chiefshmerel

HaKatan appears to believe that the only individuals in the universe with free will are “Zionists”. I’m putting the term in quotes here because it’s not accurate to describe literally every person who doesn’t want Israel dissolved as a Zionist. So I’m yielding to define it as whomever HaKatan thinks are Zionists.
In this fantasy world, Zionists know the level of their own evil and choose to act upon it with disregard for all else. The Mufti, every Arab terrorist ever, and even literal Adolf Hitler (שר”י) don’t have free will and were provoked by Zionists and Zionism.
This hypocrisy is blatant. Jews are and always were a persecuted people. Zionism is a response to that, in opposition to begging for acceptance. Even if you take the illogical pan-Arabist assumption that Jews (“Zionists”) caused every conflict in the Middle East at face value, why and how did they get to such power? What is their interest in the Levant or anywhere else?
There’s a medieval Polish saying that has been gaining popularity these days among “anti-Zionist” crowds: “The Jew will tell you everything that happened to him, but will never tell you why.” We all know who it’s supposedly referring to, but those Jews will freely tell us about the (sometimes state-sponsored) blood libels, pogroms, and genocides we went through over two millennia.
That saying can technically apply to individual Jews, but not necessarily because of their Jewishness. Yet the best faction of people in the world it describes are revisionist thinkers who unite by ideology alone.
HaKatan has fell for the same trap and wants to lure others in. To assume that Zionists provoked, strong-armed, and removed free will of every antisemite of at least the past 150 years is revisionist history. That’s who the saying applies to. And to claim that any individual has absolutely no free will, let alone one with so much discretionary power, is, to use a favorite of HaKatan, Avodah Zarah. אלה אלוהיהם.

somejewiknow, I gave sources. I don’t dispute R’ Kaplan as a source, only that there was more to the story. Has HaKatan (or anyone) done the same for me? I disputed some claims and give sources, no one else has done so.
These reactions boil down to the classic childish bully tactic: “because I said so”.

HaKatan, why do you lack sources for every single one of your claims in response to me? I referenced the Palestine Post and Ha’Aretz. What have you referenced?

HaKatan, I acknowledged that R’ Kaplan lived in Chevron at the time. For the umpteenth time, which part of the following is hard to understand?
If you pride yourself on NOT following current events, you won’t know what happens until it directly affects you. Saying they read the Palestine Post at the Chevron Yeshiva is extremely unlikely. His views at the time were certainly inaccurate and would never be accurate until he acknowledges parts that he wasn’t told, which would require adjustment of views.
Why are his views the only possibly true version of events? My great grandfather learned in Chevron at the same time and was no Zionist at any point in his lifetime. Yet he didn’t think the blame was on any single individual or faction. Saying “Zionists caused it” is oversimplified and inaccurate in the sense of the word “cause”.
To reiterate my comment in my previous post: You still haven’t answered my Occam’s Razor sighting on this thread or others beyond “nuh uh… because I said so.”
By the way, thanks for yielding on my challenge for primary sources of the time, not fuzzy recollections decades later from people who didn’t follow current events at the time. This will be my last post on this thread unless someone has those sources, I’ve made my point.

HaKatan, lecture me as much as you want how R’ Kaplan absolutely must be correct. Yeshivas of the time (and some today) pride themselves on separating from the outside world. News included. Historical accuracy involves familiarity with that history, not just soapbox. You still haven’t answered my Occam’s Razor sighting on this thread or others beyond “nuh uh… because I said so.”
In any case, I repeat my challenge to review newspapers of the time describing tensions building up for days prior. Until then, I cannot take you seriously.
Also, to address Always Ask Questions as well, I’m not disregarding blame; I emphasized the word “cause” to challenge the supposedly obvious cause-effect claim. There’s nothing that would make the massacre the fault of any single faction alone. Then again, when do antisemites in government need a valid reason to attack convenient nearby Jews?

HaKatan is obviously unfamiliar with or intentionally chooses to ignore Pan-Arabism; the common denominator between massacres in Tzefas in the 19th century, Chevron in 1929, and the constant terrorism Israel faces today. He would be the most valuable spokesman (read: tokenized propagandist) for Haj Amin al-Husseini and anyone who appreciates such.

HaKatan and friends,

Can any of you give a source where R’ Aharon Kotler wrote that “Rabbi Dr. Soloveichik was ‘responsible for all the tuma in America'”?

I’ll wait, although I don’t think it will come. Chronology isn’t the strong point of anti-Zionists. Not to mention that even if given, it will be tenuous thanks to a confirmation bias to accept literally any quote that makes Zionists look bad.
Valid sources are either in writing from R’ Aharon himself (whether in a sefer, letter, etc.) or if supposedly said verbally, a recording or claim from someone who heard it firsthand. Lenni Brenner ym”s doesn’t count. והמבין יבין.

HaKatan,

I’m a Zionist and read Perfidy. As you (should) know, the Zionist Ben Hecht wrote it as a hit piece on Israel’s Labor Party immediately before an election, headed by Ben Gurion and which Kastner was a member of. You remind me of Simon Wiesenthal’s cover for Kurt Waldheim because of partisan loyalty, despite Waldheim’s Nazi past. (Read Betrayal by Eli Rosenbaum if you don’t know what I’m talking about.)
Let me ask you, was collaborating with the Zionist Peter Bergson (Hillel Kook) so wrong? If Zionists caused the Holocaust, did Bergson cause the Holocaust?
Do you think Rav Eliezer Silver, Rav Avraham Kalmanowitz, Rav Moshe Feinstein, and hundreds of other Rabbanim did the wrong thing by collaborating with Bergson/Kook?
Bonus question, did the socialist Zionist (Hashomer Hatzair leader) Mordechai Anielewicz cause the Holocaust?

I look forward to your direct reply!

Paging UJM, HaKatan, and the other anti-Zionists on this forum:
So you blame the Hebron Massacre of 1929 on Zionists. I won’t debate that because it won’t help, but can you explain why the Ottomans massacred Jews there in 1517? Or the Egyptians as well in 1834? Ditto for Safed, same years.
Political Zionism didn’t exist before 1870s (estimating generously) and the Jews of both cities weren’t exactly taking sides with the Mamluks in the former case, nor the Ottomans in the latter. Is Occam’s Razor so controversial when concluding that antisemites have always existed in and desiring Eretz Yisrael?
And by the way, UJM, your suggestion about the UN taking over gets excessively dumber as the years go by. I am certain even the Satmar Rebbe wouldn’t have said that in 2025 (his successors certainly have not said so) as the UN gets more hostile.
Plenty of genocides are occurring across the world. Based on a quick search of the UN website, the word “genocide” appears 286 times. But when you search there for certain ethnic groups suffering genocide in 2025, nothing comes up. The word “Druze” does not appear on the UN website even once (notably not in reports or transcripts of speeches). Ditto for “Maronite”. “Sufi” comes up once as a culture with no mention of genocide. Nothing about persecution of Yazidis either.
Do you blame anyone for not wanting the UN to take over the Holy Land?

Avira, when I say anti-Zionist yeshivas, I don’t mean Satmar or a yeshiva that had an official anti-Zionist policy. What I mean is a yeshivish yeshiva in which the rebbeim personally had anti-Zionist views AND proudly espoused said views. I prefer not to name any, lest I give too much information to remain anonymous.
The attitudes I was familiar with were of the nature that require a lot of assumptions and specific long-winded scenarios to be true. For example, it was claimed that Herzl would spit at a frum person if he saw them in the street. No one ever accused him of doing such to them or in their sight, and it would be downright false to claim that he never saw a frum person in his life.
Regarding Perfidy, I wasn’t sufficiently anti-Zionist in the views of the hanhala. Without mentioning any ideas such as not building a state before Moshiach, the first line of defense was that I should read Perfidy. There was barely any discussion of hashkafa regarding this anti-Zionism, only passing references to Herzl’s secular lifestyle. He certainly was secular and atheistic, but was on good terms with rabbanim who wouldn’t dismiss him. That’s why he corresponded with the first Chortkover Rebbe, Rav Dovid Moshe Friedman, even though the Rebbe was not a supporter. Of course, Herzl wanted support, but I don’t recall any source that he sought to force his lifestyle on others. Rav Kook and Rav Reines collaborated with Herzl, although acknowledging them as gedolim doesn’t fit a certain narrative. Rav Kalischer and Rav Alkalai predated Herzl, but very much supported practical Zionism.
By the way, Herzl was not the founder of Zionism, Leon Pinsker was. Herzl’s idea was more than a decade later, piggybacking off Pinsker, and certainly involved the “permission of the nations”. That’s why Herzl met Kaiser Wilhelm during the Kaiser’s visit to Eretz Yisrael in 1898; to attract support from the nations.
I have tremendous respect for certain anti-Zionist rabbanim, such as Rav Elchanan Wasserman, who opposed it as a concept when there was no state. I believe he would be more pragmatic (like Agudah) if he lived a few more years. Ditto for the Satmar Rebbe Rav Yoel Teitelbaum, who had tremendous Ahavas Yisrael and practiced the ideal of “hate the sin, love the sinner”.
I’m not going to debate this anymore, but I’m putting this out there because someone reading this who is otherwise unfamiliar should know there is another side to the story. Whoever wants the last word can have it.

I’m not going to debate anything, and will not respond to “questions” that are really opinions. But I cannot be a bystander while an entire portion of the Jewish People is smeared. I’m only responding to questions in the original post because I don’t want to be a bystander and there is an audience who may not here this if no one else speaks up.
Depending on who you ask, it was started by R’ Samson Raphael Hirsch or R’ Asriel Hildesheimer. The current Yekke community (i.e. Breuer’s) will deny the former, hence I’m referencing the latter. Basic math makes it about 175 years old.
Regardless of which of the two you will choose to focus on, don’t lie to me and say that they either was not a savior of Orthodox Judaism in Germany.
The current version that we see in America today is based on the ideas of Rabbi Joseph Ber Soloveichik & Rabbi Dr. Norman Lamm (not an exhaustive list, but two major ones that come to mind).
The Mesorah is as old as the Torah, as in 3335 years. They are Orthodox and have more respect for Chareidi rabbis than you have for Modern Orthodox rabbis. What they all share is the belief that there is wisdom from the outside world as well; it complements Judaism.
Anything written in the Torah is a must, assuming it applies. (In the sense that not every mitzvah applies unless you are simultaneously male, female, kohen, levi, yisrael, married, single, living in EY & chutz la’aretz, and the list goes on…) Therefore, it is mandatory if written in the Torah; not necessarily mandatory just because one rabbi said it. I believe Tosfos says in Pesachim that one is not required to follow a ruling of beis din if they have a valid source from another rabbi in the period of the ruling’s source or earlier who disagrees. Don’t dismiss this unless you can attest that you learned the entire Pesachim with Rashi & Tosfos and didn’t find it.
A rabbi must be consulted in cases of ambiguity and doubt; that’s what they exist for. Hope I answered your questions. Like I said, I will not debate UJM or anyone else. I will only answer serious questions; not poorly disguised opinions.

I never thought I’d say this as a response to AAQ, but UJM has a point.
YU’s roots are in the Eitz Chaim Yeshiva in the Lower East Side. When the neighborhood continued on the dense path it went on, YU/RIETS decided to move their campus to Washington Heights due to its upper class status (in comparison).
YU may not be for the proletariat but that doesn’t mean that there are no Jews who can afford it. And yes, Manhattan was the center of American Jewish life when YU opened up there.

@mdd1, I apologize if I wasn’t clear enough in referring to Western Ukraine as Western Ukraine. It is correct to say that Galicia was Austria. What is not correct is that other regions were all Russia. Poland was larger before WWI, controlling areas such as Volhynia. Lithuania was larger before WWI, controlling areas such as Kyiv and Odessa (which are not near each other; my point exactly).
As a descendant of Jewish immigrants from Ukraine, my ancestors declared their birth country when filing for naturalization in the early 1920’s as Poland. I.E., Congress Poland, which I realize was part of the Russian Empire, but was Poland at the time of the Tach ve’Tat massacres that non-Russian pro-Russian Jews are fond of bringing up. Khmelnitsky was not Ukrainian; he was a citizen of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth (later and presently Ukraine).
Does the Pale of Settlement mean anything to you, by the way? Just curious if you realize that Jews were restricted to that area, also known as apartheid. All Russia’s doing. Don’t try to spin the story.

If only the pro-Russia folks on this site would realize the following:
Yes, Ukraine was part of the Soviet Union (not Russia proper) until 1991. The only reason that stayed until so recently was due to WWII; Hitler invaded Ukraine (which was Austria & Poland at that point). Stalin won it at the end of the war and hence added it to the Soviet Union.
Stop unwittingly supporting Nazism.

@ujm, Have you ever learned מסכת עבודה זרה? Already in the beginning, there are opinions (פירושים) which, when discussing the relationship one can have with an ‘עובד ע”ז, תוס says it is permissible to do business with them even on their holidays, for the same reason. Despite the גמ’ saying otherwise, משום איבה. But I doubt you know that because you probably haven’t learned it. The basis for entering a church under some circumstances comes from the same general area.
@common saychel, I refer to Rabbi Sacks ZT”L and Rabbi Mirvis Shli”ta when I refer to people who are greater talmidei chachamim than anyone on this site.

At the wedding of William & Kate (also in Westminster Abbey), Rabbi Sacks ZT”L attended due to fear of Chillul Hashem if he didn’t.
Considering Rabbi Mirvis is representing the Jewish people at the funeral, as a rav in his own right, I don’t see him not going. משום איבה.

@ujm, if it were being done because Bush and Reagan were Christian (I intentionally exclude Trump from religion), by people who hated Christians, then yes.
Face it, George Soros is a dream come true for neo-Nazis.

Totally taken out of context. Full sentence:
“We can only reelect Donald Trump if we get engaged in this circular firing squad. It’s got to be a positive campaign, so join us.”
A half truth is a whole lie.

I’m no fan of Obama. I don’t think he was such a good President, not that he didn’t do anything good.

I’m sick of this whataboutism. If Trump does something wrong, but Obama also did it, does that make it right?