete ignoramus so I apologize if it comes out in my question
Surely, the existence of the State of
Personally I am not aware of the statistics but presumably there have been less Jewish murders in
If this is the case should our priority not be, keeping Yidden in a place where they are most safe and less risking life- because this would be the state of Israel if we can learn from the lessons of history?
Thanx a lot,
MODERATOR Posted - 13 February 2005 7:55
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On the contrary - the State of Israel has been proven to be the least safe place for Jews in all the world. Since its inception, more Jews have been killed there than everywhere else in the world put together.
In addition, Jews all over the world are less safe because of the State of Israel. The Arabs, because of their political fight with The State of Israel, have become bloodthirsty Jew killers. So Jews in
The numbers show clearly that the further removed Jews are from the State of Israel - either geographically (i.e. not living in the State) or politically (i.e. not living in a place where the residents are politically against
Add to that the fact that the entire safety of the State of Israel - whatever of it exists - is completely dependent on the power and support of the
And never mind the fact that their economy is a that of a charity case - if it weren’t for the support of outsiders institutions they would be unviable economically as well.
Amazed Posted - 28 February 2005 18:56
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This argument is false Moderator. How can you say there are more deaths since the inception of the state? Pogroms? The Holocaust? All took place since then. How many deaths in the last 50 years? 10,000? 100,000? How can that be compared to Six Million? To the pogroms? To the Gulag? To the Expulsion? I don't understand
MODERATOR Posted - 28 February 2005 18:59
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sigh. And then people wonder why their posts don’t go up.
Read what I wrote again, please. Since the inception of the state of
Amazed Posted - 01 March 2005 11:09
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Well Duh, Moderator. That's because anytime anyone in
MODERATOR Posted - 01 March 2005 11:09
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Terror. And wars.
Amazed Posted - 01 March 2005 14:54
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ok, now we are getting somewhere. Wars. There's your answer right there. That should have been part of your original message. And obviously this goes back to whether you hold from the state or not. So it's pointless to continue. Thanks for the clarification though.
MODERATOR Posted - 01 March 2005 14:56
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Right. And now we have one more reason NOT to hold from the State: It causes Jews to die. And it also eposes for that sham it is the idea that the State of Israel is a safe haven from anti-Semitism.
Amazed Posted - 01 March 2005 16:42
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Well since you put it that way....I will continue. The sham idea that
Anti-Semitism has been growing all over the world with reported and non-reported incidents exploding. But deaths you say? Fair enough. But the counter-argument is that, as a general rule, only the Arab population has been insane enough to strap belts to themselves and blow themselves us for the cause. That explains the more death.
But to make the argument that the deaths are related to the State. You cannot simply say cause and effect. That's a basic tenet of our religion. X died because he did Y. That’s a big no-no. Perhaps the deaths are simply a nissayon. Who are we to say?
MODERATOR Posted - 01 March 2005 16:43
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Huh? If you live in Harlem you’re in more danger than is you live in
Amazed Posted - 07 March 2005 18:06
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sorry, the little bug is in my head and I can't get it out. You say that "since the inception of the State" it is statistically the most dangerous place for Jews. You also seem to imply that it's BECAUSE of the inception that this is so. There is no cause and effect. That is not provable. So yes, more Jews have died there. But more Jews also LIVE there. Is it a more dangerous place to live than NY? Yes. But is that punishment from hashem BECAUSE the Jewish state was created? You cannot say that.
Further, you argue that more Jews die there than other places. Yet, EVEN SO, less Jews have dies in the last 50 years that probably any 50 year period before that for a long time. The first half of the 20th century gave us the holocaust. The 1800's, 1700's, 1600's etc gave us pogroms, expulsions and various other massacres. Despite the horrible nature of terror in Eretz Yisrael, LESS PEOPLE ARE DYING NOW THEN IN THE PAST. Does that not have any significance? Obviously not to you, but it's something to chew on nonetheless.
MODERATOR Posted - 07 March 2005 18:14
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
But its not true - more Jews died in Israel than everywhere else in the world put together, even though less Jews live in Israel. There are about a million less Jews in
And certainly the reason the Jews are killed there is because they are there --- the Arabs said to the Jews we don’t want you here, we will kill you if you come here, and the Jews came, and the Arabs kill them. The reason Jews are being killed in
It's kind of a-b-c.
As far as less Jews being killed nowadays, that’s true mostly - we’ve had times of better peace but for the most part, BH we are less persecuted nowadays than most times in our past. And so are most other people who live in civilized countries. All ethnics who live in civilized countries nowadays are safer than they ever were, with some very rare exceptions. Boruch Hashem the safest place for any formerly persecuted minority is the
BH for the first time in history, through chased hashem, the Christians have officially said to stop blaming Jews for the death of their god. BH we are much better off now physically than generally we have ever been.
But so is everyone else. What’s the point? The place we are the least safe today, relatively speaking, is the State of Israel, which was supposed to be a "safe haven" for Jews but instead has turned out to be just the opposite.
HZ Posted - 07 March 2005 21:34
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Before the founding there were things like the Chevron massacre, but that is a lot less than today.
MODERATOR Posted - 07 March 2005 21:46
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Please listen to Rabbi Boruch Kaplan ZTL's (his wife was Rebitzen Vichna Kaplan a"h of BYBP) tape on the chevron massacre. He was there. He survived BH. The massacre caused him to become a life long enemy of Zionism. He describes how the Jews of Chevron (he was one of them) used to get along very well with the Arabs until the Zionists came and antagonized them with their threats of taking over Eretz yisroel.
He is not the only source for this. First hand historical sources (Google it if you like) are clear as day that this massacre happened because the Zionists insisted on inciting the Arabs with threats of taking their land, in particular the Kosel site.
HZ Posted - 08 March 2005 10:22
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I didn't know that (or had forgotten) about the massacre, and I picked a bad example, but the relations between Arabs and Jews was not perfect is my point.
MODERATOR Posted - 08 March 2005 10:26
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wasn’t perfect, true, but it was much much better than after the Zionists came along, and it was much better than our relationship with Christians lets say. At times the Arabs and Jews fought battles side by side against the Christians.
Even the Zionists (the honest ones) admit this.
"There has always existed a hatred of the Jew amongst the peoples of the world. Whoever was in power, Esau or Yishmael, Christians or Moslems, they pursued us. Nonetheless, in the history of Jewish persecution the Moslems were always relatively better then the Christians. We do not find tragedies such as the Jewish martyrology at the time of the Crusades, the Spanish Inquisition, or the Chmelnicky massacres, in the annals of our communities in Islamic lands.
"The position has now been radically reversed. While among the Christians one hears voices of soul searching, tens of millions of Moslems, in particular Arabs, have become Amalekites and Nazis who have engraved on their banner the call: 'Come, let us cut them off from being a nation; that the name of Israel may be no more a remembrance" (Ps. 83,5) - far be it. It is unnecessary to dilate on this; we all
know the facts.
"What has brought about the wave of hatred that has engulfed the Moslem world? We all know it is the founding of the State of Israel."
And the following is from a pamphlet called Facts About Israel: History,
published by the
"The Jewish national revival and the efforts of the Jewish community to rebuild the country were opposed from the outset by extreme Arab nationalists. their strong resentment erupted in periods of intense violence in 1920, 1921, 1929, and
1936-1939 . . . Attempts to reach a dialogue with the Arabs, undertaken early by the Zionist endeavor, were ultimately unsuccessful.
Henceforth, Zionism and Arab nationalism were polarized into a potentially explosive situation. recognizing the opposing aims of the two national movements, the British, who had already once partitioned the territory under the Mandate (1922) recommended a further partition (1937), dividing the land west of the
The Jewish leadership accepted the idea of partition and empowered the Jewish Agency to negotiate with the British government in an effort to reformulate aspects of the proposal. The Arabs were uncompromisingly opposed to any partition plan."
To the Zionists, however, the deaths of Jews caused by the State of Israel are worth it.
Amazed Posted - 08 March 2005 14:43
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2 questions Moderator:
1. In your last post you quote a large section of text but I guess I missed where you quoted it from?
2. Where does anyone say that the deaths of Jews are "worth it" It may be a sad side effect, but that is all.
MODERATOR Posted - 08 March 2005 14:46
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Five Addresses, Rabbi JB Soloveichik, p.79
Later on, he says, if the State of Israel is religious they way they want it to be, all the sacrifices will have been worthwhile.
Side effect? Deaths of Jews are not to be taken so lightly. The State of Israel, which was supposed to be a safe haven for Jews, has turned out to be a deathtrap. More Jews killed in the "safe haven" than anywhere else - everywhere else, in the world.
Its just that the Zionists think the deaths of Jews are "worthwhile", as opposed to the traditional Jews, who value Jewish lives over a State.
amolam Posted - 07 March 2007 13:54
From a religious Zionist leader (Moshe Feiglin, current candidate for prime minister, in a recent blog post):
The State of
But now, sixty years after the State was established,
Neither the Prime Minister nor the head of the Opposition can find any reasonable solution other than to turn once again to the bombers that didn't strike the first time.
Is the State of
Those who refused to establish a Jewish state, insisting on a "normal" and "safe" state instead, got a state that is not Jewish, not safe and certainly not normal.
amolam Posted - 07 March 2007 13:54
(sorry forgot the link):
http://jewishleadership.blogspot.com/2007/02/safe-haven-or-death-trap-jewish-answers.html
Tortured_Soul Posted - 12 March 2007 2:51
Sounds like he is criticizing _secular_ Zionism while defending "religious" Zionism.
MODERATOR Posted - 12 March 2007 3:05
Could it be that instead of creating a safe haven, we have created a death trap?
Hey! That’s my line! I said it 2 years ago, as you can see above. Either this Feiglin reads frumteens, or the statement is so obvious that he doesn’t need to.
The Zionists, religious and otherwise, should have listened to the Gedolim years ago and we wouldn’t have had all those Jews killed. Hashem yishmereinu.
MODERATOR Posted - 12 March 2007 3:07
Sounds like he is criticizing _secular_ Zionism while defending "religious" Zionism.
Sounds like he is trying to, but it is in fact a critique of the existence of
No comments:
Post a Comment