Tuesday, July 30, 2013

Rav Kook's dilemma: Hesped for Hertzl

Shaalvim   On the twentieth of Tammuz, 5664 (July 3,1904), Dr. Theodor Herzl (Benjamin Ze’ev) Herzl, founder of the Zionist movement, died at the tragically young age of forty-four. Rav Avraham Yitzhak Kook, the newly installed rabbi of the port city of Jaffa, was asked to participate in a memorial service to honor the departed leader. Rav Kook was placed in a difficult situation, for which there was no totally satisfactory solution. On the one hand, the Halakha is quite specific when it comes to those who have deviated from the norms of Torah:
Whoever secedes from the way of the community, namely persons who throw off the yoke of commandments from upon their neck, and do not participate with the Jewish People in their observances, in honoring the festivals, and sitting in the synagogue and study house, but rather are free to themselves as the other nations, and so too the apostates and informers — for none of these persons does one mourn. Rather, their brothers and other relatives wear white (festive garments) and eat and drink, and make merry (Shulhan ‘Arukh, Yoreh De’ah 345:5).
However one might lionize Herzl, there was no getting away from the fact that his lifestyle was that of an assimilated Jew far from observance of traditional Judaism. If one were to adhere literally to the passage in Shulhan Arukh, the customary hesped or eulogy for the deceased would be out of the question.

On the other hand, Rav Kook knew his flock. If in Jaffa itself Rav Kook might find a few individuals capable of relating to the halakhic objection to memorializing a declaredly secular Jew, in Rehovot and the other outlying settler communities, Herzl, with his patriarchal beard and searing eyes, was regarded as nothing less than a modern-day “prophet.” And Rav Kook had been engaged not only as rabbi of Jaffa, but of the recently established moshavot (colonies) as well. [...]

87 comments :

  1. There are several interpretations to this.
    However, let us first state some facts. Herzl was not born or raised frum. Thus, he was not a willful heretic. Next, it is not in our earthly capacity to say who is righteous and who is not. Herzl turned his life around from assimilationist to ingatherer of the Exiles. Had people listened to his prophetic words, millions of Jews may have been saved from the death camps.

    Now as to interpretation - R Kook is alluding to Herzl as being a Messiah ben Yosef - or part of that process. His dilemma is to avoid being stoned by the Haredim of his day, or being further excommunicated.
    The people who have studied his teachings, see in this hesped, that he saw certain qualities in Herzl, that are part of the Geula.
    I believe there is an aggada or midrash somewhere which says the Moshiach will come in unexpected ways, so as not to attract enmity from Satan. Since Herzl was not yet completely shomer mitzvot, he was able to begin the process of Geula.
    Most Gedolei Torah know this, but are reluctant to acknowledge it.

    ReplyDelete
  2. A further halachic principle: someone who is working for the Kehilla is patur from keeping mitzvot. An example was R Kotler, who was foregoing his learning, and even mechalel Shabbes, when saving European Jews.
    Herzl was already starting this process,while R Kotler and r Wasserman were deriding the entire Zionist movement, and kissing Lithuanian soil.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Eddie, surely you realize that a p'tur from keeping mitzvos might apply when those mitzvos interfere with the emergency work one is doing.
      Herzl's work in no way necessitated eating treif and desecrating shabbos.

      Delete
    2. Yes, I do realize that. Herzl was not born frum. So it was nto normal for him to keep mitzvot. He actually ended up rebelling agasint assimilation after the Dreyfuss trial. Thus, he was a baal teshuva, whether he completed it or not.
      He was a gadol - that is the issue.
      Messiah ben Yosef is not a halachic concept , but and aggadic one. So it is not something that has halachic criteria.

      The counter argument, is that he was the cause of all evil which befell the Jews. But this is mere nonsense from the haters, ie Satmar, Muncatch etc. The same haters were so confident in their own insane ideology they actually believed they would be spared the horrors of the holocaust!
      This is actual proof that these meshugaim were neviey sheker. Unlike Daniel, who was a navi, and knew he would be saved from the lions, the false prophets made al kinds of statements that were disproven.

      Delete
    3. You would be surprisedJuly 30, 2013 at 10:11 PM

      Eddie, you are an insulated Zionist who has been sold pro-Zionist information exclusively and has never been exposed to any other point of view. You easily conclude that our people have countless flocks of Chelmite fools who follow silly Rabbis who don't posses the wisdom of the smallest member of your group. If you ever come out of your cocoon you might be surprised to learn a thing or two.

      Delete
    4. You would be surprised-

      I'll just reword your own paragraph a bit:

      you are an insulated anti-Zionist who has been sold anti-Zionist information exclusively and has never been exposed to any other point of view. You easily conclude that our people have countless flocks of Chelmite fools who follow silly Rabbis (such as Rav Kook zatzal) who don't posses the wisdom of the smallest member of your group. If you ever come out of your cocoon you might be surprised to learn a thing or two.

      Delete
    5. You would be surprisedJuly 30, 2013 at 10:29 PM

      Touche', you get 2 points for that one, but...

      1. Even if you are right about me, still 2 wrongs don't make a right to badmouth Gedoilim like The Satmar Rav Z"L.

      2. As it happens to be, your guess about me is not correct. I was not raised in Satmar or similar, but I came to this point of view after finding out, for myself, and I invite Eddie and you to try this approach and you might be surprised to learn a thing or two.

      Delete
    6. You would be surprisedJuly 30, 2013 at 11:08 PM

      Please publish my response to this starting with Touche'.

      Delete
  3. Yerovam II was remembered for good despite being an idol worshipper because he expanded the boundaries of the northern kingdom of Israel. Was Herzl anywhere near as bad as him when it came to Judaism, yet he accomplished far more.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 1. You should not speak of The Satmar Rav Z"L that way.
      2. You are not well informed and do not fathom the wickedness of the Zionists. If you read Rabbi M.B. Weissmandel's book - "Min Hameitzar", where he tells, amongst other things, of his trials and tribulations in his tireless efforts to save Jews from the Holocaust, you will see that he relates how he put trust in some of the Zionist leaders trying to receive their aid in his rescue efforts, and that, to his shock, they foiled his plans in order to promote their own agenda. Their agenda was for Israel to be known as the only safe place for Jews, so they wanted Jewish blood to spill in Europe.
      Rabbi Weissmandel was a Godol with limitless Ahavas Yisroel, and he was Mafkir himself for the sake of saving Jews, so please read what he writes before you utter another word.

      Delete
    2. yet when rav weissmandel came to america, the "shearit hapleta" litvish rabbonim saw fit to make sure his yeshiva had no money, while they made sure their yeshivot made big buck$.

      2. the only objection to herzl (vs other irreligious jews) is that european rabbonim saw him as a threat to their status, and mocked him. why is herzl any different from anyone else? unfortunately,, rav kook had to toe the line (esp since this was prob his first, or among his first functions in yafo; tel aviv was not "founded" till 1905.)

      Delete
    3. 1) Why not? what did the Satmar rav contribute to saving Jewish lives? The answer is the opposite, he led them to be slaughtered, only to take the train out provided by the zionist who you call wicked.

      2) Weissmandl was perhaps a dreamer, believing he could convince the British and Americans to give trucks to save the Jews. Unfortunately the Allies didnt care about Jewish lives. Now I am not saying the secularists were all tzaddikim. At the time, the yishuv was small, they had little money, resources, weapons etc, and were fighting the arabs, as well as the british mandate. So there were schemes that Weissmandl may have bought into, but they were not necessarily something the Zionists could have succeeded in by that point. Tom Segev writes about these various schemes. Some money was given, and it did not save the lives that were promised.
      Also, he wrote to Roosvelt and Churchill to bomb the railway lines and the gas chambers, but they refused. So he can hardly blame this on the wicked Zionists.

      Look at the facts.

      From 1895, Herzl was calling on the Yidden to go back to Israel, much like Ezra in his day. Some , including gedolim did, whether R kook , the Chazon Ish, R Elyashiv (who rav kook brought).
      Many others, especially the super anti Zionists, like R Wasserman, the Hungarians all misled their flocks and told them to stay put in Europe.

      The Haredim are showing typical signs of psychological denial. They refuse to accept that their gedolim erred. This is because such a view destroys the mistaken notion of daas Torah infallibility. So they try to blame the zionists in one way or other.
      haredim lost many other souls, in that many frum people lost faith in everything after the conduct of the rabbis in Europe. That also has nothing to do with the secular zionists.

      Delete
    4. You obviously are misled. Rabbi Werssmandel succeeded in saving many many Jewish lives. He was not a dreamer by any means but a tireless activist who saved lives.I know of people who were saved by Rabbi Weissmandel. The Nazis, at one point when they were in need of funds, sold Jews for $1 a head, and Rabbi Weissmandel made a deal of 1 Million dollars for a million Jews. He didn't have the money, so he tried to stall for time and gave a $1,000 deposit supposedly as a test to see if they would give him 1000 Jews, but truthfully he did this to stall as he was working to raise the money. I know of people who were in Bergen Belzen which was divided into 2 sections - those who wee protected because they were of the 1000 whom Rabbi Weissmandel bought, and the other section were unfortunate. You can deny the truth from today till tomorrow but there are people still alive who were of that group. Please, as I said earlier, read what Rabbi Weissmandel wrote and then do your own research, to test the accuracy of his information, before you utter another word. Or are you afraid of what you might find out.

      Delete
    5. there were several projects that weissmandl and Gizi were working on, and if they saved some Jews then kol hakavod.
      However, some money did come thru - I dont know if it went thru Weissmandl or thru the Jewish agency, but did not manage to save the jews. Prof. Bauer also takes issue with WM's extravagant claims. The Jewish agency was not able to pay $1M every day to save Jews in Europe. The nazis had the belief that Zionists controlled all the money supply of the world. Apparently WM also held this belief.
      In any case, I asked you what contribution the satmar rov made to saving jews from europe, and you didnt answer. All you said is that it is wrong to disrespect him. So you agree that the satmar didnt save any jews, but on the contrary caused them to stay put in Hungary?

      Delete
    6. Recipients and PublicityAugust 2, 2013 at 8:48 AM

      Eddie @ July 30, 2013 at 11:53 PM said..."In any case, I asked you what contribution the satmar rov made to saving jews from europe, and you didnt answer. All you said is that it is wrong to disrespect him. So you agree that the satmar didnt save any jews, but on the contrary caused them to stay put in Hungary?"

      Eddie what utter nonsense are you uttering?

      No one could save masses of Jews from anywhere from the late 1920s onwards. No country, not America not Australia, not Britain wanted to take in hundreds of thousand and millions of refugee J E W S (ever heard of the word ANTISEMITISM you have yet to attack antisemites the way you attack Charedi rabbis) anywhere in the world throughout the 1930s already, so you are talking sheer trash as your only goal is to try to trash the Charedim.

      Just how and where do you suppose 500,000 Hungarian Jews could have gone anywhere?

      Hungary was an ally of Nazi Germany under the Horthy regime and they even felt bizarrely "secure" there, and not until about 1944 when Horthy was deposed and the Germans took over was the Holocaust put into action there.

      Remember the actual Holocaust was only put into full action from 1943 onwards when Germany was actually losing the war, Eichman started on his own program to make sure that in spite of losing the war Germany would still kill out the Jews. Everything was done with deception and secrecy by the Nazis, nobody knew the scope of what they planned. You think you would have been smarter than the Nazis? Think again. Only Hashem's miracles saved those who were saved, and nothing else. It was a decree from God that the Jews should be killed, there is no other explanation for a global horror and CHURBAN the worst since the destruction of the two Batei Mikdash.

      The Satmar Rov, like every survivor of the Holocaust, escaped by a miracle. Don't belittle it because it is no small matter. Will you now also criticize God too?

      At the beginning the Hungarian Zionist leader Rudolph Kastner only wanted to save about 1,800 young Jews, but it was actually the Nazis who insisted that he put older people and some notables on the train as sign that they could act "in good faith" and that's how the Satmar Ruv, the Klausenberger Rebbe and some older Jewish Hungarians got DRAGGED on to that pathetic train, and no one really knows why the hell the Nazis allowed that train to go to Switzerland in the first place and what the real motives of any of the involved parties really were -- just read Ben Hecht's well-researched Perfidy that you deride maybe that will give you some insight to the complexities involved.

      Sorry, but you sound like a real idiot when you start blaming Charedi rabbis for things they had no control over and could have done nothing about.

      Delete
  4. Concise ClarificationJuly 30, 2013 at 8:36 PM

    The way you present his dilemma, he is put in a very bad light. In short you say his dilemma was whether to follow the Torah even when it would be uncomfortable for him, or to transgress because of pressure for the people who wouldn't agree.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. this article gives some context to the hesped, and indeed the "gadlus" of Herzl, which even some non- Zionist rabbis recognised.
      http://www.haaretz.com/weekend/2.277/herzl-and-the-rabbis-1.287922

      Delete
    2. You would be surprisedJuly 30, 2013 at 10:21 PM

      Please put this comment here so it isn't missed.

      Eddie, you are an insulated Zionist who has been sold pro-Zionist information exclusively and has never been exposed to any other point of view. You easily conclude that our people have countless flocks of Chelmite fools who follow silly Rabbis who don't posses the wisdom of the smallest member of your group. If you ever come out of your cocoon you might be surprised to learn a thing or two.

      Delete
    3. "you are an insulated Zionist who has been sold pro-Zionist information exclusively and has never been exposed to any other point of view. "
      Funny, this is what the arabists say to me as well, and often it is an antisemitic diatribe.

      "Chelmite fools who follow silly Rabbis who don't posses the wisdom of the smallest member of your group."
      Depends on what you mean by silly. Was Hezekiah a wise man? I think yes. Was he silly i certain acts, like showing all his wealth to his Babylonian visitors? Again, yes.
      So it depends which cocoon you are discussing.
      The Torah didn't whitewash our leaders as not having any silly moments or ideologies. It is somewhere in galus where this trend began, but certainly continues today.
      Remember also, the Talmud says better to live in eretz Yisrael even if it has idolaters, than to live in a frum city in ChuL (or Chelm).

      Another interesting point about Herzl. he was so secular, that he refused to circumcise his son. Sadly, he died at a young age, and his son also. I wonder why, lehavdil, the greatest Jew in history, Moshe, did not circumcise his son, who was saved by the angel of death only by his wife doing the bris? Is there a connection between these two stories?

      Delete
    4. Recipients and PublicityAugust 2, 2013 at 9:03 AM

      Eddie @ July 31, 2013 at 2:09 AM said "The Torah didn't whitewash our leaders as not having any silly moments or ideologies. It is somewhere in galus where this trend began, but certainly continues today....Another interesting point about Herzl. he was so secular, that he refused to circumcise his son. Sadly, he died at a young age, and his son also. I wonder why, lehavdil, the greatest Jew in history, Moshe, did not circumcise his son, who was saved by the angel of death only by his wife doing the bris? Is there a connection between these two stories?"

      Now you are comparing Moshe Rabbeinu with Herzl. Very ingenious. And is Herzl's "Der Judenstad" also the new "Ten Commandments"? You will stop at nothing to compare someone who was very controversial and assimilated like Herzl to the universally accepted Moses, but when was the last time you stopped to compare a great Charedi rabbi to Moses, especially since it is the Charedi rabbi who teaches what Moses is all about? Or do you have the monopoly of who shall and shall not be compared to anyone that Judaism considers great.

      But unlike you, the Torah did not EXCLUSIVELY spend its time ONLY criticizing the ideal Jewish leaders. Avraham, Yitzchak, Yaakov, Moshe, Aron, Yosef, Sara, Rochel Leah, Rivka, Dovid, Shlomo, the Nevi'im all are revered and held in high regard even though they made errors as humans, but they would no doubt be be verbally decimated by you if their names came up as you decimate Charedi rabbis basically with a "take no prisoners" approach never finding any good in the rabbonim but always deriding and shooting at them with your verbal machine gun. But for Herzl and his ilk, like Nordau, you will find wonderful things to say.

      You know Eddie it says kol hamosif gorei'ah and Rabbi Eidensohn has been kind enough to post the eulogy that Rav Kook z"l himself delivered in his wisdom, so why do you have to add more drivel on top of that when it's just overkill and worse, as you use it as usual as a platform to deride the Charedi rabbis that you hate with a passion, just as based on your own words.

      Delete
    5. RAP, you continue in your series of falsehoods. A few examples:

      a) You said Rav Stav was was prog gay, pro reform etc. That is sheke #1.

      b) You said I am a reform bible critic. That is sheker#2

      c) You said I compared Moses to herzl, rather than Moses to a haredi rav. That is sheker #3.

      I used the word lehavdil. Do u know what lehavdil means? Obviously you do, but you continue on your sheker spree.
      Sheker is very unstable, since the Shin sits on a central point and is very wobbly - like your arguments. I suggest you get more grounded, using Emes, which sits on a more stable Aleph.

      My contast between Moshe - who was the greatest Navi and leader of Israel, and lehavdil Herzl, who was so secularised that he refused to even circumise his son (most secular Jews still keep this mitzvah).

      Since you do nto enjoy discussing Torah, I will repeat the analysis. Moshe, for reasons unknown to me, neglected the mitzvah of Milah for hsi son - and was visited by the angel of death - and saved only by his wife who carried otu the mitzvah. Herzl, who was a secular leader, not on par or in any way in the same league as Neviim, Gedolim or religious leaders, refused to do this mitzvah. Now, herzl lived a short life, but so did his son. So making a contrast between 2 different stories is not to say tat the 2 men were the same.
      Mr Rap, usually you are quite a good poster on here, but somethign has lit your fire - and leading you to make ridiculous lies, distortions and falsifications.

      I have no evidence of any greta Rabbis who did not mol their sons, so there is no contrast or comparison to be made.
      On the other hand, we are told that (in Joshua) Am yisrael had not molled their sons, and did so just befor entering Israel.





      Delete
    6. Recipients and PublicityAugust 5, 2013 at 5:43 AM

      To Eddie @ August 2, 2013 at 12:23 PM

      Please stop twisting my words, and please stop putting words in my mouth. This is one of your worst habits as you twist around the words of Chareidi greats, put words in their mouths, and presto, all the Chareidi rabbis come out as "villains". Seems, according toy our logic, I am now in good company with Rav Shach, the Satmar Ruv, Rav Elchonon Wasserman hy"d, Rav Aron Kotler, Rav Hutner, Rav Ovadia Yosef, Lubavitch, Rav Alyashiv, and many more about whom you have yet to show you have any real respect and appreciation for.

      Stop comparing Herzl to Moshe Rabbeinu because it is patently absurd.

      Stop defending Rabbi Stav who was the main reason all the Chareidim united to make sure that he would NOT get elected as Chief Rabbi of anything. Yair Lapid and his ally Naftali Bennett have an ultra-liberal agenda and that is why they were pushing for Rabbi Satv's candicacy, and one of Lapid main agendas is to get "equality" for gays. You put one and one together, like you find it easy to do with Moshe Rabbeinu and Theodor Herzl, and figure out the final result for yourself.

      Delete
  5. Face the Truth-

    "You are not well informed and do not fathom the wickedness of the Zionists. If you read Rabbi M.B. Weissmandel's book - "Min Hameitzar", where he tells, amongst other things, of his trials and tribulations in his tireless efforts to save Jews from the Holocaust, you will see that he relates how he put trust in some of the Zionist leaders trying to receive their aid in his rescue efforts, and that, to his shock, they foiled his plans in order to promote their own agenda."

    Do you know who Rabbi M.B. Weissmandel's right hand woman was? Her name was גיזי פליישמן http://he.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D7%92%D7%99%D7%96%D7%99_%D7%A4%D7%9C%D7%99%D7%99%D7%A9%D7%9E%D7%9F
    and was the head of WIZO http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women%27s_International_Zionist_Organization

    Do you know who organized the 'Rabbis March on Washington'? His name was Peter Bergson aka Hillel Kook- a revisonist zionist.

    Bottom line: There were some very bad Zionists but some very good ones too.

    I suggest that you read http://www.amazon.com/The-Unheeded-Cry-Weissmandl-Holocaust/dp/089906468X (from Artscroll) before making all encompassing wide ranging statements that defy reality.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You would be surprisedJuly 30, 2013 at 10:37 PM

      Of course there are some very good people who are Zionists. I did not make any all encompassing wide ranging statements. I was merely responding to Eddie who speaks nonsense about The Satmar Rav and Rabbi Weissmandel and anyone who isn't Zionist.

      Delete
    2. No, not everyone. The Mir yeshiva, for example accepted visas provided by Warhaftig. the rest didnt.
      R Kotler, as I mentioned either her or not, was a Gadol. while he was he in Lithuania, however, he was influenced by R Elchonon, and hence misled - casuing the deaths of many jews. he escaped and tried to do a Tikkun for these events.
      The satmar and Lubavitcher rebbes, however, were not interested in saving jewish lives, and mocked R Kotler.
      So you see, even in America, the hassidic rebbes were wicked, and stood idly by jewish blood, whilst R Kotler, and Hillel Kook worked night and day to save lives. (Hillel was a cousin or some relation of Rav Kook)

      Delete
    3. Recipients and PublicityAugust 2, 2013 at 9:53 AM

      Eddie @ July 30, 2013 at 11:58 PM said: "R Kotler, as I mentioned either her or not, was a Gadol. while he was he in Lithuania, however, he was influenced by R Elchonon, and hence misled - casuing the deaths of many jews. he escaped and tried to do a Tikkun for these events. The satmar and Lubavitcher rebbes, however, were not interested in saving jewish lives, and mocked R Kotler. So you see, even in America, the hassidic rebbes were wicked, and stood idly by jewish blood, whilst R Kotler, and Hillel Kook worked night and day to save lives. (Hillel was a cousin or some relation of Rav Kook)"

      Okay, so now let's just count how many times you stab at the Charedi rabbis: 1 Rav Kotler was misled; 2 Rav Wasserman was a "meisis umeidiach" he did the "misleading" according to you; 3 Satmar Ruv did not care about Jewish lives; 4 Same for the Lubavitchers; 5 In America ALL Chasidic Rebbes are "wicked" according to you they did not care about Jewish blood -- all in such masterful brief cut throat wording.

      Where did you learn this stuff?

      What motivates you when you hide how the Reform and secular and Zionist leadership were the real ones standing on the sidelines doing nothing to save Jewish lives.

      The only real heroes are the SILENT heroes the hundreds of thousands of anonymous men and women who were in the Allied armies and actually fought the Nazis and their Axis allies.

      Delete
    4. Recipients and PublicityAugust 2, 2013 at 9:56 AM

      To Eddie @ July 30, 2013 at 11:58 PM

      I have in front of me a copy of Perfidy, here is just one segment pp 19-221 that tells you about the famous Chaim Weizmann whom you have yet to mention let alone criticize:

      "...Chaim Weizmann...first president of Israel...in August, 1937 Dr. Weizmann, as leader of World Zionism, addressed a Zionist convention in London...Of the six million Jews who were in a few years to be exterminated by the Germans, Dr. Weizmann...had this to say: I told the British Royal Commission that the hopes of Europe's six million Jews were centered on emigration. I was asked, 'Can you bring six million Jews to Palestine?' I replied, 'No. . . . The oldest ones will pass. They will bear their fate or they will not. They were dust, economic and moral dust in a cruel world. . . .Only a branch shall survive. . . . They had to accept it . . . If they feel and suffer they will find the way -beachareth hajamin [sic]- in the fullness of time . . . [(Footnote 4: The New Judea...XIII (April, 1937)]...'beachareth hajamin' [sic], meant that 'When the Messiah comes, all the Dead will be revived.'...in 1939 at the outbreak of the war, Dr. Weizmann, the uncrowned king of Jewry, announced he was taking a recess from all Jewish activities . He was going to concentrate on the scientific war effort...Dr. Weizmann's Anglophilism never wavered to his death [Footnote 6: Weizmann hung on to his status as a citizen of Great Britain until a week after taking office as Israel's president...] There were those who noted that Weizmann's speech to the World Zionist Congress proclaiming the Jews as the 'dust of Europe' was virtually a plan to abandon them in their danger..."

      Now who is on record of not caring about Jewish blood here. Start distributing the blame at least. Turn your ire on the likes of Weizmann and quit saying well oh well he wasn't a "rabbi" just a "bureaucrat" -- what bull, read Perfidy and find out that the head American Reform rabbi Stephen Wise (born in Badapest yet!) who had access to FDR in the White House was working harder than Weizmann to keep the six million "Ostyidden" out of America.

      Ships with refugees were sent back by US authorities and Orthodox rabbis were denied access because Stephen Wise told FDR to ignore them.

      You think a guy like Stephen Wise was "tzadik" and wanted anything to do with the Satmar Rebbe and would want Satmar to grow in America or anywhere?

      So Eddie let's see you start denouncing famous Reform rabbis and Zionist leaders with the same vehemence and spite and anger and determination that you apply to Charedi rabbis and you will have maybe some credibility because right now you are just on wide side, the Charedi-bashing bandwagon. Why?

      Delete
    5. You quote stephen wise and weizmann.
      Stephen wise was reform, and a shaigetz. I mean, quite apart form being reform, he was also a sheigetz. But, contrary to your assertion, he is not my "rebbe", and he is not on par with Gedolei torah. America turned back ships, and didnt bomb the railways, same with britain. So who says that wise was a tzadik? I never suggested anything of the sort. Are u putting words into my mouth?

      Regarding weizmann, I don't know what he actually said or in what context. Did he try to save jews or not? The book you cite quotes him as estimating the number of casualties - not saying that we can save that many but refuse.

      I have to seek more evidence about what Weizman's positon was. Before the 6 day war, the Generals approached r goren, and estimated 10s of thousands dead in the war, chas v shalom, and were looking for mass graveyards. That is an estimate, but it does not mean they planned to have that many killed.
      So it is quite possible that weizman was speaking about logistics.

      The previosu psot you make some comments:

      A mesit is one who leads people to idolatry. So you are are misappropriating a Torah term to help your case. So if you claim to be Orthodox, then plese use correct terminology.
      R Waserman was offered visas from R Warhaftig. In fact, Warhaftig went to many yeshivas and offered agricultural visas for yeshivas and students to go to eretz Yisrael. He was rebuffed by many roshei yeshiva.

      The word wicked was borrowed from the previous poster, who was saying that about the Zionists. To me, the refusal to save their yeshiva students when visas were offered, is a wicked or cruel act. Perhaps you see it as a fine, compassionate kiddush Hashem. But you then place yurself in the same dilemma as another poster did. If you claim that savign Jews was a mitzvah, then you cannot say that these rabbis did the mitzvah, since they refused.
      On the other hand, if you say that doing nothing to save jews was a mitzvah, then you are also destroying your own claims against Wise. You obviously do not see the logical point here, since you are acting out of emotion.

      was refusing the visas that Zerach Warhaftig had secured a cruel act or one of hesed?

      Delete
    6. Recipients and PublicityAugust 5, 2013 at 5:54 AM

      To Eddie @ August 2, 2013 at 12:43 PM

      You speak in extremes then you get all defensive and "reasonable" when you don't like a counter-argument.

      You could do yourself a great favor when trying to make points -- NOT to do it at the expense of verbally "killing off" Chareidi greats, because all that shows is that you your agenda is not so much the argument you are making -- but that you have an even larger agenda, pretty obvious by now, of demolishing the status and state of all the great Chareidi rabbis, the ones Chareidim refer to as their Gedolim, and for that you have dedicated reams of cut-throat zippy comments.

      When it suits you, and when called on, you seemingly retract and withdraw into a defensive shield of loner commentaries and supposed logical arguments as you try to move to the high ground and put down anyone who questions you. But your tactics, strategy and goals always remain the same, to verbally shoot down and smash down Charedi Gedolim.

      So if you can, drop the above, which is a big question, and just post questions and responses in good faith and have discussions without resorting to cut-throat blogging of EVERY Chareidi Gadol that comes you way, you will then have some credibility, until then you are just a person with a big metaphoric hatchet in your hands ready to chop off the metaphoric heads of Chareidi gedolim as they come your way.

      You need to stop that and tone down and become more even-handed.

      Delete
  6. You would be surprisedJuly 30, 2013 at 10:40 PM

    And, in all truth, I was referring to the founders.

    ReplyDelete
  7. A few facts about Herzl.

    He was ready to take Uganda instead of Israel.

    He fully supported Max Nordau's marriage to an Xtian woman.

    In the diary of Hertzel, page 14, he writes a way to solve the problem of anti-Semitism was to speak to the head priest of Vienna to get an appointment with the Pope, to make a mass conversion of all the Jews of Austria to Catholicism. He continues: "It should be done on a Sunday, in the middle of the day, with music, and pride, publicly. We are the last generation that held on to the faith of our for-fathers. The conversion would be in St. Stephen's Cathedral." (How could you honor a Jew that wanted to abolish Judaism?)

    In the bi-weekly diary, "Temurah", no.2, pg. 12-13, "I didn't circumsize my son Hans, and this will bring the Geula closer."

    Ibid. "Simple goyim are better than Rabbis, and the highest are the goyish priests."

    Diary, page 16: "Antisemitism helps to build this kind of jew, Education that will bring to assimilation."

    Diary, page 68: "An idea rose on my heart to bring on anti-Semitism and to obliterate Jewish wealth.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, these are from before he started doing Teshuva. He was an assimilationist, and was seeking a solution to antisemitism. He first thought that by mixing and converting, then hatred would end. However, his turning point was when he saw the Dreyfus trial. Just like Jonah realised he cannot escape his duties, so did herzl realise that he cannot escape being a jew.

      As for Uganda - this was to be a temporary haven. Now, even in this case, in retrospect you can see his wisdom and foresight.

      Delete
    2. "He fully supported Max Nordau's marriage to an Xtian woman."

      Max Nordau left Judaism when he was 15, and assimilated, like many others. He died in Paris in 1923.
      Remember, in Ezra's time, many people had also intermarried, with the nations forbidden by the Torah. Herzl was not on the same level as Ezra, and could not get answers direct from Above to his questions.

      So this point is really moot. Assimilation did not begin with Herzl, but many years before. Herzl, and also Nordau, saw that this was not a solution. since they changed direction, even if a short distance, they still turned round 180 degrees. Thus, even lefi halacha, they were baalei teshuva.
      We had a debate here a few months back, on the anti-Zionist BT, DeHaan. Dehaan was spokesman for R Sonnenfeld of the Eda.
      He was not shomer mitzvot either, since he was a well known feigele and pedophile.
      So - what is the nakfa mina, where R Kook says hesped for Herzl, and R Sonnenfeld says hesped for De Gaan?
      Admittedly, Dehann was shomer shabbes at this point, but was still chayev mitah.
      Now, Stan pointed out that many frum people name their sons Yaakov in memory of DeHaan. I believe that some name their sons after Herzl - or בִּנְיָמִין זְאֵב.

      Delete
    3. Recipients and PublicityAugust 2, 2013 at 10:01 AM

      "Eddie @ July 31, 2013 at 12:16 AM said..."Yes, these are from before he started doing Teshuva."

      You are making things up. Herzl did not do "teshuva" in the Halachic sense. You are applying Halachic Torah notions when it suits you to the wrong cases. There is a name for that kind of thing.

      Delete
    4. I said he started doing teshuva. So he didnt actually do vidui, but he made a return, from being pro-assimialtion, to being anti-assimilation. What you neglect to mention, is that I also said we cannot judge him, since eh was born totally irreligious.
      You do agree that someone who is born frum, and even becomes slightly less observant is in trouble, whilst the opposite for a secular person, will get him into olam haba?

      Delete
    5. Recipients and PublicityAugust 5, 2013 at 6:04 AM

      Eddie @ August 2, 2013 at 12:47 PM said "I said he started doing teshuva."

      Please stop applying Halachic Torah notions and concepts and parameters to totally secular subjects. Herzl had NOTHING to do with teshuva. He did not think in those terms, he was not aware of them and did not care about them. He was a secular Jew who was shocked by the Dreyfus Affair and decided that the Jews needed an homeland of their own. Does that "equal" teshuva"? Now you are making your own things up.

      But there is something else that is troubling about your overly kindly generoius view of Herzl that he was doing something "noble" your words take on a very understanding and sympathetic tone, while when you focus ob Charedi rabbis, one can actually "feel" you changing gears as you pull that verbal machine trigger to fire your verbal attacks at them.

      How about you start finding a few nice things to say about any Chareidi Gadol BEFORE you start to tear them apart for the perceived sins you wants to lay at their feet and around their necks. Stop creating a world where people who are secular and died secular are "heroes" while people who are great rabbonim never get a chance to redeem themselves in your extensive pantheon of rabbinic villains.

      Delete
  8. I see we agree on some things:

    The Satmar Rav was a tzaddik yesod olam. It especially irks me when people disparage him in the name of 'ahavat chinam'. I wish people would be more like R Shlomo Aviner shlita who is a talmid muvhak of R TY Kook

    http://www.ravaviner.com/search?q=satmar

    "Chasidei Satmar and Neturei Karta


    "Q: How should we relate to the Chasidei Satmar and Neturei Karta who participated in the Holocaust Denial Conference in Iran?


    A: They are confused and do not represent Satmar Chasidim (One of the current Satmar Rebbes, Ha-Rav Yekutiel Yehudah Teitelbaum, said about these members of Neturei Karta who visited Iran: "These people take the pure name of Satmar in vain! Our Holy Rabbi, the 'Vayoel Moshe' [the first Satmar Rebbe, and his uncle], exaggeratedly said that they cause more damage than the Zionists themselves. We are working to cast off all these extreme sects. When these went to Iran, the Satmar Beit Din issued a harsh letter against them." Mishpachah Magazine. 29 Kislev 5773, p. 24). "

    See link for more examples.


    2) I did not come to my view either by imbibing propaganda . I've checked out all sides, and ended up an 'Agudist' who doesn't belive the State of Israel is the 'Atchalta D'geualah' OR the work of the 'sitra achra'.

    I spent one Shavous learning 'maamar shalosh sh'vuos' (Not that one has anything to with the other. But the SR manages to find a Maharsha that says the 3 oaths are prerequisites for Mattan Torah, or something to that effect. I was also learning Pesachim at the time, and the SR starts with the chiyuv to destroy chametz and leads right into how terrible the zionists are that they don't destroy churches in Israel but instead actually take care of them.)

    2a) It's worth quoting R Aaron Rakeffet-Rothkoff
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aaron_Rakeffet-Rothkoff#Noteworthy_Quotations

    "You can not be a good Zionist unless you know Vayoel Moshe by heart. Once you know Vayoel Moshe by heart, with Al HaGeula Ve’Al Hatemura…then you can be a Zionist. Until then you’re a faker."

    3) "And, in all truth, I was referring to the founders."

    Such as R Yackov Yitzchak Reines? R Tzvi Kalicher? Or only the secular ones?

    ReplyDelete
  9. Recipients and PublicityJuly 31, 2013 at 9:38 AM

    The problem with Eddie is that he, so to speak, puts words into the mouths of famous Charedi rabbis and he also acts as the final witness, judge, jury and executioner of all the famous rabbis he does not like.

    In front of Eddie, the Charedi rabbis can never get a fair trial because the cards are stacked against them since witness/judge/juror/executioner Eddie has the "monopoly" on the facts and he can therefore bear (false) witness if he wants to, judge (falsely) as he wishes, adjudicate as he sees fit, and then execute them with his cruel words as he puts all the greats of Charedi Jewry in front of his one-man verbal execution squad and fires away at at will with his incendiary words until none are left standing.

    It is all quite comical to watch. For a person who is obviously well-read and even learned on so many worldly, Judaic and Torah topics to be so PREJUDICED against anything with the "scent of Charedi" to it and so totally incapable of being OBJECTIVE while fighting adamantly to prove that he, and only he, and none else but he, know what the truth is about the greatest Charedi rabbis. The Satmar Rov, Lubavitch, Rav Aron Kotler, Rav Elchonon Wasserman hy"d, Rav Shach, and many more, few have any true Torah value in his eyes. He would love to see all their followers come over to his way of wishful thinking.

    Note how he tippy-toes and is careful NOT to attack Rav Moshe Shternbuch who he knows is held in high regard by the owner of this blog, as well as not saying much to insult the memory of Rav Moshe Feinstein who is also someone the owner of this blog regards very highly. That way Eddie can stay out of trouble and be in the "good graces" of the blog owner as he gets in blow after blow against one Charedi leader after another, and since most of them are dead and cannot defend themselves he can just do as he pleases.

    Eddie, wake up, people are getting tired of your anti-Charedi tirades!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Actually , I have on a couple of occasions offered critique of R Shternbuch.

      let me also make clear, that I am not saying Herzl was a kosher or frum yid. I would not be able to eat in his house, or even visit it on shabbat. The point about Herzl is that he was a great political scientist. Just like Einstien was and is the greatest physicist, so Herzl was a great political thinker.
      If a doctor who finds a cure to genetic disease, cancer, viruses etc, but he is not frum, but a heretic, is it permitted to benefit from his discoveries? Now Herzl is the same, except that he may have played a major role in the ingathering of exiles. The Navi speaks of Khourosh being the moshiach - a persian goy!

      Not everything with a scent of haredi is the target of my attacks. Also, I attack RZ people if i think they talk rubbish, as well as Sephardic, (I am sephardic).
      Now, I didnt say that these gedolim didn't have any true torah value. they had massive torah value.
      it is also "humorous" to read your list. Since half of them were at odds with the other half. I heard that the Rebbe of Lubavitch put a litvish gadol in Herem, for attacking the previous Lubavitcher rebbe.
      Also, despite your fine oratory, you haven't justified the acts of Satmar or R' Wasserman in preventing Jews from escaping from Europe (although you are ready to accuse kastner for allegedly not saving as many as he could).

      Delete
    2. Why is R&P response in bold letters while none of the others' are?

      "Eddie, wake up, people are getting tired of your anti-Charedi tirades"........SORRY R&P there are many Eddie fans on this site!!!

      Delete
    3. Recipients and PublicityAugust 1, 2013 at 5:14 AM

      yoni @ August 1, 2013 at 12:35 AM said..."........SORRY R&P there are many Eddie fans on this site!!!"

      Sure, Yair Lapid and Naftali Bennett also have lots of fans on this site, and they share Eddie's anti-Charedi views and almost exclusive Charedi-bashing habits.

      Eddie is really NOT "pro" anything in JUdaism as far as anyone can tell he is basically ANTI almost everything and will arguemnts that he seems to back something just to attack the main target he has chosen to verbally annihilate.

      In the past posters on this blog, such as the famous "Roni" were pro-Tropper it was possible to have pro and counter debates with them. At times Eddie comes across as entirely anti-Orthodox and even anti-religious, he is obviously stifling himself when he gives the impression that he likes the MO or RZ rabbis that he often shows he dislikes but he uses them as useful foils against the Charedi rabbis whom he basically irrationally hates with a near fanatical passion.

      No one can recall when he last gave a decent fair review of ANY Charedi rov. In fact the bigger the Charedi rabbi under the microscope, the bigger will be Eddie's attacks against that rabbi.

      Basically Eddie's methods are slash and burn and move around quickly so that he not get pinned down on any topic too long. He has a data base of knowledge of Charedi rabbis, and what he thinks is all the alleged "dirt" against them and all the time throws it at them like rotten fruit hitting the fan that comes splattering back or worse like a verbal machine gun mowing down multiple targets. The only other person online who acts like this is Shmraya Rosenberg who runs the "Failed Messiah" blog who is also irrationally anti-Charedi and will never post any scandles among the non-Orthodox. Try convincing him to be "objective" about anything to do with Orthodoxy and see how far you get, that is the same modus operandi of Eddie unfortunately.

      If you are a fan of Eddie what does that say about you? Nothing good basically.

      At this point I have grave concerns. I am not sure what motivates him and who backs him to spend so much time SHOOTING DOWN the topics and rabbis that this blog respects. You know, there was once a guy by the name of Tzemach Atlas, He at least had a brilliant mind and he wrote cogently and powerfully about topics that ran counter to the Charedi/Chabad view. He shared the same goals maybe as Eddie, but Tzemach Atlas had respect for his topics. Unfortunately he got tired of running his blog and shut it down. It was a shame because he posted brilliant stuff. Unlike Eddie who just squats on this blog whose views he hates and fires away with hostile posts like a jumping jack citing this that and the other to knock down Charedi things.

      He admits that he does not like the notion of "Daas Torah" and you can see that the this blog is called "Daas/t Torah" and it seems that Eddie has devoted himself to destroying this blog's ideas and its foundations. I still suspect that someone is setting him up to do this job of the character assassination of any and all Charedi rabbis since he NEVER has anything nice or good or objective to say about them.

      At times Eddie has shown he has the same approach to characters in the Tanach that he knocks with the same vehemence.

      Eddie just does not like YIDDISHKEIT because he has another VERY GOYISH interpretation of it. Sorry that is just based on his comments.

      Is he Reform, or Conservative or a just a secular scholar of Judaism who buys into the Biblical Criticism school that universities train but certainly not any YESHIVAS, from his words he seems to be all of the aforementioned and maybe something else, why else would he spend so much time attacking, biting, undermining, accusing? What do you say?

      Delete
    4. RAP "At times Eddie has shown he has the same approach to characters in the Tanach that he knocks with the same vehemence. "

      "Is he Reform, or Conservative or a just a secular scholar of Judaism who buys into the Biblical Criticism school that universities train.."


      Please cite my alleged attacks on characters of the Tanach - since I do not recall having done so.

      As for bible criticism, RAP, you have sadly entered the realm of fiction. I do rely on the Bible, but as a source of Nevuah. get it? My question on Daas Torah is to have a clear definition of it - not an elastic one.
      Ironically, on this particlar subject, I did write about King Yehoshaphat in the past. Yehoshafat was a Tzaddik, but his errors, as recounted in the Bible (which perhaps you do not accept) was that he left the high places, and he made union with Ahazia, who was an idol worshiper.
      So this is presumably a basis for not making a union with idolaters. So the question is are secular Zionists mamash idolaters or not?
      However, Yehoshaphat had an advantage that we do not have in this era. There were neviim who spoke directly to Hashem, who instructed him that he would win wars without lifting a finger.

      Another lie that RAP tells is that I wish to attack and assasinate all charedi Rabbis' characters.

      This is sheker. You obviously did not see that I have written many times how great the Hatam Sofer was. Or perhaps he wasn't a real haredi?

      As for Chabad, I attacked 2 main areas, or perhaps 3. Idolising their rebbes (which R Kotler also opposed), Moshiach, which many people opposed. And the rational/mystical debate, where I do accept that I am in the minority.

      It may also slip your attention that my critique of R' Kotler was only regarding his oppostion in Lithuania to leave, when visas were offered. Even though he was opposed to yeshiva + University combinations, I have not attacked him for that, since I accept that as an authentic orthodox position.

      This debate, if taken back into its halachic precedents, boils down to 2 viewpoints. The Sifre - where we are told to accept what a Rav says even if they tell you left = right etc. And the Yerushalmi, which rejects this view, and says how can you accept such an absurdity.

      I believe the notion of Daas Torah is more aligned with the Sifri, whilst my worldview is more aligned with the Yerushalmi. the Yerushalmi doe should of the authority of Sanhedrin of course, so it can hardly be caleld a Reform or conservative talmud. Rap, you seem to imply that the Sifri is Orthodox, and the Yerushalmi is reform?

      Delete
    5. Recipients and PublicityAugust 2, 2013 at 10:30 AM

      Eddie @ August 1, 2013 at 2:49 PM said "I believe the notion of Daas Torah is more aligned with the Sifri, whilst my worldview is more aligned with the Yerushalmi. the Yerushalmi doe should of the authority of Sanhedrin of course, so it can hardly be caleld a Reform or conservative talmud."

      This is classical Eddie. Call him on his anti-Charedi tirades and he will always find a way to defend himself by taking it to the next level of twisted "scholarship." Now he is claiming that his whole outlook and premise of his entire Weltanschauung is that he goes according to the Talmud Yerushalmi of all things while everyone else must hold by the Sifri. Not just that but he says that to confront him of being Reform is to call the Yerushalmi "Reform" so now Eddie= Yerushalmi, how grandiose is that? Perhaps it''s also more than a hint that Eddie is in fact a Reform rabbi/rebbetzin?

      What a good joke that all is. Can you just imagine if we could incarnate all the Chachomim and Rabbonim, the holy Tannaim, Ammoraim, Meforshim (Eddie you do hold that the Tannaim and Ammoraim were holy don't you??) of the Talmud Yerushalmi and ask them to read what Eddie has declared about some of the greatest scholars of our time such as Rav Aron Kotler (whom Eddie belittles as he throws him a bone) or Rav Elchonon Wasserman hy"d (whom Eddie relentlessly attacks, not enough that the Nazis murdered Rav Elchonon whose works are learned in every Litvish yeshiva) or the Satmar Ruv, Rav Yoel Teitelbaum who has authored vast scholarly tracts studied by tens of thousands of Chasidim and non-Chasidim alike, or how many times has Eddie knocked Rav Ovadia Yosef shlit"a the leading Posek and leader of Sefardi Jewry, or made fun of Rav Elyashiv the acknowledged leader of Torah Jewry and master of kol HaTorah kula, or smeared Rav Yosef Chaim Zonnenfeld, Rav Hutner, and the list goes on and on, all of them knew Yerushalmi's like we read the back of cereal boxes, do you think they would now come out, read up on Eddie's judgements on ANYTHING and say, you know what, this Eddie he really goes like the Yerushalmi on understanding Daas Torah, we can't wait to go to his "shiurim" and be in his yeshiva?

      Wake up Eddie, you are not fooling anyone!!!!!

      Eddie I am saying it point blank, you are not playing with an open deck, and you hide your agenda, but by now it is clear from the viciousness of your anti-Charedi tirades that are NOT just about this or that aspect of "Daas Torah" -- and from the level of your stubbornness you are maybe, just maybe, being hired by someone to come and destroy all the good work that this blog has done and is still doing.

      Delete
    6. RAP"Perhaps it''s also more than a hint that Eddie is in fact a Reform rabbi/rebbetzin?"

      This is funny. OK, Rap, I am a reform rebbetzin, and I preside of Congregation Recipients and Publicity.

      Joking aside, I missed the above post by you, and it is hysterical, in more ways than one.

      Now, I mention a serious debate between the Sifri and the Yerushalmi, but unable to discuss it you use subterfuge. You say that all the rabbis on my alleged list know the Yerushalmi backwards. whether that is the case, is open to question.

      Nor have you really understood why i have criticized some rabbis and in what context, and to what degree.
      Perhaps your mindset is that anyone you disagree with can be called Amalek, as was the case with Cohen of Porat Yosef.

      That is not what I have alleged.

      My critique of R' Yosef, was that he didn't censure his poodle S. Cohen. He did , however, say that the claim itself is a ridiculous one - ie to label all kippot srugot as Amalek.

      Note well - I have never attacked R Yosef because he clashed with r Goren. That is because r Yosef held a genuine position there in halacha. You don't get it. I would say I am a devotee of r Goren. But i am not attacking people for opposing his decisions per se. R Elyashiv i criticized because he was nto consistent on the position of annulling geirus. R Yosef was consistent.

      Now, perhaps your view is that we cannot argue with someone greater than us. That seems to be your bottom line. That isn't a torah line tho, it is a charedi one. Now, you are not opposed to gays because it is forbidden in the Torah, but because your rebbes make protest at gay pride marches etc. I pointed out this hypocrisy when i criticised the very unusual support that R Sonnenfeld gave to a feigele when it was poitically expedient. Again, I did not criticism him for being opposed to R Kook's views.

      So you cannot distinguish between my critiques and what you project onto me.

      Now, what you are implying, or asking, is for me to attack reform because of their gay stance, but be silent when a large sector of orthodoxy has gay pride in deHaan, and name people in his memory. You want to have your non kosher cake and eat it.

      How exactly can I destroy the good work of this blog?
      You make a number of ludicrous claims, yet when it comes to real discussion, you just ramble on without getting to the depth of the discussion.

      Daas Torah today is directly related to the debate between the Sifri and the Yerushalmi. But you cannot say a single word about either, other than platitudes about how many followers Satmar have, that Steinsaltz edition is now being translated into arabic, etc.

      Re: R Aharon Kotler, if saying he made a mistake in Europe is belittling him then you have problems. His work in America was sheer gadlus. Again you fail to grasp the irony of your position -which is modelled on your post about Dov Lipman, who you think has united haredim.

      You are taking a unified defensive position about the Gedolim in America, for examle, even though there ws no unity. My critique of R Joseph Schneerson was that he was the man who belittled R Kotler. R Kotler did a huge mitzvah in america, saving lives, but Schneerson snr mocked him , saying it's not important to save lives. of course, since Gedolim can do no wrong, then u don't se a problem in that. Perhaps you do not see a problem in him, and Schneerson jr. claiming to be moshiach, to be the Ein sof incarnate, etc.

      If I disagree with 0.1% of what r Kotler said, you are taking it as disagreeing with 100% of what he said.
      Now, r Kotler criticised the psycho claims , neo sabbatian tendencies of Lubavitch, but for your Lipman-Unity ideology you are now covering this up.






      Delete
    7. Seems to little ole me in the holy land that EDDIE and R&P, both have an entire agenda at hand that is unknown to the occasional visitors to this site.

      You both are creative thinkers, outspoken and aggressive in ideas, and 'out of the box' for the normative MO or Charedi life. With success in the boxing match, sima irhakodesh

      Delete
    8. My critique of R' Yosef, was that he didn't censure his poodle S. Cohen. He did , however, say that the claim itself is a ridiculous one - ie to label all kippot srugot as Amalek.

      You seriously do not understand how things work in the Sephardi world. The Roshei Yeshivot of Porat Yosef(either of them) do not answer to Rav Ovadiah Yosef. They do not follow the opinions of Rav Ovadiah Yosef. Any respect they have for Rav Ovadiah Yosef is due to his learning, and they consider his opinion as being advisory only on most things, though they do give him free reign on Shas, because he is a great political thinker.

      Not only can't Rav Ovadiah censure Rav Kohen with any kind of authority, he wouldn't. He would be worried about the ramifications and causing a split at what is obviously an inconvenient time within the Sephardi world.

      Delete
    9. "Not only can't Rav Ovadiah censure Rav Kohen with any kind of authority, he wouldn't. He would be worried about the ramifications and causing a split at what is obviously an inconvenient time within the Sephardi world."

      Is that an admission that R Cohen was clearly behaving ina disgraceful manner, causing a huge Hillul hashem?
      After all, they say even a talmid hacham with a stain on his close is liable to onesh mavet - this filth coming from the Rosh Yeshiva's mouth is much worse.
      Let us just imagine, if chas v'shalom someone said this about another ethnicity, everyone would be up in arms.

      Delete
    10. Recipients and PublicityAugust 5, 2013 at 6:35 AM

      To Eddie @ August 2, 2013 at 4:03 PM and @ EddieAugust 4, 2013 at 12:20 AM

      There used to be an old song, with lyrics that went "it's not what you, but the way that you say it: it's not what you do, but the way that you do it..." and you cannot have credibility with serious readers if you reduce every critique that you have of Charedi Gedolim to verbal chopped meat or worse. That is your problem.

      Imagine if you were a sports commentator and you spoke about the faults of even the greatest players and teams in the way that you speak of Gedolei Yisroel and yet you know full well that the sports players and the Gedolei Yisroel are held in high esteem by their fans or followers, faults and all (after all, people are only human). What such verbal attacks would mean is that you are not in fact trying to be OBJECTIVE and reasonable with them, certainly NOT that you "love" the players and the game, but that you are either backing some other unknown team or worse you are actually actively trying to undermine and destroy the entire game by attacking its rules and and paradigms, fifth columnists style.

      In politics there are agent provocateurs who are sent out into opposing countries feigning to be "part" of an opposing society and of that society's discourse, but in fact are committed to tearing down and destroying that opposing country down to its very roots. That is how you come across when you attack every tenet and fiber of what the Charedi world views as IMPORTANT let alone HOLY.

      Say someone hated soccer and then went on a famous soccer-loving blog with a knowledge of the game, all the key players and famous games of the past and then as each player's name came up, and episodes from the past came up for discussion you proceed to talk not as a FAN (by now that is obvious, you are no fan of this blog and what it is purporting to achieve) but rather you went about slicing up everything the blog holds dear, by "citing" that you have "sources" for this and that that are just utter rubbish for anyone who knows how to learn, while it is clear as daylight you are playing a not-so-devious-game-by-now, asking for "sources" when challenged, and when not, just proceed to post cut-throat vicious, demoralizing and hateful and hurtful comments that berate, belittle, besmirch, bemoan, begrudge and just chop up and cut down all the main tenets and heroes of the game. Look at how you treat Rav Yosef Chaim Zonnenfeld. Is that normal? No one knows what the true story is with De Haan. It is the least part of Rav Yosef Chaim Zonnenfeld's life in any case. You smear him with mud. That is precisely what you are doing.

      You are creating your own religion. It is not Charedi Judaism. It is not Religious Zionism. It is not Modern Orthodoxy. It is not Chasidism. Is it Christianity? Reform Judaism? or just plain Anarchism? University perspective? What it is only you know, but it is NOT something that is taught in any Orthodox community. Especially what is NOT taught is that you spend your time full-time attacking Chareidi greats. Someone like Shmarya on his "Failed Messiah" blog does it because he had a very big fall-out with Chabad. Ok, so one can understand that he is driven by a sad experience, but what makes you tick in the same way is still not clear? You feint in the direction of pro-Orthodoxy or neo-Orthodoxy when challenged but by now it is 1,000% clear you hate hate Chareidim and pretty much all Orthodoxy. It is not amusing. Very sad in fact. Don't you have another hobby?

      Delete
    11. Eddie I just want to state I clearly agree with RaP. You have raised important questions - but the you way of doing it conveys the impression you are primarily interested in destroying the reputation and status of chareidi gedolim. You have already reached judgment regarding their "crimes" and your task is to educate the "unfortunate masses" who still "mistakenly" respect them.

      This "When did you stop beating your wife approach" is really not helping sincere discourse and seems more directed at a hit and run approach of scoring points by constantly raising new "crimes" whenever you are answered regarding your claims.

      I clearly acknowledge your sincerity in your posts - but am strongly questioning the value of your way of "raising issues for discussion."

      Delete
    12. OK, DT, I understand your point, I will try to rethink and examine my approach - very often we "think aloud" so i must see where my thoughts are coming from, and if I am writing them correctly or not Thank you.

      Delete
    13. RAp - I do not hate 1000% or 100% or 10% the Haredim.

      Let us come from the starting point of the stature of a Gadol b'Torah, obviously very high. In fact, in orthodox view it is the highest stature of all.
      The problem, as i see it, and correct me if I am wrong, is that this adulation can become total and absolute, tot he point of, chas v'shalom idolatry. Before you jump to conclusions - the Ohr sameaach said there was a danger of Moses being idolised by Am Yisrael, and that is why he was not allowed into Israel. Now I am directly comparing gedolei Torah with Moses. Is the idea to reach the point where even Moses was not appropriate to be? So , whilst you accuse me of various religions, i am making the distinction between Judaism and Christianity, and a Rav vs the Pope.

      Next, on Herzl - perhaps we would agree that he had reached the 49th degree of tumah, and was pushing to the 50th, i.e. total spiritual death, by assimilation and conversion. Now, by reversing that, and bringing an anti conversion, anti assimilation agenda, as well as return to Israel, and rebuilding the temple (although this was going to be humanitarian temple), he improved his level of tumah - perhaps to the 40th or 20th or even 1st or 2nd. That is teshuva. It is nto for you or any rabbi to judge whether soemoen makes teshuva or hwo effective it is. that is for G-d. Rap, drop you arrogance of pseudo prophesy and alleged G-dly knowledge of matters. It is not your role to judge someone in olam haemet.

      If a Gadol b'Torah is on the 49th level of Kedusha, but drops even 1 level, as R' Nachman of Breslov said, the tzaddik is still a Tzaddik, and the sin is still a sin.

      I am not saying that Gedolim ar no longer gedolim, but I am saying that this idea of papal infallibility is not fooling anyone, or actually perhaps it is falling a lot of people.

      I don't see why you think I am smearing R' Sonnefeld. I am pointing out a contradiction. Perhaps your reaction is that you cannot accept the contradiction, since it shatters your papal view of gedolim. R Sonnenfeld was a gadol, on par with Rav Kook (without saying one is greater than the other). My point is that his position about Zionism was inconsistent. Since he forbade cooperation with secularists, then it would be inconsistent for him to see fit to cooperate with a menuval. Why is that a smear? It is a logical argument. It is like catching out Amnon Yizthak
      with an iphone, whilst he is holding parties to destroy tvs and smartphones.

      Indeed, RAP, to use your own language, when the Tropper case hit the fan, certain Gedolim who were associated with him and EJF were being heavily criticised on this blog, including by yourself. So , again , you have to be consistent.


      There is one more issue. Rap, how would you react if someone was to call all haredim Amalek? You would probably go ballistic. In fact , since you already have gone ballistic, then perhaps you would go nuclear.
      Yet, it is quite alright for a Rosh Yeshiva, who is haredi, to say that about about Kipa Sruga?
      This lunacy and fanaticism is a uniquely haredi creation. And I don't believe it was created in the past few months.




      Delete
    14. @RAp "You are creating your own religion. It is not Charedi Judaism. It is not Religious Zionism. It is not Modern Orthodoxy. It is not Chasidism. Is it Christianity? Reform Judaism? or just plain Anarchism? University perspective? "

      Do you accept that the Torah has a system of korbanot?

      Do you accept that some of these are for shogegot?

      Do you accept that the highest legal authority within Judaism, the Sanhedrin, was not immune to error? Do you further accept that in such cases, they had to bring special korbanot?
      Do you accept that there is a mesechet called Horayot in the Talmud (both bavli and Yerushalmi)?

      Do you accept that there is a section called Shogegot in the Rambam's Yad?

      Are any of these part of the new religion you accuse me of creating?

      Now, the weakness or circularity in your argument is that when I do bring Torah sources, you say "this is typical Eddie, he brings sources to back up his arguments, and then says if we oppose hi, we oppose the sources".

      Whether or not Horayot it taught in some yeshivas is not my problem, that does not make it an Unorthodox sefer. Perhaps you could try getting it banned, since it dispels the concept of rabbinic Infallibility.

      Delete
    15. Recipients and PublicityAugust 6, 2013 at 9:00 AM

      Eddie @ August 5, 2013 at 1:13 PM and Eddie @ August 5, 2013 at 2:39 PM said: "RAp - I do not hate 1000% or 100% or 10% the Haredim."

      RaP: You lie. Yes yo do do hate them. Just review all your words.

      "Let us come from the starting point of the stature of a Gadol b'Torah, obviously very high. In fact, in orthodox view it is the highest stature of all."

      RaP: Stop deciding what the "premises" of discussions should be and stop "hakking in kop" if you know what that means in Yiddish.

      "i am making the distinction between Judaism and Christianity, and a Rav vs the Pope."

      RaP: This is an old point, as old as the trees, many Litvaks-Misnagdim use this analogy. So try barking up another tree. For Chasidim their Chasidic Rebbes ARE regarded as "links" to God and as being ESSENTIAL to belief in God. The Tanya teaches this directly, and it is believed and practiced by ALL Chasidim. In recent years Litvish Roshei Yeshiva have morphed into this role as well, as you can also see the style of dress among Litvaks has the same dress code as the Chasidim. Basically the Chasidim have won, in kashrus, dress styles, leadership models and more. So what are you carrying on about? Just move on and get on with your life instead of ranting and raving about it on this blog. Unless, if you still want to be part of the Orthodox world, you can be Modern Orthodox or a moderate American-style balebatish Charedi (i.e. those who go to college and university and get modern professions, unlike the Lakewood-Bnai Brak models), stop waving your banner and doing hatchet jobs on Chareidi rabbonim on this blog that will get you nowhere quickly.

      "when the Tropper case hit the fan, certain Gedolim who were associated with him and EJF were being heavily criticised on this blog, including by yourself. So , again , you have to be consistent."

      RaP: Feel free to criticize but also balance it with compliments, while what you do goes way far beyond that. You dig up the corpses, and lots of dirt, and hurl the vilest infamy at them. Just go back and read your words. Yeah, yeah, you use some arguments here and there but what comes through is not your arguments but your venomous destructive comments against of all of them.

      "how would you react if someone was to call all haredim Amalek?"

      RaP: Personally I would yawn and attribute it to sensationalism. But Eddie, please stop pretending that you are here on this blog as the "defender of the faith" of all MOs and RZs because by now it is clear you are not. You have another agenda of destroying Torah Judaism as portrayed and depicted on this blog.

      "Whether or not Horayot it taught in some yeshivas is not my problem, that does not make it an Unorthodox sefer. Perhaps you could try getting it banned, since it dispels the concept of rabbinic Infallibility."

      RaP: This a good example of your problem, you want to make a point but you insist on deadly attacks on (count) 1 Yeshivas; 2 Twisting sources that have nothing to do with your agenda (do they really study these masechtas in your community of Charedi-haters?); 3 Smearing all Charedi rabbis because some ban books they don't like (which is their good right, every society has some standard it wishes to uphold even if outsiders do not agree); 4 Daas Torah ("rabbinic Infallibility") the latter concept drives you crazy and you have devoted your career on this blog to demolishing it. Are you sure you are not part of that horrendous anti-Torah blog at http://www.daatemet.org/ ??

      Delete
    16. RAp: "Basically the Chasidim have won, in kashrus, dress styles, leadership models and more"
      In this we are in agreement - the once great Litvish mind has become authoritarian and no longer interested in reasoning.

      RaP: "Personally I would yawn and attribute it to sensationalism."

      Unconvincing - since I critiqued certain debates and specific points of haredi rhetoric, yet your reaction is totally overblown. Yet you pretend you would be calm and collected with such a huge and vile insult - which is only dished around by maniacs ( who earn their living as rosh yeshiva).

      Rap: "Twisting sources that have nothing to do with your agenda "

      Not twisting at all, You are twisting everything old boy. Like your plain lie that R Stav is a gay rights person, and your opposite and overblown protest at learning of R Sonnenfeld's "heter" or at least don't ask don't tell attitude to gays, in a time when the British law would make gayness an imprisonable offence.

      Your argumentation is so twisted and hypocritical, that it makes a joke , like something out of monty python. Also, you have the gaavah to not retract or admit the lies you tell about good rabbonim, whilst the young R' Lau is now being exposed as having cheated in his semichah exam!

      Delete
    17. Recipients and PublicityAugust 7, 2013 at 9:47 AM

      1 of 2:

      Eddie @ August 6, 2013 at 3:04 PM said: " "Basically the Chasidim have won, in kashrus, dress styles, leadership models and more" In this we are in agreement - the once great Litvish mind has become authoritarian and no longer interested in reasoning."

      RaP: No I did NOT say, nor did I imply what YOU say, and now try to put in my mouth (this is one of your worst habits, putting words into others' mouths). I was just making the obvious point that Chasidim and Chasidism has "won" in terms of how TORAH LEADERS are viewed, meaning the premise of the Tanya is that the "TZADIK" is the link to Hashem and that those who are not on the level of being such a "tzadik" must per force come to their designated TZADIK to intervene on their behalf to Hashem. The Tzadik also has a level "ruach hakodesh" (I know that this notion drives you nuts) and it is on the basis of that or from that that the Torah world's concept IN OUR DAYS of "Da'as Torah" emanates. That is what I meant. Not that their minds have atrophied. There can be kind and non-authoritarian Tzadikim. It is a matter of personality and character that Hashem gives them.

      ""Personally I would yawn and attribute it to sensationalism."
      Unconvincing - since I critiqued certain debates and specific points of haredi rhetoric, yet your reaction is totally overblown. Yet you pretend you would be calm and collected with such a huge and vile insult - which is only dished around by maniacs ( who earn their living as rosh yeshiva)."

      RaP: Eddie, your problem is that you are incapable of understanding that there is a difference between CONSTRUCTIVE / POSITIVE criticism and DESTRUCTIVE / NEGATIVE criticism. You seem to think that "any" criticism that comes out of your proverbial fog-horn is somehow helpful, while to readers such as myself all I can tell is that you have an agenda to just tear down the proverbial "rosh yeshiva" without providing anything in its place. Yeah, yeah, you pay lip-service by saying some nice MO or RZ types you like would be nice to have around, but what comes through from your words, is that even that solution is not what you are really after. You just want to destroy the whole Charedi world and its leaders and the way it function. An utter impossibility in any way. No normal OBJECTIVE / UNPREJUDICED person thinks that way.

      Delete
    18. Recipients and PublicityAugust 7, 2013 at 10:00 AM

      2 of 2:

      Eddie @ August 6, 2013 at 3:04 PM said: ""Twisting sources that have nothing to do with your agenda" Not twisting at all, You are twisting everything old boy. Like your plain lie that R Stav is a gay rights person, and your opposite and overblown protest at learning of R Sonnenfeld's "heter" or at least don't ask don't tell attitude to gays, in a time when the British law would make gayness an imprisonable offence."

      RaP: A man is known by the company he keeps. Rabbi Stav is an ultra-liberal ultra-modern rabbi supported by Bennett and Lapid, to use your languge Stav was willing and able to become the "poodle" of Bennet and Lapid and that includes equal rights for gays in Israel or at least recognition of their demands. As for Rav Zonnenfeld, what nonsense are you spouting? He may or may not have said something about his support for De Haan (who may or may not have had his issues as a newly observant Jew) and NOTE how you are are ever so kind to Herzl, calling him a "baal teshuva" while at no time do you offer any such courtesies and holding back your sharp tongue against De Haan.

      "Your argumentation is so twisted and hypocritical, that it makes a joke , like something out of monty python. Also, you have the gaavah to not retract or admit the lies you tell about good rabbonim, whilst the young R' Lau is now being exposed as having cheated in his semichah exam!"

      RaP: You just cited British law above, in that system you are innocent until proven guilty, so please use the same yardstick for the young Rabbi Lau. The media is now in a frenzy to tell the maximum lies about the young Rabbi Lau. Naturally, because he is a threat to them and they feel cheated. As for Semicha exams, it is impossible to know all the convoluted rules in Israel for becoming a rabbi. The way you talk of "semicha" you reveal your secular goyish view of it. In Judaism, to be a great rabbi no formal semicha is required as if for a position at a university. It is both a formal and informal system. Someone can go in to a great (one of more of a) rov/dayan/talmid chochem/rosh yeshiva/posek/mekubal/rebbe/boki, speak for 10 minutes in learning with him and get semicha based on that. The main point is to be a great Talmid Chochem and Yerei Shomayim.

      Hear this fascinating audio/video of R Shlomo Carlebach "How I got Semicha" (6 minutes "Uploaded on May 31, 2011 reb Shlomo Carlebach describes how he received semicha from Rav Hutner at the behest of the Lubavitcher Rebbe. Semichah is Rabbinical Ordination"), quite revealing about the whole process. Subsequently Rav Shlomo Carlebach himself gave semicha to many, many people. On the one hand there are semicha mills, but on the other hand there is the "real mckoy" that has nothing to do with any process as such.

      The formalization of the process is ultimately meaningless, as you should know, this is not like academia with Phd=Professor. You so easily buy into unproven slanders from secular anti-Charedi media as long as you can score cheap points. Shame on you.

      Delete
    19. RAp - perhaps you have your own agenda, and that is why you are projecting so many false things onto me. A few points:

      Chssidic/Litvish: fine you can say Hasidim have won, although Mitnagdim (that I have sen) do not consider themselves or leaders to be Tzaddikim in the Habad style. They do, however, adopt a less rigorous intelelctual style than was traditionally kept in Litvish world. An example -I once approached several Litivsh rabbis, including a Brisk guy, to ask some questions on Nefesh Hachayim. They were all totally unaware of that Sefer's contents. I had to go to some leading gedolim to get my answers. At least in Chabad, they all know Tanya like the back of their hands.


      2) Stav - again, you telling porkie pies. You should change your initials from RAp to BS. Stav was not anyone's poodle, in fact Benent and his party initially wanted r Ariel, but could not pull it off, because of his age. Next, your argument is also false. You seem to have taken the demonisation of lapid/Benent too seriously, since your face turns pale each tiem their names are mentioned. lapid and Bennet have very different views of the world. They did not vote the same for the prisoner release.
      Even if Lapid is pro-gay , that does not make Stav pander to those views. You simply telling lies, and slander.

      3)Amalek. Ok, you can make the case that my tone is lacking in the appropriate respect, and I would generally accept that strand of your argument. However, I asked you the hypothetical question of how you would react if someone called haredim amalek. You said you would yawn. Yet, you are effectively taking what i have said as being worse than that, which is rather queer, since I have not implied that Haredim are a special nation marked out for genocide, and it is a mitzvah to do so. Moreover RaP, where was your protest when someone said the same about DL? Nowhere. Had a Sepahrdi Rosh yeshiva been meikil in converting a blondie for a Morrocan you would explode. When he calls for genocide, you are quite (hypocritically) smug about it. The shame is on you Rap.

      Delete
    20. "RaP: A man is known by the company he keeps"-
      This is you orwellian/haredi mentality. orwell famously wrote "all animals are equal, but some more equal than others".
      You have one set of standards for your opponents, but when they are applied to your own group, you cannot handle dissonance, and you are reduced to yelling, kicking, and screaming. This hypocrisy is evident in most of your BS rhetoric. You seem to be unabel to grasp the point I made about R Sonnenfeld, and his colleagues. In brief, Rap, if you live by the sword, you fall by it. Hence, if you live by the motto that "A man is known by the company he keeps", then be sure you don't keep company with feigeles who go to the kotel to pick up boys.
      When is a contradiction not a contradiction? When a modernisher points out a contradiciton in Daas Torah. This is the kind of web of lies that you live in.

      Herzl and DeHaan have some commonality. But again you miss the logic because your head is up your emotional alley.

      As i have said, Herzl was on the 49th level of Tumah, and headed for 5oth, but he turned around.
      Dehaan Also. It is ultimately not for me to judge either of them. The point is not that one was a Tzaddik and the other a rosho. It is that they were both sinners. The opposition to Zionism was based on not being allowed to associate with sinners. So if you are to argue that they cannot assocaite with Herzl, then you cannot associate with Dehaan either, because he is (and was) chayyav mitah!

      It is funny Rap, you are so wrapped up in BS, that you fail to see that homosexuality is forbidden int he Torah. You seem to have one torah for Seculars (where it is forbidden) and another for haredim, where is it ok, as long as you ignore it.

      Here is WRAP's logic:

      Lapid is secular, and pro gay rights. Lapid doesn't care who is chief rabbi, but Bennet is Ok with Stav or Ariel. since there is a gezeira shav between lapid and Stav, therefore Stav is secular pro gay rights.

      That is your BS#1

      You BS# 2 is like this:

      DeHaan was a BT. however, he was also a BUttee, and used the Kotel as his gay cruising ground. However, since he was honored by R' Sonenfeld, then anyone who mentions this fact, must be reform/bible critic/ rebbetzin or simply earning $1000 for each post on here.

      Sorry Rap, but you have lost all credibility .


      Delete
    21. Recipients and PublicityAugust 8, 2013 at 1:12 PM

      To Eddie @ August 7, 2013 at 10:17 PM and Eddie @ August 7, 2013 at 10:32 PM

      It is fine to debate someone who does not cross red lines of logic, and appropriate civil language and does not use easily start using curse words and nivul peh (foul language and odious terms), but now Eddie you have resorted to not just putting words in my mouth, and playing a game with yourself on both sides of the court as it were, but you are now also resorting to a stooping to use terms that civil society and decent company considers to be not just inappropriate but insulting and demeaning.

      We may disagree and we may hold opposing views, and you are entitled to yours, even as you admit that your "my tone is lacking in the appropriate respect" but you can't control yourself and then when you resort to terminology such as "You should change your initials from RAp to BS", "BS rhetoric", "your head is up your emotional alley", "you are so wrapped up in BS", "That is your BS#1", "You BS# 2 is like this", "DeHaan was a BT. however, he was also a BUttee"...

      Sorry, as they say, once is a joke, but twice is a fool, but to do it so many times as you do makes it useless to debate you because you are now sinking into a mud-pile that you seem to think is fun and fine but most normal people stay out of that.

      I think we have both made our points for now on this thread. Please note that while I critiqued your methodology and tendencies to think in linear line and not see that human beings are walking paradoxes.

      You see things in a very linear way and when something at some point in the line is in conflict with another thing on that same line you tend to negate the entire subject, while I see things in more circular ways, and human beings as more complex PARADOXICAL entities capable of containing and having opposing, opposite and contardictory qualities and tendencies. Both a YETZER HATOV AND a YETZER HARA, often mixed deep inside of them, and it is an art to be able to understand human beings in that light, everyone is responsible for doing more good, and keeping bad at bay, and that is why WE ALL DO TESHUVA especially now before ROSH HASHANA before coming to judgments about anyone, something best left for a good court of justice or a reliable bais din and not expect everyone to be a paragon of perfection or meeting every one of your self-created logical criteria that may be nice in theory but have nothing to do with the complexities of life or with the real world, not to mention what the Torah and Halacha require of people.

      Let is just leave at that for now.

      Delete
  10. Recipients and PublicityJuly 31, 2013 at 4:43 PM

    Eddie @ July 31, 2013 at 1:14 PM said inter alia: "you haven't justified the acts of Satmar or R' Wasserman in preventing Jews from escaping from Europe" I have no interest nor am qualified to pass judgement on either the Satmar Rov who built a huge Chasidus in America or of Rav Elchonon Wasserman hy"d who died al kiddush Hashem mamash. They were both very tough people as well and had their way of doing things. Their Torah works are studied by tens of thousands in yeshivas today. They are holy men. They may have made mistakes, even Moshe Rabbeinu made mistakes, but it is not for me to judge them and I do not need to defend them. There are those who feel they can criticize them and that is their good right if they have the grounds and the correct facts, but sorry, I pass when it comes to taking on such giants as the Satmar Rov and Rav Elchonon Wasserman HY"D, and maybe IY"H you can something from me in that regard. You don't have to bark at every Charedi boogy-man you think needs to be attacked for whatever reasons that motivate you or whoever is guiding you or perhaps even paying you to do so on this website.

    There are certain rabbis that I know a lot more about and can marshal the facts and arguments to say something, but not against the holy Satmar Ruv or the martyred Rav Elchonon Wasserman HY"D. No!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. RAP, if someone was paying me, I would be writing longer megillas than you are, and i would be enjoying the parnassa from it. Unfortuantely that is not the case.
      So we are in agreement that even Moshe rabbeinu made mistakes. That is good. My point, is that the Daas Torah concept is a very serious one, and it has a spectrum of meanings. Btw, Moshe made mistakes in his actions, in carrying out certain things. Not in Nevuah, chas v'shalom.
      There are those who toy with the idea that Nevua is meant by daas torah, ie rabbis have the koach of nevuah. Then there are those that say they have an oracle, which gives them knowledge of things they are ignorant of, precisely because they didnt study it. Thus on matters of science, they claim to be more expert than scientists. Then there are those that daasTorah is infallibility; or also exclusivity, ie "we have the Daas, so anyone who disagrees is wrong and an apikores/amalek" etc.
      If my critiques are disproportionately aimed at some haredim, it is perhaps because this is more a haredi concept. But they also play a game, which I am trying to expose.
      If they are selling Daas torah as mamash nevuah, then their predictions have to be scrutinised , and any false predictions will invalidate their authority. This is a Torah commandment.
      FYI, I am also critical of absurdities of the people who I follow myself, ie non -haredim. Thus, I have pointed out that R' Mordechai Elyahu, who was great, was also greatly mistaken when he backed the Moshiach campaign of the Rebbe.
      I also criticized the very MO R' Lichtenstein for his land for peace obsession, and backing oslo.

      Now, this is just showing that they are all human, and can be biased - or they can be right, and I can be wrong on all counts (that is the position of R' Hershel Shachter BTW).
      I heard a vort from RHS , which is interesting. He says that emunas hachamim isn't about faith in the sages, it is faith that they are not pulling our leg. It is a fine distinction, but it is also a novel one.
      Finally, i also have some reservations about some of r' Kook's fanciful ideas. But that is another story.

      Delete
  11. Rabbi Betzalel Naor beautifully analyzes this address, including discussion of Rav Kook's reference to Moshiach ben Yosef in his work http://orot.com/when-god-becomes-history/. I highly recommend it.

    ReplyDelete
  12. The canard of Chareidi Rabbis telling Jews not to leave Europe is a slander and a lie on many counts.

    First of all, the main opponent to immigration to Palestine for Orthodox Jews was Yitzchok Greenbaum who headed up the Zionist committee for rescue during WW2. He virulently opposed any efforts to save any Jews that would be Orthodox.

    Secondly, initially the people in Europe thought that there might be some refuge in different areas of Europe. When it was finally clear that there wouldn't be, there were very few visas and only a small number was made available to Orthodox Jews.

    Thirdly, who says it would have been better for the Jews do come en masse to the US and for the most part abandon their religion in the highly antagonistic environment rather than die al kiddush Hashem in Europe?

    Who says that the Zionist inclined Rabbis were any better at giving advice to their adherents to leave?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Zorba:

      Yes, grunbaum was a complete rasha and shaigetz - there is no doubt about that. But Tom Segev in his book the 7th Million writes that Grunbaum was a nasty bureaucrat with little power or influence. Ben Gurion asked the british to save teh Jews of germany, to bomb the railways etc. The Brits did not help at all - just like today they are nto helping anyone in Syria.

      Your 2nd point may be true - but why did a large number of people see the danger much sooner? they can't all be crazy? Also, the great scientists like Einstein and Teller left Europe - so obviously they could see the dangers coming.

      3rd - now you are mixing one position with another. This is contradictory - if you make such a claim - which I think is totally nuts and absurd - then in fact you are supporting the Grunbaum , or what is alleged about him. Either it's a mitzva to saves lives or it's not. If it is, then anyone who could have done but didnt - and this probably includes officials everywhere, did a sin. If it's a mitzva to die, and was an aveira to save lives, then you cannot blame the secualr z's for "perfidy".
      I see it as a Tora commandment to save lives, as well as a rational law or principal, that any human should know.
      If satmar could build communities in America, as some people are praising them of doing, then they could have built an even larger one if they had left sooner.

      Finally, someone is accusing me of 20/20 hindsight - perhaps, because I was not born then. One of the Gedolim, may have been r Shapiro after the war, mocked the Zionists for seeing what happened with "ruach hakodesh", ie they predicted it.
      But we are also told the Chofetz Chaim foresaw this happening.

      So yes, it is not so clear cut to look back from now and blame x or y. The Jewish agency did send money to Eichman, after a few months, but the Germans said the deal was off. So there is no way of knowing whether Weissmandl was being lpayed by the nazis, or not. Perhaps they would have called the deal off anyway.

      Delete
    2. "initial thought there was other refugee in Europe" Who encouraged this thought process of safety in other places? and on what basis?

      As a third generation American who was raised as a Torah Jew in NYC (now in Israel), the fallacy of 'leaving Yiddishkeit behind" is another part of the rewriting of history that is chewed & swallowed whole by readers of Jewish history accounts.

      Delete
  13. From Rav Yitzchok Hutner ZTL, in the Jewish Observer, 10/77:

    It will be our task this evening to untangle the web of distortions about recent Jewish history, which has already been woven, and uncover the Torah perspective which has been hidden from us.

    To be sure, it will not be easy to regain this perspective. The thoughts that we will explore this evening will be difficult to digest because of our long subsistence upon the forced diet of public opinion. The creators of the powerful force of public opinion are beyond the realm of our control and the mind-numbing results of their influence are largely out of our hands. In order to achieve any hold on the truth, we will first have to free ourselves form the iron-clad grip of their puissance and open our minds and hearts to the sometimes bitter pill of truth...

    An example of how public opinion can be molded - indeed warped - at the whim of powerful individuals can be taken from a study of Russian history textbooks published during the respective reigns of Lenin, Stalin, and Khrushchev ... Undoubtedly, "public opinion" during each period, once the children's minds had been suitably molded, reflected the thinking and the wishes of the state. While more subtle in form, this ability to direct public opinion exists in democratic countries as well. Thus, we already pointed out at the beginning that we must make every effort to free ourselves from the powerful grip of public opinion, and must be ever on our guard that our opinions of the true nature of world events be shaped only by Torah views seen through Torah eyes.

    Sadly, even in our own circles, the mold for shaping public opinion lies in the hands of the State of Israel. And appropriate example of this dangerous process of selectively "rewriting" history may be found in the extraordinary purging from the public record of all evidence of the culpability of the forerunners of the [Jewish] State in the tragedy of European Jewry, and the substitution of factors inconsequential to the calamity that ultimately occurred.

    To cover its own contribution to the final catastrophic events, those of the State in a position to influence public opinion circulated the notorious canard that Gedolei Yisroel were responsible for the destruction of many communities because they did not urge immigration. This charge is, of course, a gross distortion of the truth, and need not be granted more dignity than it deserves by issuing a formal refutation. However, at the same time as the State made certain to include this charge a historical fact in every account of the war years, it successfully sought to omit any mention of its own contribution to the impending tragedy. . . .

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This charge is, of course, a gross distortion of the truth, and need not be granted more dignity than it deserves by issuing a formal refutation.

      PERHAPS if efforts were made to analyze the speeches of Rebbes and others before leaving Europe, accuracy could be uncovered. Whether there is guilt in the hands of the Jewish agency or in hands of Torah leadership, none was purposeful rather lack of knowledge, assumptions, or miscalculations. I find these historical researches come up with the same info every time....and 'public opinion' is then shifted from one side to the other.

      Delete
  14. .....In 1923 Hitler wrote Mein Kampf . . . [which] was read by Haj Amin el-Husseini, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, who found most significant alliances of modern times. . . Not only did the Mufti visit Hitler and his top aides on a number of occasions, but indeed with Adolph Eichmann, he visited the Auschwitz gas chamber incognito to check on its efficiency.

    The extent of the Mufti's influence upon the Nazi forces may be seen in a crucial decision made by Hitler at the height of the war. Railroad trains were much in demand by the Axis, and Hitler’s troops badly needed reinforcements in Russia. Yet, soon after he landed in Berlin in 1941, the Mufti demanded that all available resources be used to annihilate Jews. The choice: "Juden nach Auschwitz" or "Soldaten nach Stalingrad" was to be resolved this way . . . Two months later (Jan 20, 1942) at the Wannasee Conference, the formal decision was made to annihilate all Jews who had survived the ghettos, forced labor, starvation, and disease.

    Of course, the mufti was serving his own perverted fears, which were the influx of millions of Jews into Palestine and the destruction of the Mufti’s personal empire. Yet, there can be no doubt that through their symbiotic relationship, Hitler and the Mufti each helped the other accomplish his own evil goal. Eichman simply wanted to kill Jews; the Mufti wanted to make sure they never reached Palestine. In the end, the “final solution” was the same . .. At one point, Eichmann even seemed to blame the Mufti for the entire extermination plan, when he declared, “I am a personal friend of the Grand Mufti. We have promised that no Jew would enter Palestine any more.” . . .

    It should be manifest, however, that until the great public pressures for the establishment of a Jewish State, the Mufti had no interest in the Jews of Warsaw, Budapest or Vilna. Once the Jews of Europe became a threat to the Mufti because of their imminent influx into the Holy Land, the Mufti in turn became for them the incarnation of the Angel of Death. Years ago, it was still easy to find old residents of Yerushalayim who remembered the cordial relations they had maintained with the Mufti in the years before the impending creation of a Jewish State. Once the looming reality of a State of Israel was before him, the Mufti spared no effort in influencing Hitler to murder as many Jews as possible in the shortest amount of time. This shameful episode, where the founders and early leaders of the State were clearly a factor in the destruction of many Jews, has been completely suppressed and expunged from the record. Thus it is that our children who study the history of this turbulent era are taught that the Gedolei Yisroel share responsibility for the destruction of European Jewry and learn nothing of the guilt of others who are enshrined as heroes.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The problem with this maamar of R Hutner, which was disproven big time by Prof Lawrence Kaplan, is its poor logic and argumentation. It makes out like Hitler was really a nice chap, and his book was just something like Snow white, with no references to killing the Jews. It imagines that things were just dandy in Germany, kristallnacht never happened, Jews were not made to wear yellow stars. In this JO fairytale, no Nuremberg laws were passed, and Hitler loved the Jews, imposed no restrictions on them, and let them go about their daily business in a just an free society that nazi Germany was. One day, Muftu came to berlin, and he spiked Adolf's tea with something, which turned this peaceful and lover of humanity into a brutal anti-semite.

      what nonsense. And i don't care if RAp raps me for criticising another haredi gadol. This is a fairy story, just like half the artscroll biographies are. Just becasue the JO claimed it was DAas Torah, the fools beleived its truth. This is precisely the nonsense that is used to brainwash people, and oh how you buy it.

      Delete
    2. Recipients and PublicityAugust 2, 2013 at 11:09 AM

      Eddie @ August 2, 2013 at 1:25 AM said..."The problem with this maamar of R Hutner, which was disproven big time by Prof Lawrence Kaplan, is its poor logic and argumentation."

      RaP: So now it is Rav Hutner, the famous Illui from Slabodka who also attended the University of Berlin for a while, and who was known as the teacher of some of the greatest Torah scholars in America, had problems with using logic and with his argumentation. Eddie you are more vicious and brutal than I thought and you have hidden it quite well until now.

      "It makes out like Hitler was really a nice chap, and his book was just something like Snow white, with no references to killing the Jews. It imagines that things were just dandy in Germany, kristallnacht never happened, Jews were not made to wear yellow stars."

      RaP: Baloney. You are just putting words and ideas into dead rabbis' mouths when they cannot defend themselves. You just hate Rav Hutner because he was a very successful Charedi rabbi, face it. The article does not say or imply any of the things you allege. The article does not say that everything was "fine and dandy" in Nazi Germany. Anyone knows it was not. The point it is making is that while the situation was dangerous and precarious -- it could get worse.

      The decision to go ahead with the "Final Solution" was a very careful and calculated one because the Nazis did not want to be be revealed as murderers. They waited for the right moment and it was relatively late into the war, at a point where Germany was already losing, that the decision was made to launch the final mass killings. A number of factors influenced Hitler to go into high gear, and Rav Hutner's conclusion was that the Mufti played a role in influencing Hitler's decision because the Mufti as the main leader of the Arabs in Palestine and the leading spiritual leader of Sunni Muslims did not want to see millions of Jewish refugees flood Palestine. This is so clear and logical any fool can see it makes sense.

      Try attacking the Mufti and Hitler to the same degree you are attacking Rav Hutner and all the other Charedi rabbis you attack all the time. Then maybe you will gain some credibility.

      Delete
    3. Recipients and PublicityAugust 2, 2013 at 11:10 AM

      Eddie @ August 2, 2013 at 1:25 AM says... "In this JO fairytale, no Nuremberg laws were passed, and Hitler loved the Jews, imposed no restrictions on them, and let them go about their daily business in a just an free society that nazi Germany was. One day, Muftu came to berlin, and he spiked Adolf's tea with something, which turned this peaceful and lover of humanity into a brutal anti-semite. what nonsense."

      RaP: Eddie you are so full of it, when you make such ludicrous nonsensical stupid allegations. Rv Hutner never said and never implied that all was well in Nazi Germany or that Hitler was some sort of "nice guy"! That would like saying that Rav Hutner was "retarded" ch"v. Rav Hutner, with quite some guts really, put forth the point that Hitler was antagonized by Zionist actions and ALSO encouraged by the Mufti to go ahead with the Final Solution.

      Holocaust scholars all agree that the really big mass killings did not commence until 1943 and 1944 when Nazi Germany was losing the war but was determined that the Jews should be killed out at all costs. The factors that motivated them is what Rav Hutner is probing and postulating reasons.

      "And i don't care if RAp raps me for criticising another haredi gadol. This is a fairy story, just like half the artscroll biographies are. Just becasue the JO claimed it was DAas Torah, the fools beleived its truth. This is precisely the nonsense that is used to brainwash people, and oh how you buy it."

      RaP: Thanks for the "honorable mention" but it is you that is running around metaphorically chopping off the heads of the Charedi greats as they come up. Your "head count" of the Roshei Yeshiva you head-hunt to scalp as viciously as possible (good contrasting puns) is ludicrous. It seems it is the only thing you enjoy and know how to do.

      Don't you have any other hobbies?

      How about attacking famous Reform rabbis for their blunders and peccadilloes, or the policies of the Reform accepting patrilineal descent and ordaining women rabbis, and do you know that at least a third if not more of Reform rabbis are not even Halachically Jewish today?

      How about the Reform and Conservative stance on gays?

      What sayest thou?

      NO words from the wise Eddie on those things -- only Charedi-bashing like it was a drug addiction. How about the collapse of the Conservative movement?

      How about the fact that half of the UK's Jews have assimilated and become total GOYIM and Christians in the last 70 years. There used to be about 600,000 Jews in the UK now there are officially barely 300,000 why is that and what have the Reform and Liberal movements in Britain done to stop it or have they aided it along and participated in the world-wide greatest SILENT HOLOCAUST of Jews that the world has ever seen?

      How about you scream and shout about that instead of attacking the now-defunct Jewish Observer and yelling at the popular ArtScroll, at least they have translated the entire Talmud into English and now working on translating it into French as well. It's brought tens of thousands of people into Daf Yomi.

      You know, the cup is not perpetually half empty as you insist.

      Delete
    4. The article by R' Hutner, implies that it was a chain of cause and effect that led tothe holocaust, ie zionims-> arab reaction->mufti goes to berlin-> genocide.
      This is nonsense.

      But your thinking is like this: "if a gadol [designated by RAp] says x it must be true; if the messenger [in this case Edward] refutes x, then the messenger deserves to be shot.

      I find it quite telling that you at the same time accuse me of having no interest int he Torah, but then refuse to discuss any of the points i raise which are Torah discussions. So, i raised the issue of the Sifri vs. the Yerushalmi. Yet you can only discuss superficial points like the translation into english by artscrool. you do nto discuss what is actually debated in the Talmud, but only the typeset, the binding, the translation, distribution, and discounts made available if bought online.

      FYI the shoah began before 1943
      http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/worldwars/genocide/holocaust_overview_01.shtml

      there was a Rav in UK who was in Germany when kristalnacht took place. A student asked him what was it like, and his answer was "have you ever seen an abattoir"?

      In 1938, the concentration camps had already started. You are saying there was a process of industrialization of murder, which is true. However, the link to zionism is really poor. BTW, historians say that the Mufti was not really influential, except that he just gave some support to genocide. Also the Zionists use this as evidence of arab antisemitism. In any case, many people criticised r Hutner for this article, because it was so preposterous.

      As for gays, I have repeatedly stated my position, it is totally forbidden in the Torah. i also attacked those "frum" people who seem to find loopholes for it. As for reform, there is no discussion.

      I will give you another vort, but only if you can respond with some lomdus, rather than you exaggerations.

      In UK, there is something called "masorti", which is officially conservative , but could well be reform.
      They use the orthodox siddur, they follwo the orthodox nusach, and they make the same brachos on reading the Torah.
      Those brachos say "Torat Emet", and Neviiey haEmet.
      If someone from masorti r other group, does not accept the Torah as being from Hashem, are they also guilty of making a bracha lvatala, when they recite this bracha?





      Delete
    5. "The Mufti a FRIEND OF JEWS"....that is the biggest fraud ever. He was in charge of terror attacks in the Galilee and the roads to Netanya starting in the early 1900's. Rewriting history to have the lamb and lion sleeping together (Jew & Arab) in serenity has always been the biggest fallacy of the 20th century.

      Delete
    6. careful speaking the truth Sima, since if it contradicts what is written in a haredi mouthpiece such as the JO, you might be accused of hatred of the Torah/Rabbis etc.

      Delete
    7. The phrase ""the mufti a friend of jews" is nowhere to be found in a Google search that turned up over 23 million hits. halilnafshi was citing "_cordial_" relations between old Yerushalmi Jews and what were then their Muslim overlords... so what? The Mufti, y"s had no problem with Jews who knew their dhimmi place and toed the line. He also had no problem inciting razzias and pogroms against those who didn't. Hitler, y"s, didn't give a lot of material support to the Mufti but they were birds of a feather about the Jews, and did use the Mufti to raise mass murdering Muslim SS auxiliaries in the former Yugoslavia and elsewhere.

      Hecht and Rav Miller both had it in for the Labor Zionists, though for different reasons – Hecht was a farbrent Revisionist – but Rav Miller's reliance on Ben Hecht is a good example of how the enemy of my enemy is not always really my friend.

      Ladislas Lob, who was rescued by Kastner and Canadian publisher Anna Porter separately reexamined the issue. While not uncritical of Kastner, they demonstrate that Hecht's account not only was one sided, but played fast and loose with facts. Kastner's trial was a travesty worthy of Stalin's courts.

      By the way, Rav Miller's work is not the only place one finds extensive quotations from Hecht. They are also to be found on neo-Nazi, Holocaust denier, Neturei Karta, Iranian and other jihadi sites. They smell the same everywhere.

      The Nazis set things up so that if some German official was corruptible or had a glimmer of humanity, any Jew saved probably meant another one dying in his/her place and in any case did not represent a trend that could be counted on. In those days, anybody who saved even one Jew did so at great personal risk -- and to save even that one had to make terrible choices about not saving another. Yes, to that extent, anybody who rescued one Jew by bribing a Nazi was a collaborator: but it was the Nazis' doing that there was no other way.

      Schindler was a high living, arrogant adrenaline junky and a basically a con man. He put those otherwise problematic attributes to very good use. He schmoozed evil high officials, and otherwise walked a razor's edge for years. That's what it took in those days.

      We're going to say Unetane Tokef soon. Pay attention to the words.

      Delete
    8. Check out the WANNSEE CONFERENCE of 1942, when the leadership of the Nazi party met to accelerate the killings of Jews. No mention of the Mufti, Zionism, Israel, etc. just death to the Jews.

      Delete
  15. בענין הטענה האפיקורסית כי בגלל הוראותיהם של גדולי ישראל שלא לעלות לארץ בימי מלחה"ע השניה נהרגו כה רבים מיהודי אירופה

    http://www.yoel-ab.com/katava.asp?id=117

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. His point is that it G-d was going to make it happen anyway. Well then, we can't be blaming zionists either, can we?

      (I'm not part of Gedolim bashing camp; I'm simply pointing out that MR Elchonon article that the 'nafshi' dude linked to, demolishes most of the rest of his/her cut-and-pasted/digitally-scanned comments.)

      Delete
  16. "only a small number was made available to Orthodox Jews." or any jews.

    "who says it would have been better for the Jews do come en masse to the US and for the most part abandon their religion" that was decided during the crusader's time, and psaqim were made that it would be better, and accepted by all.

    "main opponent to immigration to Palestine for Orthodox Jews was Yitzchok Greenbaum" and who listened to him? let alone how powerful was he anyway. besides, few jews of any type were allowed into palestine at the time. (and despite charedi rhetoric, the majority of jews in europe were not religious.)

    ReplyDelete
  17. Rav Avigdor Miller ZT”L
    Awake My Glory

    Paragraphs 517-518

    517. But let us turn to reproach by vile men on the Jewish side.
    The Zionists (also “religious” Zionists) delight in accusing the East-European Torah-leaders as “responsible” for the destruction of the Six Million, because they were not enthusiastic over the Zionist settlement of Eretz Israel. But it is common knowledge that the Torah-scholars founded the Jewish community in the Holy Land, and that the Zionists refused immigration certificates for the orthodox.

    518. Actually, the Torah-leaders were the true shepherds of mercy, but the Nationalists were partners with the nations in the blood guilt of multitudes of Jews. The Zionist organization is powerful, and therefore copies of “Perfidy” are not available even in rare-book stores. “Perfidy” is the toned-down version of what the author really knew, but it demonstrates that the Zionist leaders allowed a great number of European Jews to be destroyed when there was opportunity to save them (754-759). The truth is that the only Jews rescued from Hitler (except Zionist part functionaries who were saved by the party) were those whom the Torah-Sages redeemed with the bitterly scraped-together funds that they personally collected, such as by the Vaad Hatzalah. All that the Zionists did was to prevent any action to rescue Jews, as is documented in “Perfidy”; and that is the reason that this book is not available.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Rav Avigdor Miller ZT”L
    Awake My Glory

    748. The lilliputian secular leaders and the reform “rabbis” have blindly led the masses into perilous paths, and it was they that poured oil on the Nazis’ wrath and turned it into a cataclysm. “They ridiculed the humble ways of the old generations and they mocked the Torah-way of placating the nations by restraint and quiet diplomacy, and thus the majority of Jewry were misled into the policy of Nationalism and of demanding their rights with vociferousness. This was at a time when most of Europe lay helpless under the feet of the evil Hitler and his allies who clustered around him. At that time these unthinking (the Jewish “leaders”) rose up in their places of security in the free lands and they cast ridicule upon Hitler and enraged him by their irresponsible demonstrations and speeches…and they kindled his wrath by the reckless boycott. All this was in the year 5693 (1933) when the nations were still at peace with this evil one (Hitler) and there was no way other than humility and negotiation by persuasion. But these self-ordained leaders acted according to the opposite of wisdom and the opposite of the oath imposed by G-d (not to arouse the nations by open opposition), and they had a great share in arousing the frenzy of the mad dog to the highest degree” (Min Hametzar, Rabbi M. D. Weismandl).

    749. How different the results would have been had the people given ear to the Torah-Sages! Following the wise precedents of Torah-history, and motivated solely by unselfish principles (unlike the demagoguery and notoriety-seeking of the Reformers and other anti-Torah elements) the Torah-leaders were successfully establishing contacts with Hitler’s lieutenants and might have rescued millions, if not for the non-cooperation of the powerful and wealthy “leaders”, and also because of outright obstruction (read “Perfidy” by Ben Hecht if you can find a copy which has escaped the attention of the Zionists). When leaders are not doves, but ravens and buzzards, the masses are not favored by G-d’s approval.

    ReplyDelete
  19. 754. The Zionist leaders together with the Reform “rabbis” aided substantially in the destruction of the European Jews.
    In July 1938 President Roosevelt convened the Evian Conference to consider the problem of Jewish refugees. At that time a German offer was made to release Jews at $250 per person. The Jewish Agency, headed by Golda Meir, decided to ignore the offer.
    At this conference, the delegation from the Jewish Agency made no effort to influence the United States or any of the 32 other participating nations to open their gates to admit German Jews.

    755. When a shipload of Jewish refugees on the Danube river were refused permission to disembark anywhere, Henry Montor the leader of the United Jewish Appeal explained that they could not be allowed to sail to the Holy Land because “Palestine cannot be flooded with… old people or with undesirables” (Feb. 1, 1940).

    756. On Nov. 25, 1940 the Haganah commanders ordered the blowing up of the ship Patria in Haifa Harbor as a protest against England’s plan to send refugees to Mauritius instead of to Palestine, and thus 272 Jewish refugees perished.

    757. On Dec. 17, 1942 both houses of the British Parliament declared readiness to afford temporary residence fro endangered persons, but on Jan. 27 a spokesman for the Zionists stated that the Jews opposed the motion because Palestine was omitted.

    758. The New York papers (Feb. 16, 1943) publicized Romania’s offer of 70,000 Jews of Trans-Dniestria at the price of $50 each. On Feb. 24 Stephen Wise the president of the American Jewish Congress and leader of U. S. Zionists publicly denied the authenticity of the offer and declared that no collection of funds “would seem justified.” The Jewish Agency in England also ridiculed the news of the Rumanian offer. But Under-secretary of State A. A. Berle affirmed privately that the Rumanian government had actually made such an offer to the State Department. Some time later, when all the Jews who could have been rescued had been annihilated, the facts of the offer were confirmed by Bartley Crum, an expert on affairs of the Near East, who declared that the 70,000 Jews could easily have been transported through Turkey by a few days’ travel in trucks, but the State Department had refrained from publicizing the news of the offer due to Jewish (Zionist) pressure.

    759. On Feb. 18, 1943 Yitzchak Greenbaum, chairman of the “Rescue” Committee of the Jewish Agency declared at a Zionist Executive Council in Tel-Aviv: “When they asked me: Could you not give money from the United Jewish Appeal funds for the rescue of Jews in Europe? I said No! And I say again, No! One should resist this wave which pushes the Zionist activities to secondary importance.”

    760. In 1944 the Emergency Committee to Save the Jewish People called upon the United States to establish a War Refugee Board. Stephen Wise came before an especial committee of Congress to object to this proposal.

    761. In 1948* President Roosevelt planned to open the gates of America to 150,000 refugees, and Great Britain agreed to follow suit. When Roosevelt’s emissary Morris L. Ernst came to England, the Zionist leaders declared: “This is treason. You are undermining the Zionist movement.” As a result, Roosevelt informed Great Britain that the project must be abandoned: “We cannot put it over because the dominant vocal Jewish leadership won’t stand for it.”
    762. In 1947 Congressman William Stratton sponsored a bill to grant immediate entry to the U.S. of 400,000 displaced persons. The bill was publicly denounced by the Zionist leaders, and it was therefore not passed.

    763. On Feb. 23, 1956 J. W. Pickersgill the minister of immigration was asked in the Canadian House of Commons: “would he open the doors of Canada to Jewish refugees?” He replied: “The government has made no progress in that direction, because the government of Israel…. does not wish us to do so”.

    ReplyDelete
  20. 764. On July 15, 1971 the Zionist leaders, through Herman Weissman the president of the Zionist Organization of America, successfully opposed an effort in the U.S. Congress to allow 30,000 Russian refugees to enter the United States.

    765. But when we turn to view the deeds of the true leaders of Israel we see an entirely different picture.
    The Sages of our people, following the principles of the Torah, concentrated all their thoughts and efforts on the saving of Jewish lives. The Vaad Hatzalah was organized by the Torah-leaders, and they toiled to raise money and to carry on negotiations and to send help to their suffering and imperiled brethren. They were not supported by the wealthy, they were ignored by the big “Jewish” organizations, and they were opposed and slandered by the irreligious. But it was they, and only they, who actually succeeded in rescuing many Jews and bringing them to a safe haven.

    766. Had Jews in America, Canada, England, Australia, South Africa and Switzerland and elsewhere followed the Torah-leaders, the story would have been entirely different. Rabbi Weismandel of Nitra poured out his heart’s blood in the effort to save Jewish lives, but the “reform” (assimilationist) and Zionist leaders of the deluded Jewish masses in the free countries turned a deaf ear to his impassioned entreaties.

    ReplyDelete
  21. 767. Because the Jewish populace of Eastern Europe, like those elsewhere, had ceased to regard the Gedolei-Torah as their leaders and spokesmen (740), and they had given prestige and power to the atheists and enemies of Torah, now in their hour of bitter need they were given a taste of the bitterness of the non-Torah leadership. At the famed Kastner trial it was revealed that the Zionist leaders in Hungary, in cooperation with the world Zionist leaders, had betrayed the Jewish masses and had prevented them from taking steps to save themselves by flight over the nearby border. At the same trial it was also revealed that Joel Brand, the emissary who went to meet the Zionist leaders, in Turkey and Palestine, to plead for a relatively small ransom fund to save many Jews from annihilation, was deceived by the chief Zionist leaders and was maneuvered by their trickery into a British prison, where he languished in despair until all those that had sent him were wiped out.

    768. Rabbi Weismandel sent urgent and impassioned appeals for small funds to stave off the deportation of thousands. The assimilationists and Zionists of Switzerland and other neutral countries and of the rich communities overseas refused his request. The Reform “Rabbis” and the disloyal, to whom the public Jewish funds were entrusted, scorned the messages which Rabbi Weismandel smuggled out at the risk of his life, and they allowed the masses of Slovakian and Hungarian Jews to be transported to the German killing-centers.

    769. It was because European Jews put their trust in atheistic Zionist leaders that these leaders everywhere became the lackeys of the Nazis in all the Ghettos. They were the machinery which served efficiently in the task of keeping the Jews docile and of persuading and coercing them to be sent off to their deaths. No Torah-leader ever cooperated with the Nazis in the destruction machinery.

    770. Similarly, it was the “reform” and liberal Jews in the American Civil Liberties Union who fought for the Nazis to win the right to come into the open in the U.S.A. with their hate-and-kill propaganda.

    771. “In the way that a man measures, so is it measured to him” (Megillah 12 B). The masses (many of them still observant) that read the periodicals of the Zionists and looked up to the anti-Torah spokesman, now saw how these same leaders were the implements of the people’s destruction.

    772. The ugly face that the errant leaders display is the result of looking up to the nations for guidance, and these non-Torah spokesmen usually mimic the worst elements of the gentile world.

    773. But G-d tells His people, the genuine Jews: Do you know why you are beautiful my beloved? Because your eyes, meaning your leaders, are like doves. The Torah-leaders are guided by the principles and precedents of the Torah, from which they gain many good qualities. Paramount among these is the quality of humility (“like doves”).

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Mr Nafshi-
      Instead of just copying wholesale from Frumteens and True Torah Jews Against Zionism, why not try and read 'Perfidy' - recomended by R Miller- yourself.

      http://www.amazon.com/Perfidy-Ben-Hecht/dp/0964688638

      You'll find some very good zionists in there. The type that tried saving Jews during the Holocaust.

      Delete
  22. For a powerful revelation of unknown perspectives of what people knew and didn't, believed and didn't, could and couldn't do and in general how Haredi Rabbis and people on the spot related to the unraveling of the holocaust, see the award winning compendium based on the meticulous research of Rebbetzin Ester Farbstein in her monumental "Hidden In Thunder" as portrayed in http://www.cross-currents.com/archives/2008/02/07/two-on-rebbetzin-farbstiens-hidden-in-thunder/

    ReplyDelete
  23. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s9CWH8-S65U

    ReplyDelete

ANONYMOUS COMMENTS WILL NOT BE POSTED!
please use either your real name or a pseudonym.