Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Quotes from the Zionists
04-23-2012, 10:23 PM,
#1
Quotes from the Zionists
Quotes from the Zionists

Chaim Weizmann

At the Zionist Congress in London in 1937, Dr. Weizmann established the line of policy with his words:

"The hopes of Europe's six million Jews are centered on emigration. I was asked, 'Can you bring six million Jews to Palestine?' I replied, 'No'....From the depths of the tragedy I want to save two million young people...The old ones will pass. They will bear their fate or they will not. They were dust, economic and moral dust in a cruel world...Only the branch of the young shall survive...They have to accept it."

Holocaust Victims Accuse, pp 25.


Theodor Herzl (founder of Zionism)

While Herzl claimed that the establishment of a "Jewish" state would cure anti-Semitism, he also promoted anti-Semitism to further his cause.

Herzl stated in his diary:

“It is essential that the sufferings of Jews.. . become worse. . . this will assist in realization of our plans. . .I have an excellent idea. . . I shall induce anti-Semites to liquidate Jewish wealth. . . The anti-Semites will assist us thereby in that they will strengthen the persecution and oppression of Jews. The anti-Semites shall be our best friends”. (From his Diary, Part I, pp. 16)

Benny Morris (the Israeli Historian), described how Herzl foresaw how anti-Semitism could be "HARNESSED" for the realization of Zionism. He stated:

"Herzl regarded Zionism's triumph as inevitable, not only because life in Europe was ever more untenable for Jews, but also because it was in Europe's interests to rid the Jews and relieved of anti-Semitism: The European political establishment would eventually be persuaded to promote Zionism. Herzl recognized that anti-Semitism would be HARNESSED to his own--Zionist-purposes." (Righteous Victims, p. 21)


Apolinari Hartglass

Apolinari Hartglass, a member of the Zionist rescue committee in Palestine, wrote a memorandum in early 1943 explaining what the purpose of this rescue committee really was, "We may expect the extermination of more than 7 million Jews... It is clear to us today that we cannot dream of saving more than twelve thousand or some tens of thousands of Jews... If the efforts of the committee are likely, therefore, to lead to only the most minimal of results, we must at least achieve some political gain from them... a) if the whole world knows that the only country that wants to receive the rescued Jews is Palestine... b) if the whole world knows that the initiative to save the Jews of Europe comes from Zionist circles; c) if the Jews that are saved from extermination know during the course of the war or after its end that the Zionist movement and the yishuv tried to save them...

He continued: "Should we help everyone in need, without regard to the quality of the people? Should we not give this activity a Zionist-nation character and try foremost to save those who can be of use to the Land of Israel and to Jewry? I understand that it seems cruel to put the question in this form, but unfortunately we must state that if we are able to save only 10,000 people from among 50,000 who can contribute to building the country and to the national revival of the people, as against saving a million Jews who will be a burden, or at best an apathetic element, we must restrain ourselves and save the 10,000 that can be saved from among the 50,000 - despite the accusations and pleas of the million. I take comfort from the fact that it will be impossible to apply this harsh principle 100 percent and that the million will get something also. But let us see that it does not get too much." (The Seventh Million, pp. 99-100)

The Zionists knew, as Hartglass said, that they could reap a great propaganda benefit from the Holocaust, and this is most strikingly apparent from the fact that in September 1942, when most of the Holocaust victims were still alive and well, the Zionists were already busy planning their memorial, Yad Vashem. In that month, a former delegate to several Zionist congresses, Mordechai Shenhavi, proposed that the Jewish National Fund establish a memorial to the victims of the Holocaust. Shenhavi's proposal led to discussions and letters, and a committee was set up to examine them. (The Seventh Million, p. 104)


David Ben-Gurion

Ben Gurion wrote in the N.Y. Times 4/22/63: “Jews are in truth a separate element in the midst of the peoples among whom they live – an element that cannot be completely absorbed by any nation – and for this reason no nation can calmly tolerate it in its midst.”

Ben-Gurion said in 1938: "If I knew it was possible to save all the children in Germany by taking them to England, and only half of the children by taking them to Eretz Israel, I would choose the second solution. For we must take into account not only the lives of these children but also the history of the people of Israel."


Rabbi Hershel Schachter

Rabbi Hershel Schachter records that his teacher, Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik once mentioned that the Satmar Rebbe asked in his sefer: who permitted the Zionists to offer so many sacrifices of Jewish lives for the sake of creating the State and maintaining it? Shouldn’t the danger to life have superceded the whole idea of the State, even if it had been a very great mitzvah? Rabbi Soloveitchik said that seemingly, this is a very strong argument. But he answered it based on his grandfather Reb Chaim Brisker's opinion that saving a Jew from apostasy has the same status in halacha as saving a Jewish life (in contrast to the opinion of the Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chaim 306:10 that the reason one may violate Shabbos to save his daughter from apostasy is only because of the principle of “sin so that someone else should not sin”.) Reb Chaim also held that a person is obligated to enter a situation of possible danger in order to save another person from a definite danger (in contrast to the ruling of the Mishnah Berurah, end of 329). Assimilation, in this context, is like apostasy, for assimilated Jews violate the entire Torah. Were the Jewish State to cease to exist, assimilation in America and Europe would increase by a large factor, for only through the State do the Jews in this period (after the Holocaust) have pride. So the individuals who sacrifice their lives in Eretz Yisroel are putting themselves in possible danger to save the multitude from a definite danger."

Rabbi Soloveitchik went on to say, however, that it is only when the entire existence of the state is at stake that it is obligatory to sacrifice lives to keep it in existence. If it is only a question of returning a piece of land in exchange for peace, the state is obligated to return the land, because the danger to the lives of Jews in Eretz Yisroel supercedes the mitzvah of conquering the Land. This, he said, is against the view of the Minchas Chinuch 425, who says that since the Torah commands us to conquer Eretz Yisroel from the Canaanites, and war by its nature involves some casualties, it must be that the mitzvah was given explicitly with the provision that it overrides Jewish lives. Rabbi Soloveitchik argued that Yehoshua's wars were an exception, since they were commanded directly by Hashem, but at all later times perhaps the Torah only permits conquest and defense of territory when there is some danger to Jewish lives, however remote. (Nefesh Harav, pp. 97-98)

In a 1988 article, Rabbi Schachter goes a step beyond his teacher's views, and says that even giving back land to save lives is not obligatory. First of all, he says, the Minchas Chinuch holds this way. Secondly, we can prove that any war to defend land, even when lives are not at stake, is a mitzvah war. For if it is only an optional war, how do the nations of the world have the right to defend their countries against an attacking army? They have no Sanhedrin that could grant permission for an optional war. So a war to defend territory is a mitzvah war, and by this logic Jews can do it too, even at the expense of lives.

He goes on to explain the reason why, in his view, defending a piece of land is more important than saving lives: "Since Eretz Yisroel is vital to Jewish existence as a nation-state, conquest by a foreign power is considered a lethal blow to the conquered nation. Therefore, just as a doctor may amputate a patient's limb in order to save the patient's life, where the life of an entire nation is in danger it is permissible to sacrifice the lives of the few for the purpose of sparing the nation at large."

However, he says, this would only be true if the Israeli-Arab conflict were a winnable conflict. Then we would put land above lives. But if it were a losing battle, similar to the war against the Romans at the time of the destruction of the Temple, then we would advocate surrender as did Rabbi Yochanan ben Zakai. And if it becomes clear that the conflict is neither clearly winnable nor clearly a losing battle, then it is up to the Israeli people themselves to decide if it is worth the sacrifice to hold onto the land. (Journal of Halacha and Contemporary Society, Fall 1988)

Rabbi Schachter goes even further and says that it is forbidden to pray for peace in Eretz Yisroel, because the Israeli-Arab wars are the “beginning of the redemption” and if there is peace, it will delay the redemption. As his source for this he cites a responsum of the Minchas Elazar (4:5) written during World War I, in which the Minchas Elazar understood that World War I was the being of the redemption and we should therefore not pray for peace, only for the redemption. Obviously, that would not apply here, because war waged by a Jewish state during exile is an obstacle to the redemption, not a vehicle to bring it closer. This is what the Gemara says in Sanhedrin 98a: that moshiach will not come as long as the Jewish people has a sovereign state.


Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik

Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik was a strong supporter of Zionism and the state. His student Rabbi Hershel Schachter records that he once mentioned that the Satmar Rebbe asked in his sefer: who permitted the Zionists to offer so many sacrifices of Jewish lives for the sake of creating the State and maintaining it? Shouldn’t the danger to life have superceded the whole idea of the State, even if it had been a very great mitzvah? Rabbi Soloveitchik said that seemingly, this is a very strong argument. But he answered it based on his grandfather Reb Chaim Brisker's opinion that saving a Jew from apostasy has the same status in halacha as saving a Jewish life (in contrast to the opinion of the Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chaim 306:10 that the reason one may violate Shabbos to save his daughter from apostasy is only because of the principle of “sin so that someone else should not sin”.) Reb Chaim also held that a person is obligated to enter a situation of possible danger in order to save another person from a definite danger (in contrast to the ruling of the Mishnah Berurah, end of 329). Assimilation, in this context, is like apostasy, for assimilated Jews violate the entire Torah. Were the Jewish State to cease to exist, assimilation in America and Europe would increase by a large factor, for only through the State do the Jews in this period (after the Holocaust) have pride. So the individuals who sacrifice their lives in Eretz Yisroel are putting themselves in possible danger to save the multitude from a definite danger."

Rabbi Soloveitchik went on to say, however, that it is only when the entire existence of the state is at stake that it is obligatory to sacrifice lives to keep it in existence. If it is only a question of returning a piece of land in exchange for peace, the state is obligated to return the land, because the danger to the lives of Jews in Eretz Yisroel supercedes the mitzvah of conquering the Land. This, he said, is against the view of the Minchas Chinuch 425, who says that since the Torah commands us to conquer Eretz Yisroel from the Canaanites, and war by its nature involves some casualties, it must be that the mitzvah was given explicitly with the provision that it overrides Jewish lives. Rabbi Soloveitchik argued that Yehoshua's wars were an exception, since they were commanded directly by Hashem, but at all later times perhaps the Torah only permits conquest and defense of territory when there is some danger to Jewish lives, however remote. (Nefesh Harav, pp. 97-98)

http://www.truetorahjews.org/zionistquotes
Reply


Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
Heart To The Zionists! h3rm35 1 483 09-08-2012, 03:26 AM
Last Post: rockclimber
  Louis Theroux: My time among the 'ultra-Zionists' TriWooOx 6 1,628 02-05-2011, 11:48 PM
Last Post: Dunamis
  Zionists launch Wiki editing courses mothandrust 0 461 08-18-2010, 10:30 PM
Last Post: mothandrust
  The Zionists of Arabia plasticfan 5 1,450 03-02-2010, 07:38 PM
Last Post: plasticfan
Sad Zionists - the killers of children joeblow 0 443 11-30-2009, 05:30 PM
Last Post: joeblow
  Critics of “holy Israel” targeted by Christian Zionists joeblow 0 351 10-13-2009, 11:45 AM
Last Post: joeblow
  Anti-Semitism: Zionists’ tool to silence the critics --- 0 385 09-19-2009, 07:43 PM
Last Post: ---
  Zionists Used Biological Terrorism in 1947-1948 --- 0 460 05-08-2009, 09:50 PM
Last Post: ---
  Religious Zionists Challenge March of the Living’s Value --- 0 380 05-05-2009, 04:35 AM
Last Post: ---
  Pics comparing Nazis and Zionists mastermg 4 670 02-11-2009, 01:32 AM
Last Post: ---

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)