G
gilliam
Guest
Well, well, well… Look what we have here… And some here said they are many in this category. Looks like just a few raticals.
jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1108783754541&apage=1
There is a small group of Jews – perhaps a few hundred people altogether – who make up what is surely the most universally reviled group within world Jewry. Mention their name, and Jews of every stripe will grimace. They are, of course, the Natorei Karta anti-Zionists, the self-declared “Guardians of the City,” who can often be seen in their ultra-Orthodox garb demonstrating alongside Palestinians at international events, and who drew attention to themselves most recently by visiting the dying Palestinian leader Yassir Arafat in his Paris hospital.
The Natorei Karta’s antipathy to the State of Israel has its origins in the objections to political Zionism articulated by most of Orthodoxy dating back to the late 19th century. These objections had their basis in the very secular focus of political Zionism, which Orthodoxy saw as a threat to Jewish tradition and observance.
While this dim view of Zionism has never really subsided among haredim, most integrated into the nascent State of Israel, with their representatives acting as a voice of opposition from within. Those who refused to change their stance became the Natorei Karta, for whom any compromise with this reality was and remains sacrilege, an affront to Judaism and God.
Natorei Karta will not participate in the life of Israel, and they openly call for this “heretical” state to be dismantled because, in their view, its very existence and its every action hinders the advent of the Messianic era.
Over recent months a new group has emerged that seems to uncannily echo the stance adopted by Natorei Karta. Its adherents use religiously charged language to besmirch the democratically elected government of Israel. They seem to have no respect for the rule of law and their verbal assaults on those who oppose them are increasing in tempo and aggression.
The group I am referring to consists of those among the religious settlers and their supporters who will continue to oppose the Gaza disengagement whether or not there is a referendum.
This group – a minority, it must be said – has decided unequivocally that the Greater Israel ideal is of such enormous significance that no kind of pragmatic compromise with reality can possibly be reached.
And make no mistake: This group is not about to roll over and give up its cause for the sake of Jewish unity. Should the disengagement take place, as it seems certain it will, adherents of this group will become sworn enemies of the State of Israel, equal in scale and virulence to the Natorei Karta.
But while Natorei Karta has no history of violence, the uncompromising proponents of non-disengagement have already proven themselves violent and, worryingly, most of them have military training. The idea that rational, democratic, sensible measures – such as a national referendum – would in any way defuse the fire of their extremism is both na ve and dangerous.
Perhaps because I live in London rather than Israel and am not overwhelmed by the pressure-cooker environment that is Israeli politics (which generally results in myopic, petty arguments about issues that have long been decided), certain things are obvious to me.
It is obvious to me that leaving Gaza is a good thing for Israel. It is obvious to me that the two-state solution, originally proposed in 1947, will inevitably result – whether now, in five years or in 10 years – in a State of Palestine. It is obvious to me that the Greater Israel ideology that led to the wholesale settlement of Judea, Samaria and the Gaza Strip was a gamble that never paid off.
It is obvious to me that there is no country in the world – friend or foe – that sees Yesha as anything other than occupied territory that must be returned to the control of its majority inhabitants sooner rather than later.
It is obvious to me – as a non-Zionist nonresident of Israel – that the absolutist uncompromising aims of settler Zionists, while worthy of admiration for their steadfastness in the face of adversity, are a danger to the security of Israel, unhelpful to the international reputation of Israel and an excuse for anti-Semitism the world over.
…
The miracle of Jewish survival has always been the result of pragmatism and practicality, not extremism. It is a lesson that the fanatical Greater Israel land-cultists would be wise to learn. The writer, an Orthodox rabbi, helped found London’s Saatchi Synagogue. pini@pinidunner.com
jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1108783754541&apage=1
There is a small group of Jews – perhaps a few hundred people altogether – who make up what is surely the most universally reviled group within world Jewry. Mention their name, and Jews of every stripe will grimace. They are, of course, the Natorei Karta anti-Zionists, the self-declared “Guardians of the City,” who can often be seen in their ultra-Orthodox garb demonstrating alongside Palestinians at international events, and who drew attention to themselves most recently by visiting the dying Palestinian leader Yassir Arafat in his Paris hospital.
The Natorei Karta’s antipathy to the State of Israel has its origins in the objections to political Zionism articulated by most of Orthodoxy dating back to the late 19th century. These objections had their basis in the very secular focus of political Zionism, which Orthodoxy saw as a threat to Jewish tradition and observance.
While this dim view of Zionism has never really subsided among haredim, most integrated into the nascent State of Israel, with their representatives acting as a voice of opposition from within. Those who refused to change their stance became the Natorei Karta, for whom any compromise with this reality was and remains sacrilege, an affront to Judaism and God.
Natorei Karta will not participate in the life of Israel, and they openly call for this “heretical” state to be dismantled because, in their view, its very existence and its every action hinders the advent of the Messianic era.
Over recent months a new group has emerged that seems to uncannily echo the stance adopted by Natorei Karta. Its adherents use religiously charged language to besmirch the democratically elected government of Israel. They seem to have no respect for the rule of law and their verbal assaults on those who oppose them are increasing in tempo and aggression.
The group I am referring to consists of those among the religious settlers and their supporters who will continue to oppose the Gaza disengagement whether or not there is a referendum.
This group – a minority, it must be said – has decided unequivocally that the Greater Israel ideal is of such enormous significance that no kind of pragmatic compromise with reality can possibly be reached.
And make no mistake: This group is not about to roll over and give up its cause for the sake of Jewish unity. Should the disengagement take place, as it seems certain it will, adherents of this group will become sworn enemies of the State of Israel, equal in scale and virulence to the Natorei Karta.
But while Natorei Karta has no history of violence, the uncompromising proponents of non-disengagement have already proven themselves violent and, worryingly, most of them have military training. The idea that rational, democratic, sensible measures – such as a national referendum – would in any way defuse the fire of their extremism is both na ve and dangerous.
Perhaps because I live in London rather than Israel and am not overwhelmed by the pressure-cooker environment that is Israeli politics (which generally results in myopic, petty arguments about issues that have long been decided), certain things are obvious to me.
It is obvious to me that leaving Gaza is a good thing for Israel. It is obvious to me that the two-state solution, originally proposed in 1947, will inevitably result – whether now, in five years or in 10 years – in a State of Palestine. It is obvious to me that the Greater Israel ideology that led to the wholesale settlement of Judea, Samaria and the Gaza Strip was a gamble that never paid off.
It is obvious to me that there is no country in the world – friend or foe – that sees Yesha as anything other than occupied territory that must be returned to the control of its majority inhabitants sooner rather than later.
It is obvious to me – as a non-Zionist nonresident of Israel – that the absolutist uncompromising aims of settler Zionists, while worthy of admiration for their steadfastness in the face of adversity, are a danger to the security of Israel, unhelpful to the international reputation of Israel and an excuse for anti-Semitism the world over.
…
The miracle of Jewish survival has always been the result of pragmatism and practicality, not extremism. It is a lesson that the fanatical Greater Israel land-cultists would be wise to learn. The writer, an Orthodox rabbi, helped found London’s Saatchi Synagogue. pini@pinidunner.com