Just Emes:
Regarding the “Beis Din of Klal Yisrael”, this is not relevant; all this indicates is that Hashem listens to them, not that they are or are not correct.
Regarding Rav Moshe, as I wrote, the context matters (like by Rav Meir Simcha, just for example), and the questions above would address the issue.
Beyond this, regarding mitzrayim and Zionism, I asked you if you believed that the arsonist in the example I mentioned above was deserving of hakaras haTov. A similar chiyuv (or, presumably, lack thereof) of hakaras hatov would apply to the Zionists.
From the rest of your post, it appears that you don’t understand the basis for comparison. I will get to it after your next point.
Again, the major gedolim like the Brisker Rov and others held that no matter who would run the State it would still be assur to start it. And even those from the Agudah who agreed not to prevent it, whatever that means, did so with the expectation that the Zionists would not interfere with Yahadus, as I wrote. Since the Zionists did and do interfere, it is plain from their words that none of those Agudah Rabbis would have endorsed the State of Israel. So much for “Klal Yisrael’s Beis Din”.