To Daniel Tauber. A year ago, I knew very little about Jabotinsky other than he was revered by Revisionists. I am now just completing the reading of the Lone Wolf and can appreciate every word you have written. Along with my reading journey into his life and accomplishments, I was continually confronted by the similarity of the challenges to Zionism in his time with the challenges we now face.
Much can be learned from Jabotinsky’s thinking on and actions in meeting these challenges. Ted Belman
By Daniel Tauber – Jerusalem Post
July 19, 2012 marks the 72nd anniversary of Ze’ve Jabotinsky’s passing
The occasional spatter of articles don’t do justice to the lasting impact of Jabotinsky’s words and deeds.
He was called the next Herzl, the next Dostoyevsky, the Jewish Garibaldi, the Jewish Churchill, the Prisoner of Acre, the Defender of Jerusalem, the Father of the Revolt, and the Father of the IDF. He wrote books, poems and articles. He founded armies and organizations. He was the voice of the downtrodden and was considered by some to be a modern day prophet, travelling around the world warning the people of impending destruction but never doubting their ultimate redemption. Yet, most Jews don’t know much about him or understand his impact on Jewish history.
In much of the Zionist literature, Ze’ev Jabotinsky and his Revisionist-Zionist movement are treated as an afterthought. Where discussed at all, they are often mentioned as a fringe faction, which happened to be correct on a number of issues. In Walter Laquer’s History of Zionism, Jabotinsky gets one chapter.
In Howard Sachar’s tome, Jabotinsky is mentioned in a few scattered instances.
True, Jabotinsky’s legacy gets a boost every now and then with the election of a Likud prime minister or the death of a Revisionist- Zionist figure, such as Benzion Netanyahu or Yitzhak Shamir.
But the occasional spatter of articles don’t do justice to the lasting impact of Jabotinsky’s words and deeds.
Jabotinsky wasn’t just the head of a fringe faction, an influence on two or three prime ministers, or the spiritual father of the leading party in Israel. Every chapter of Zionist history after Herzl’s death was colored by Jabotinsky’s personality. He stands among Herzl, Ben-Gurion and Weizmann as one of the founding fathers of the Jewish State.
JABOTINSKY FOUNDED the Jewish Legion and the Hagana and renewed the Jewish military tradition which was and remains essential to Jewish statehood. His concept of the “Iron Wall,” with its implications for Jewish military strength, defeating violent Arab opposition to Zionism and achieving peace with our neighbors, has become embedded in Israeli society.
He fathered and fostered the organizations and philosophy which expelled the British from the country, without which the state would not have been founded. (Even Lehi, which split from the Irgun after Jabotinsky’s death, was composed of former members of Betar and the Irgun).
He led the effort for illegal immigration, saving thousands of Jews from the Holocaust.
Despite active opposition from the Zionist leadership, the Betar and Irgun saved at least 24,000 Jews, in what they called “Af Al Pi” (despite it all) immigration, which was the forerunner to Aliya Bet.
Until his death, Jabotinsky was the primary Zionist leader who carried the torch of Jewish statehood, while both Weizmann and Ben- Gurion shamefully denied that a Jewish majority and Jewish statehood were the goals of the Zionist movement.
This is not to mention his contribution to the revival of the Hebrew language, his founding of Jewish self-defense groups, his propaganda (hasbara) and fund-raising work for various Zionist causes, or his inspiring thousands to come to Israel and help build the Jewish state. His Zionist propaganda for the Jewish Legion in Britain has been said by many, including Chaim Weizmann, to deserve “half the credit for the Balfour Declaration.”
Nor is this to mention Jabotinsky’s failures, which also speak to his greatness as well as to the shortsightedness of his opponents. He failed to convince the Zionist leadership, the world, even European Jewry itself to evacuate Europe (his warnings were cast down as fear-mongering).
He died before he could convince the Allies to establish a Jewish army to fight in World War II, which would have created a sizable Jewish military force, enabled Jews to fight the Nazis on their own terms, and strengthened their claim to statehood after the war.
(Several years after his death, a less politically useful “Jewish Brigade” was formed which provided military training to thousands of Palestinian Jews). He also died before he could prevent the partition of the already diminished territory of Palestine.
It’s no wonder that multiple Israeli political parties now say they follow in his tradition, that more streets and public places in Israel are named after him than any other figure, or that Israeli legislators debate what he would say about this or that bill or policy.
UNFORTUNATELY, OUT of ignorance and political bias of various shades, our historians, intellectuals and educators have relegated Jabotinsky to the sidelines of Jewish history, especially in the Diaspora.
The result is a monolithic history in which our leaders were in general agreement and made essentially the best choices they could have made given the circumstances. In this history the two-state solution (or partition) was supported by all; it was the United Nations which founded the State of Israel; and our leaders never risked our security in fear of international opinion.
The true history is one of a minimalist-leftist coalition (Weizmann, Ben-Gurion and the socialist factions) rejecting the policies of Jabotinsky’s maximalist-rightist movement with disastrous consequences for the Jewish nation. Partition was criticized severely; it was Jewish arms which founded the state; and the leadership was cautious of international opinion to the point of being suicidal.
The danger of this historical cover-up is not merely the denial of a great man his place in history, but the prevention of generations of Jews from learning from the failed decisions of the past.
A Jew who is denied the opportunity to read Jabotinsky’s testimony before the Peel Commission, his article the “Iron Wall,” his warnings of “H-U-R-B-A-N,” or the plethora of other classic writings and speeches he produced is robbed of the realization that the issues we face today are essentially those we have faced for almost a century.
He is denied Jabotinsky’s eternal, prophetic and awe-inspiring message: We are not consigned to our fate. We need not concede our national interests in search of the ever-elusive moral high ground. Our cause is indeed just and if we have the courage, even in the 11th hour, we can redeem ourselves.
The writer is director of Likud Anglos. His grandfather, R. Jack Tauber, was personal secretary to Jabotinsky. Jabotinsky’s 72nd yahrzeit is this Thursday.
-
“For three years I have been imploring you, Jews of Poland, the crown of world Jewry, appealing to you, warning you unceasingly that the catastrophe is nigh. My hair has turned white and I have grown old over these years, for my heart is bleeding that you, dear brothers and sisters, do not see the volcano which will soon begin to spew forth its fires of destruction. I see a horrible vision. Time is growing short for you to be spared. I know you cannot see it, for you are troubled and confused by everyday concerns… Listen to my words at this… for time is running short.” — Jabotinsky – to the Jews of Warsaw on Tisha b’Av 1938
Jabotinsky Institute in Israel offers a selection of articles written by Ze’ev Jabotinsky
yamit82 Said:
Oh Yamit, how it irks me to say it, but you are right.
Bernard Ross Said:
Bernard, I AGREE with all that you’ve said. I Agree that we’ve been treated shamefully by most of mankind through the ages and the modern world is wicked in its treatment of Israel today. We have every right to protect ourselves by ANY means available to us and I support a small pre-emptive Israeli nuclear strike against Iran, with the threat of a massive second attack. I’m very active in pro-Israel advocacy and find drippy left wing Jews far more irritating than any of our Muslim detractors.
But no matter what crimes are perpetrated against us, we must take care (as the abused), not to become the abuser.
yamit82 Said:
Ok Ted, I’m convinced that I must learn more about the man. Can you recommend where I should start?
elki Said:
Hi Elki, thank you for that, it’s most suprising. I think my world may be turning upside down. I really will have to read some of Kahane’s writings, rather than judging the man by the racists who use his teachings to justify themselves.
“Stop being an overbearing, arrogant, stuffy , self important pr—.”
As we say up here in Irish Canada, “Thanks for the compliment and we’ll have another round.” LOL
@ babara:
He apologized. Indeed, semantics are at play here. Have a bourbon on the rocks and settle back.
@ Michael Devolin:
Don’t you dare telling someone, who is or is not a Zionist. Stop being an overbearing, arrogant, stuffy , self important pr—. You might just have enough grey matter to fill in the spaces.
No worries Michael. It was an interesting discussion. Thanks to Shy and Yamit for their insightful comments.
“If Andrew and others like him wish to feel Zionist it’s not up to us to discourage him.”
I apologize, Andrew, if I’ve discouraged you. That was not my intention (although, after reading my post, that’s what it sounds like). I was simply trying to define the mere essence of Zionism. Again, I apologize.
Rabbi Meir Kahane was the Rabbi of my parent’s shul in Rochdale Village, Queens, New York. His father was the Rabbi of my grandmother’s shul in Brooklyn. Both men were outstanding Jews and Zionists. They devoted their lives to Judaism, Zionism and to Klal Yisroel. I consider it an honor to have known Rabbi Meir Kahane. I think that he was before his time. If he were alive today, many more people would support his views.
Ted my comment on Jabotinsky posted yesterday has not been recovered and posted by you???
@ Michael Devolin:
@ Andrew:
Both of you are correct.
Zionism in the modern political sense is the National Liberation Movement of the Jewish people to reestablish Jewish sovereignty in the Land of Israel or (Palestine) either in total or truncated.
Every religious Jew in a religious sense is a Zionist based also on Halacha and our prophets speaking in the name of the G-d of Israel.
Certainly Zion is one of the three pillars upon which Judaism is based.
Both of you are supporters of a Jewish Israel and therefore can be considered as supporters of some form of Jewish Zionism secular and political or religious.
If Andrew and others like him wish to feel Zionist it’s not up to us to discourage him .
At a time when so many Jews are not Zionists or supportive of Israel this argument boils down to distinctions without much difference.
Michael Devolin Said:
I think we’re in a game of semantics here.
The Torah doesn’t talk of Zionism. It talks of the inseparable connection between Israel and its land. Zionism, as defined by the Jewish Virtual Library is, quote, “…the political and spiritual renewal of the Jewish people in its ancestral homeland.” Why can’t a gentile be a supporter of the Jewish people’s yearning for their land?
On the other hand, the problem with the term “Christian Zionists” is indeed the fact that practically every last religious christian organization and leader are interested in the spiritual corruption of the Jewish people upon their return to Zion. This is what makes that particular term an oxymoron.
Like I said, there are semantics here.
“I am not Jewish but I am a Zionist.”
Then my question to you would be, if it is you truly understand the essence of Zionism, Why are you a Zionist? You may be a non-Jew but you are certainly not a Zionist. You are pro-Zionist but as a non-Jew you cannot be a Zionist. It’s like a non-Jew eating Kosher or celebrating Pesach: there is no meaning in these disciplines for the non-Jew. This is why the term “Christian Zionist” is an oxymoron and a contradiction in terms. It’s not your fault or mine: it’s the way the Torah prescribes these observances. Non-Jews forget that Zionism is part of Jewish Halacha and therefore has nothing in it as reward for the non-Jew.
Tony Jacobs Said:
pLease re read my comment, I thought my words were clear. The behavior you refer to is the behavior that has been exhibited by the arab/muslims towards the Jews. There was no need for you to refer to the posters when the arab/muslim “victims” being attacked have already used all these methods agianst the Jews and no one has done anything about it. I notice that you did not comment on the still as yet UNADDRESSED ethnic cleanisng of Jews from arab nations AFTER the Genveva conventions were signed and put into effect.
Tony Jacobs Said:
I never made that staement and do not see its relevance. However, there is an unusual lack of outrage at the behavior of musims by muslims. I note that Jews immediately disclaim Jewish behavior with which they dissagree. I would submit that the Islamic culture is far reaching and that polls have shown that most muslims agree with behaviors which are considered outrageous in western culture.
Tony Jacobs Said:
Why is it wrong to seek redress, justice and equanimity for the ethnic cleansing of Jews from arab lands and especially to point out the double standard of all who criticise the transfer of arabs but raise not a voice for the CORRECTING of the foul deed. As long as this is uncorrected and unaddressed I can entertain no sympathy or arguments related to the “wrong” of population exchange of arabs. I cannot accept double standards for Jews.
As long as this foul deed is uncorrected then it is an acceptable behavior in international law among those who allow it to remain. If you notice in my comment regarding the ethnic cleansing of Jews and the arab transfer I am merely seeking to complete the action, which so far has only been completed by the Jews, which has gained world acceptance. There is precedence set not only in this ethnic cleansing of Jews but also in other population swaps(eg India pakistan) I always am suspicious of those who seek double standards for jews and encourage jews to turn the other cheek. I find their double standards to be disingenuous and indicative of con artistry.
@ Felix Quigley:
Frankly Felix besides you, nobody gives a shit what Bronstein said once somewhere or not. What is not debatable is that even if he had been prescient re: the Jews, he did nothing about it. He and his ideological and political partners were responsible for the mass murder of many people including Jews.
You as a Commie have nothing to say to us or to teach us if it is based on any form of MARXISM.
“TROTSKY MAKES REVOLUTIONS AND THE JEWS PAY FOR THEM”, was not coined by Jews is a vacuum, was it?
For your information, antisemitism predated Capitalism by a few thousand years. It had nothing to do with class warfare either.
Michael Devolin Said:
Garbage. Zionism, is the belief that Jewish people have the right to self determination in their homeland. I am not Jewish but I am a Zionist.
“Zionism is not the property of any one religion”
Oh, but it is. Zionism is the exclusive property of Judaism and the Jewish people. Without Judaism and the Jewish people there can be no Zionism. It’s as simple as that. Anything else is a transmogrification of the term and its prescribed nationhood.
“I exercise my right to disagree.”
I believe in “freedom of speech” too. But “free speech” becomes servile and confined when it descends into the restricted bounds of denigration and calumny. Slandering others does not involve intellectual discipline but only base passion.
Felix, I agree completely with the above; but it contradicts what most posters here (and indeed, most Jews) have been saying. They all seem to believe that the Shoah was simply a contination of equally bad Christian treatment of the Jews throughout history, and therefore entirely predictable. What you are quoting here, is a statement that this was NOT normal Christian treatment of the Jews; that Christians are, in fact, actually HUMAN. You may have to alter what you’ve said, to fit in with the prevailing prejudice.
Norman Geras
Marxists before the Holocaust
I shall begin here from an astonishing fact. In December 1938, in an appeal to
American Jews, Leon Trotsky in a certain manner predicted the impending
Jewish catastrophe. Here is what he wrote: ‘It is possible to imagine without
difficulty what awaits the Jews at the mere outbreak of the future world war.
But even without war the next development of world reaction signifies with
certainty the physical extermination of the Jews.’1 This was just a few weeks after
Kristallnacht and it was one month before Hitler’s famous Reichstag speech of
30 January 1939 in which he ‘prophesied’ the annihilation of European Jewry
in the event of a world war.
I call Trotsky’s prediction an astonishing fact. For it is a common and well-
grounded theme in the literature of the Holocaust that the disaster was not
really predictable. It was outside the range of normal experience and of sober
political projection or indeed imagination. Even once the tragedy began to
unfold, many people found the information on what was being done to the Jews hard to absorb, hard to connect up into a unified picture of compre
hensive genocide, hard to believe; and this applied to wide sections of the
Jewish population itself. Then, after the event, its enormity has seemed
to many difficult to grasp. It has seemed to be in some measure beyond
understanding and explanation. We have the evidence of such a reaction
from none other than Trotsky’s great biographer. Referring to ‘the
absolute uniqueness of the catastrophe’, Isaac Deutscher would later
write:
The fury of Nazism, which was bent on the unconditional extermi
nation of every Jewish man, woman, and child within its reach,
passes the comprehension of a historian, who tries to uncover the
motives of human behaviour and to discern the interests behind the
motives. Who can analyze the motives and the interests behind the
enormities of Auschwitz? . . . we are confronted here by a huge and
ominous mystery of the degeneration of the human character that
will forever baffle and terrify mankind.2
How are we to account for Trotsky’s prescience in this matter? Was it per
haps just some sort of stray, dark intuition? Or was it rather a hypothesis
founded on the forms of knowledge which he brought to trying to under
stand the realities of his time? I shall in due course propose as an answer
that it was something in between. But I will come to this answer by way
of a critical review of Ernest Mandel’s thinking on the same subject. This
is the main purpose of what I want to present here, though my aim will be
as well, through it, to offer some more general reflections on Marxism as a
body of theory in relation to the Nazi genocide against the Jews.
I say a critical review of Mandel’s thinking on the subject and critical is
what it will be; although it will be somewhat less so in relation to his
later views as compared with the earlier ones, since there was an internal
development and enlargement of these. Still, overall, it will be critical.
And I am bound to observe, therefore, that so critical a review may seem…
Reviewing the literature Geras notes the following:
Michael Marrus, The Holocaust in History, London 1987 , pp. 156-64. Yehuda Bauer goes
so far as to say that nobody predicted the Holocaust, whatever may have been claimed to
the contrary; that the most that anyone could have envisaged was ‘pogroms, economic
destruction, hunger, or forced emigration’, not ‘the mass murder of millions of human
beings’. I have no way of knowing whether Bauer is familiar with Trotsky’s quoted
remarks but, however things may be in general on this score, I do not see how those
remarks can be taken in the way Bauer suggests. It is not only that Trotsky puts …
PS…I am not sure why Geras says “in a certain manner”…why the qualification, and his stupidity about “intuition” (is Geras from the Twilight Zone!!!)
‘It is possible to imagine without
difficulty what awaits the Jews at the mere outbreak of the future world war.
But even without war the next development of world reaction signifies with
certainty the physical extermination of the Jews.’1
His own (Geras) emphasis! Could any prediction be more explicit!
This is from http://www.questia.com/googleScholar.qst?docId=98490462
@ dweller:
I was never a follower of Kahane nor one of his groupies but I have met and worked with him in an official capacity and found him to be a very humble Jew. That’s not to say he was in some ways egotistical but most great men are.
My objection is to your characterization of he being insufferable and regretful. Maybe for the likes of you who I consider insufferably egotistical he was. You are seldom correct in your characterizations of others and this is but the latest example.
What Kahane did was not for himself, and his family suffered greatly because he put the Jewish people first.
There was a saying!
What is the difference between Kahane and a prophet?
Answer: 20 years
Another Version:
What is the difference between Kahane and mainstream moderate Zionists?
Answer 20 years.
Posted by Ted Belman, Jan 9, 2009 Rabbi Meir Kahane z’l (written in 1976)
Israel, US and the Stinking Fish
Pls. read all the comments as well.
I remember hearing really bad things about Kahane. Then I took time to actually listen to one of his speeches. He struck me as very erudite and measured. There didn’t seem to be anything hateful about him. The more I read of his writings, he seems to have been a very great man.
@ yamit82:
How is he that?
@ yamit82:
In what way? — how, precisely, have I ‘lied’
— or ‘slandered’ the man?
Are you saying he wasn’t an egotist?
Or are you saying, rather, that he was — but that there was nothing insufferable about that?
Or are you saying he was an insufferable egotist
— but that this reality wasn’t regrettable?
Which is it?
@ Michael Devolin:
True.
As a human being, you most certainly ARE ‘qualified’ and ‘permitted’ to excoriate them for “their human frailties.”
— especially if they are heroes in your eyes.
@ BlandOatmeal:
Coming from a descendant of Chief Guacamole of Outer Mongolia, and a direct descendant of King Agag; I accept your comment as complimentary.
@ NormanF:
If you really believe that, I can recommend some very fine books on Jewish history. Jabotinsky was an important and had some influence and his talents far exceeded his influence but the greatest figure in Jewish history???? Shirley you jest?
@ yamit82:
@ dweller:
Liar, Slanderer. May your evil tongue wither.
Speaking of insufferable egos, I see in your comment a classic example of the proverbial “pot calling the kettle…”!!!
A very accurate self description.
I must admit that I know very little about Kahane or his views. I confess that in my ignorance I may have mis-judged him. My view of the man is based on what his admirers and followers say about him.
elki Said:
You seem to be saying that since Herzel was a self loathing Jew and looked down on observant Jews, it’s ok for Kahane to be racist. I must say again, two wrongs don’t make a right.
Michael Devolin Said:
Addressing your second paragraph, Zionism is not the property of any one religion, organisation, nation, etc. You have every right to an opinion and to express it, just as I have a right to disagree.
As for your first paragraph, I exercise my right to disagree. Kahane is a Zionist like The Peoples Democratic Republic of N. Korea/S. Yemen/Bhutan/Algeria/etc, or The Democratic Republics of Congo/China/Afghanistan/Vietnam/etc are all democracies.
Arthur Koestler on Jabotinsky. Arrow in the Blue, page 143:
Jabotinsky’s speech in the Kursaal , the largest concert-hall in Vienna, was a remarkable event. I have heard many political speakers since, but no one who could cast a similar spell over the audience for three solid hours without ever resorting to cheap oratory. There was not a cliche in his speech, delivered in a German worthy of the traditions of the Imperial Burg Theatre; its power rested in the transparent lucidity and logical beauty. One of Jabotinsly’s admirer’s – either Lord Wedgwood or Anatlole de Monzie – has called him the greatest orator of his time and the only man, besides Lloyd George, who was equally outstanding as a speaker journalist and a politician.
Bernard Ross Said:
I notice you don’t bother to dispute my contention that many Kahane supporters on this site broadly accept nazi style round-ups and forced deportations of Arabs from areas under Israeli control. It worries me that that doesn’t seem to worry you.
As for the rest of your post:
1) Not all Arabs are bad.
2) Two wrongs don’t make a right.
yamit82 Said:
Ok Yamit, you’re 100% correct and I can’t be pretty right wing. I’m stupid and you are clever. I cannot tell you exactly where I am on the political spectrum, in absolute terms.
So please show stupid me exactly, in absolute terms, without any hint of relativity, your position.
Tony Jacobs Said:
Dear Tony, we do not need to look to the nazis for inspiration, we can look at the arabs/muslims who are the actual subjects of t your statements and who are guilty of more than the transfer envisioned in return. 1) Their islamic culture encourages them to slaughter jews 2) they slaughter jewish civilians not just soldier 3) they control 77% of palestine mandate Jewish homeland in swindle, they control gaza & they control arab population centers in west bank,5) In all the areas under their control that formerly were part of the palestine mandate jewish homeland there is a ban on jewish settlement, jews cannot own property, jews cannot reside, jews are in danger:obviously this is not changing, 6) The arab countries who engaged in war against Israel ethnically cleanse their centuries old jewish populations from there midst and stole their properties: what is your solution for addressing this UNADDRESSED war crime that has occurred AFTER the GC are in force(no GC for Jews??)It cannot be allowed to go unaddressed: my solution is that: in the absence of the UN, the hague and the arab countries taking responsibility, the only EQUITABLE solution, that removes double standards against the Jews,is to act unilaterally and consider the ethnically cleansed jews as the first half of a population exchange(eg india/pakistan)with the arab/muslims to be transferred to the relevant arab countries. 7) the intenationally guaranteed jewish right of settlement in the west of jordan river must be encouraged and these rights are being obstructed by the existing muslim population and the GOI. If they cannot live iin peace with jews they must be expelled from the jewish homeland. 8) NO SINGLE COUBLE STANDARD AGAINST THE JEWS SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO REMAIN IN ANY AREA UNDER JEWISH CONTROL.
I was commenting not on their respective personalities but on their respective Zionism: both warned of impending violence against the Jewish people; both suggested that a necessary denouement to that impending violence was the unifying power of Zionism.
I am not qualified nor permitted as a Gentile to excoriate them for whatever might have been their human frailties. Both are heroes in my eyes, and both should have been given more credence by those critics, the same who even today refuse to acknowledge their prescient intellects.
@ Tony Jacobs:
Jabotinsky doesn’t remind me of Kahane either.
But not because the latter was a ‘racist bigot.’
I’ve heard that claim about Kahane for years. Never believed it.
Kahane had problems, granted.
But a ‘racist’ he was not. Kahane couldn’t have cared less what somebody’s DNA consisted of.
You could, perhaps, make the argument that he was some kind of “culturo-religio chauvinist” — but with a litle time, I (or anybody else who’d been paying attention) could leave that allegation in shreds too.
Kahane was an insufferable egotist, and that’s regrettable. But he got a lot of things right, and he wasn’t a racist.
More often than not, those who used that epithet on him did so because they found it a convenient tool, not because they believed that about him.
Sorry that you call Kahane a racist. We should have listened to him. See the youtube here covering Herzel and Jabotinsky. I am disappointed about info I did not know.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LKaIeEWTUqw&feature=related
Ted Belman Said:
Because, Ted, It’s just as wrong for us to talk about the Arabs as if they were a single, unified block, as it is for them to refer to Jews that way. Further, many of those Arabs have lived in the disputed territories for a lot longer than the Jews who would evict them. Lastly (from me at this time, not because there are no more arguments), Israel is a democracy and there is nowhere near a majority in favour of rounding up and deporting any ethnic minority to the east, for resettlement. I’m pushed for time and know I haven’t articulated my arguments well, but I’m sure you can understand my point.
If you want to bar me from commenting, that’s your prerogative. I’m a libertarian to the core and defend your right to do so, no hard feelings on my part.
Yamit, in my opinion, your version of our religion is sick and twisted. That’s not an attack on you, just my take on your opinion. I don’t call you names, nor question your legitimacy as a Jew. I don’t even expect you to reciprocate the courtesy. Just don’t write to me any more. I don’t dispute you material, just your interpretation.
@ Tony Jacobs:
@ Michael Devolin:
People, intolerant of drunks, should be all the more intolerant toward hostile and abusive Muslims.
Without political correctness Judaism could be defined as racist not the skin type and color racism but a type of racism that declares the Jews different, and others less sanctified, thus deficient in a major respect, the transcendent realm. Judaism demands the isolation of Jews from the outside world, which is less clean then we are supposed to be. Judaism is self-righteous and presumes others to be wrong. Judaism is a radical teaching, and rejects compromise about values or observance.
Intolerance isn’t bad. It’s tolerance and permissiveness that is.
Kahane a racist or just a good Jew living and acting out and through real Judaism?
Zionism By Rabbi Meir Kahane
Jewish History! That whirlpool of tragedy, drama, and courage, whose richness and color dazzle anyone who plunges into its depths. And the American Jew, whose ignorance of self is devastating, knows it not. It is so important that he travel backward through the pages of his own times! It is so necessary that he learn what his stubborn zeydes did or refused to do and how, but for their obstinacy, he would not exist today…
Listen, you who begin to believe in inanities and who begin to doubt the legitimacy of a Jewish State. You who weep for the oppressed Arabs and gnash your teeth at the ‘fascist’ Zionists. You who waver in support of Israel and who suggest that she lie down and die. Listen.
You are too young to remember the day. It was a moment in May, the 14th day of that loveliest of months, and they stood in the streets. They, the Jews; they, your people; they, the Zionists. The year was 1948, but to Jews it was 1878. One thousand eight hundred and seventy-eight years since the long exile began. You see, that is how your people count history.
They stood in the streets and waited, these Zionists. To look at them, you would never have imagined them to be part of an international cabal, hand-maidens of Rockerfeller’s Esso and other monopolist oil interests. Beholding the old men, and the rapturous women and the glorious youth, one might easily have been moved to consider them the farmers and tailors and housewives and mechanics and students – and Auschwitz survivors – they claimed to be.
And as they stood, they listened to a proclamation that tolled an end – and a beginning – of an impossible dream come true. The words entered their ears, filling the minds, choking their throats, gripping their hearts, flooding their eyes:
“We hereby proclaim the establishment of the Jewish State in Palestine, to be called ‘Medinat Yisroel,’ the State of Israel…”
And as the last words drifted off into the cloudless mid-eastern skies, the ‘fascists’ of Tel Aviv burst into song, the song. The words were written a mere sixty years earlier; the idea was 1,878 years old. With tears streaming down their reactionary cheeks and radiance lighting up their faces, they sang:
“Od lo avda tikvateynu…
Our hope is not yet lost –
The hope of two thousand years.
To be a free people in our land
The land of Zion and Jerusalem.”
How they sang and how they rose – for just that moment in time – to the heights of immortality. And happy were they eyes that merited seeing that moment, while how sad for you that you were not there to taste the sweetness of a miracle.
And when they finished singing, with the stains still fresh on their skin, they danced – oh, how they danced. Never was there a dance such as this and never will nations know the ecstasy of such vindication…
Listen, young descendant of a stubborn zeyde. Listen and try to understand the tenacity of the Jew who sat in countless synagogues on the night of Tisha B’Av with flickering candles and tearstained Book of Lamentations, with stockinged feet and bearded face as befits the mourner for Zion and who mournfully remembered the anniversary of the destruction and sadly intoned the words: “How doth she sit solitary; the city that was filled with people hath become a widow.”
Listen to all this and ask yourself the question: Was it truly United States oil that created Israel? Was it really the military-industrial complex that gave birth to a Jewish State? Was it the United Nations that brought us home? Was it British imperialism that created this dream?
There was no Esso when Jews were driven from the land in which they had lived for centuries and to which they vowed to return. There were no Arabs when Bar Kochba went down to defeat, and Jews were already turning to Zion three times a day. There was no Pentagon when Yehuda Halevi, the greatest of medieval Jewish poets, wrote: “My heart is in the East and I am in the West.”
Israel came into being because it never came out of being. Israel came back to life because it never died. It was the Jewish State in the days of Joshua; it was the Jewish State when there were Pharaohs; it was the Jewish State when Assyrians and Moabites and Edomites and Philistines and Babylonians and Persians and Hellenes and Romans drifted through history and passed out of it again. It remained Jewish because Jews never left it and there was never a time when Jewish communities did not remain in Zion.
Do you think Theodore Herzl created Zionism? Not so! Zionism came into being the day that Jews went into exile and was nurtured by every religious law and custom. Every Jew who practiced his faith and every Jew who observed his tradition was a Zionist. Herzl was merely a man whose time had come, and Jews simply put into practice the goal and dream and aspirations of two millenia. Had there been no Balfour Decleration – there would still have arisen the State of Israel. Had there been no United Nations – there would still have come into being a Jewish State. The stubbornness of Jewish zeydes can be denied for only so long…
After suffering the slings and arrows of outrageous Gentile fortune and a sadistic world for too many centuries, the Jew in the late 19th century decided that he had had quite enough of moving eulogies over his grave and wished to become quite as normal as those who persecuted him. He dreamed a dream of Zion, woke up with its memory firmly captured and decided to do the impossible – go home.
@ Tony Jacobs:
Question: Can a Woman be half pregnant?
Can a Jew be “pretty right wing”?
Observant Jew? According to who and what?
Mishne Torah, Sefer Shoftim, The Laws of Kings and Their Wars, Chapter 5, Halakha 12
Halakha 12: Talmud Bavli, Ketuvot, 110b, Our Rabbis taught: One should always live in the Land of Israel, even in a town most of whose inhabitants are idolaters, but let no one live outside the Land, in a town most of whose inhabitants are Israelites; for whoever lives in the Land of Israel may be considered to have a G-d, but whoever lives outside the Land may be regarded as one who has no G-d. For it is said in Scripture, To give you the Land of Canaan, to be your G-d. [Vayikra 25:38] Has he, then, who does not live in the Land, have no G-d? But [this is what the text intended] to tell you, that whoever lives outside the Land may be regarded as one who worships idols. Similarly it was said in Scripture in [the story of] David, For they have driven me out this day that I should not cleave to the inheritance of the L-rd, saying: Go, serve other gods. [Shmuel I 26:9] Now, whoever said to David, ‘Serve other gods’? But [the text intended] to tell you that whoever lives outside the Land may be regarded as one who worships idols. [Tosafot,’Avoda Zara, 5]
An Israeli citizen who left Israel to return to England and abandoned we Jews for “the good life” (sarc)?
The Rambam (Mimonides) writes:
“It is forbidden at all times to leave Eretz Yisrael for the Diaspora except: to study Torah; to marry; or to save [one’s property] from the gentiles [lit. the worshippers of the stars and signs]. [After accomplishing these ends,] one must return to Eretz Yisrael.
Mishne Torah, Sefer Shoftim, The Laws of Kings and Their Wars, Chapter 5, Halakha 9”
Tony Jacobs Said:
Make your case, if you want to have commenting privileges here. Why is it racist to remove your enemies from your midst. Its called self defence. To expel the Arabs is common sense so long as they want to kill you and destroy your state.
WHAT YOU HAVE DONE IS TO SMEAR US RATHER THAN DEBATE WITH US.
I saw the video the “Children are ready” and I want to add they are also ready for the truth. The truth is that revered fathers of Israel killed jews in order to promote their perceptions and views of reality. Like the 2000 year Christian serial jew killers’ program to kill the witnesses in order to obstruct truth and facts the revered fathers and their current successors maintain their decades long program of failure so as to avoid shining the light on Jabotisky’s truths/ That lights would reveal the truth of their failure and the lie of their morality. Today the Jews are in ignorance because the leaders of Israel perpetuates the failed program and obstruct the truth regarding the Jews right of settlement which is clearly written in international law long before the Levy report. Even the Levy report does not assert Jewish rights but only states that under the GC Israel is not an occupying force. A very pertinent question was recently asked by Jack Golbert: When and How did the Jews lose the internationally guaranteed right to settle west of the JOrdan? It is likely that those who killed Jews to maintain jewish security were also the ones to begin the cynical journey whereby their “solutions” deprived Jews of their rights. One would have to revise Israeli history and teach the children the truth about their revered fathers. The cover up of the abandonment of Jewish settlement rights by the GOI must be revealed. I would like to know, as there are many Israelis on this forum who are well versed in Jewish and Israeli history, the answer to Jack Golberts question: the when and the how???
Michael Devolin Said:
Thanks for telling me what I think and believe, but I can think for myself.
I think that everyone is equally entitled to an opinion and your opinion is a pile of poo. Please don’t bother to respond, I’m sick of racist bigots of all religions and all political persuasions. I’m a pretty right wing, observant Jew and Israeli citizen and I find your position repulsive. So please don’t write to me again.
Racist bigot? And were Jabotinsky’s efforts at making peace with the Arab-Muslims reciprocated. No.
Your remarks are symptomatic of Torah-defined Zionism diluted and transmogrified with non-Jewish, grotesque ideas.
Torah Zionism is the only Zionism applicable and exclusive to the Jews of Israel AND of the diaspora. All other imaginations, no matter how similar or how palatable, are effeminate and emasculate the very purpose of real Zionism as defined in the Torah.
Your argument is not with me, your argument is with the Torah and G-D; you’re not offended by my estimation of Rav Kahane, you are offended by those ideals and stratagems (which were Rav Kahane’s)inclusive in the Torah of the Jews. “Forget not the landmarks of our fathers.” If you are Jewish and you are not living in the land of Israel, your Zionism is not fully realized. I did not demand this of you, the Torah demands this of you. Rav Kahane (OBM) lived his Zionism and died for it. You could be more respectful of such a brave and courageous Jew. What did King David say? “With the utmost hatred, I hate them; they have become enemies unto me.” The very projection of your contention with Rav Kahane (and Torah Zionism) is delineated in the anti-Jewish protestaion, “Zionism is racism.”
Michael Devolin Said:
Kahane was a racist bigot, who was not fit to do menial work for Jabotinsky. Just look at the writings of some of his admirers on this blog, who condone the actions of the nazis as a fitting tactic to employ against the Arabs of Y&S. These same bigots make the most vile personal attacks against any Jew who does not agree with them. The only similarities between Jabotinsky and kahane are that they were both Jews of the same gender.
Jabotinsky reminds me of Rav Kahane. I cannot comment as a Jew, but in my humble opinion, both were shining examples of what real Zionists are.
Vladimir Jabotinsky is the greatest figure in Jewish history.
A close study of his life and death has much to commend itself to Jews today.
The circumstances of his era remain very much with us as is Arab opposition to Zionism and Jewish Statehood.
Every Jew in Israel is his heir whether or not they want to acknowledge it.