It should be made clear that the reason the state of Israel was not established many years earlier, after Britain received a mandate to do exactly that in 1917 was BECAUSE of the (violent) objections of the Arabs.
In fact, the second world War may be considered to have delayed the formation of the state of Israel.
So...after the loss of 6 million of our brethren many of whom could have been saved if the Brits hadn't caved to the Arabs, we could also ne a bit aggrieved maybe?
The reason that a Mandate was created that included language for a "Jewish National Home" (notably NOT a sovereign Jewish state) was that the Paris Peace Conference after WW1 was basically a discussion between three philo-Semites.
1. David Lloyd-George was an actual Christian Zionist. (So was Arthur Balfour, but he wasn't a major player in British politics at that time.) This was not an uncommon end-times theology among the Welsh Protestants such as Lloyd-George at that time, even though he didn't let religion prevent him from bringing his mistress to Paris with him rather than his wife.
2. Woodrow Wilson's father had been one of the leading Presbyterian ministers in the South and Wilson himself was a Presbyterian elder who believed in the return of Jews to Zion; I am not sure that it was based on end-times theology or simply the more common (today) view among many (nor all) evangelical Christians that Jews are God's Chosen People and deserve our homeland. Wilson proved that a philo-Semite can be a horrible racist about Black Americans -- although not so much of a racist to avoid marrying a widow with documented American Indian ancestry.
3. Georges Clemenceau came from an opposite perspective. He was a leftist atheist who passionately hated the Catholic Church (which was still at that time horribly anti-Semitic). In his long career, even more as a journalist than as a politician, he repeatedly defended the interests of oppressed minorities including Black Americans during Reconstruction, the Communards of the 1871 Paris Commune, and Armenians when the Ottoman Empire was murdering them *en masse*. But he seems to have had a special place in his heart for Jews. He published almost seven hundred articles in his newspaper defending Dreyfus -- at great risk to his life. The result of Clemenceau's work was an absolute total complete defeat for the anti-Dreyfus movement and the Catholic Church that had supported it almost totally; France separated Church and State in 1905 and remains a militantly secular country today (except for Alsace and Lorraine, which were not a part of France at that time). Clemenceau wanted Jews to have a homeland like every other people.
It might be possible to ascribe the fact that three non-Jewish Zionists led the Paris Peace Conference to Divine Intervention. All three had limited political support in their home countries. None had majority support in their countries' legislatures. Wilson was hated by the majority Republicans; Lloyd-George was distrusted by much of his own party in addition to the majority Conservatives, and Clemenceau was hated by, well, just about every other politician in France and they had only turned to him to lead the country when it seemed like there was no alternative (sort of Churchill in 1940 Britain).
". The Hamas massacre is a price that we pay for having a Jewish State, but the Holocaust was a price that we paid for not having one. This is just one of the many reasons that we should be very, very grateful that we have Israel."
I think it's very strange to propse that the Holocaust *couldn't* happen to a Jewish state. Especially one that is under constant threat from its neighbors who want to destroy it, chas v'Shalom. Armies invade sovereign nations all the time. The Nazis steamrolled over many sovereign nations. And when that happens, the population is at their mercy. The Holocaust was an extreme outlier in world history (October 7th style pogroms were much more common), and the lack of a Jewish state has nothing to do with it. צא ולמד what happened to the sovereign Jewish state during the time of the Churban. I am sorry to sound so morbid, but I think you are giving over the wrong message. There are perhaps many good reasons to have a sovereign Jewish nation, but Holocaust prevention is not one of them. Only Hashem can allow or prevent a Holocaust.
Thanks. I hear what you are trying to say, although it still seems strange to me, referring the prevention of a hypothetical future Holocaust in some unspecified country "one of the most basic goals" of having a Jewish state, and talking about the real Holocaust as "price that we paid for not having one"- as if we had the option of preventing the Holocaust by establishing a Jewish state earlier. Almost like a resident of Hiroshima building a nuclear bunker in 2010 and saying how great it would have been to have it in 1945. Surely there are much more basic and practical reasons for Jewish people to want a Jewish state.
It was already clear by around 1930, if not 1920, that there was going to be some sort of Jewish state, absent strong attempts to sabotage it (which of course did take place). Did the Holocaust change things? The one act I think we can point to is the November 29, 1947 resolution. And that resolution- for several reasons- had no legal impact, and no real practical impact, as the British were planning on pulling out anyway (and had to). Still, did it pass because of the Holocaust? Maybe, but Israel still had to do a *lot* of lobbying to get it passed, and the same for later events, like US recognition of independence. So probably the Holocaust had *some* impact, but not as much as some people think.
The UN resolution had the practical impact of having the US and USSR both recognize the new Jewish state very quickly after it was declared. And many other countries followed shortly thereafter: Czechoslovakia, Nicaragua, Poland, Guatemala, and Uruguay within a few days; Hungary and South Africa (two days before a pro-Nazi government won the general election in ZA!) within a month; Finland, Paraguay, Costa Rica, Panama, Venezuela, El Salvador, and Honduras by mid-September. About 30 more countries would do so before Medinat Yisrael was a year old. That recognition would have come much slower had there not been the UN Resolution.
I didn't say there was *no* effect. Even so, Truman, for example, had to have his arm twisted with Chaim Weizmann tracking down his old Jewish haberdashery partner, who was by then an active Zionists, and getting him to barge into the Oval Office and sweet talk him into meeting Weizmann.
(Truman wasn't an anti-Semite, but was irritated by Zionist pressure. Truman's wife was a real old-fashioned Jew-hater who wouldn't let Jews into the house- and since it was her house, Harry apologetically let her have her way.)
Two others who pushed Truman in the right direction were Clark Clifford, an old fashioned Washington insider who would later serve as Secretary of Defense under Johnson, and Henry Wallace, a millionaire businessman previously Secretary of Agriculture, Secretary of Commerce, and Vice President, who was then a far left third party Presidential candidate (and stooge for Stalin) who repeatedly attacked Truman for not supporting a new Jewish state.
Nevertheless Truman still slapped an arms embargo on Israel and even prosecuted Americans who broke it. That embargo would remain in effect through the entire Eisenhower Administration and was ended by Kennedy. Stalin, OTOH, ordered his Czech stooge Gottwald to ship arms to Israel even as Gottwald had the man who had arranged for the arms transfers, Jan Masaryk, pushed out of a window.
Masaryk's father has a bunch of places named after him in Israel, including a street in Jerusalem, in the neighborhood where the streets tend to be named for non-Jewish Zionists (Lloyd George, Patterson, Smuts, and others- Martin Luther King is a few blocks away, but I'm not sure if that's intentional). I imagine that sort of crowded out the son.
In Washington, there's a statue of Masaryk pere located right next to one of Gandhi. My wife, who used to live nearby, finds it funny that Masaryk is in an overcoat and Gandhi is in a loincloth. :-)
I wonder how much of Wallace's views were sincere and how much were the party line. I tend to be a bit cynical about Communists considering how they flipped back and forth about Hitler in the late 30's and early 40's. I wonder if Wallace's views, ahem, "evolved."
Wallace, of course, was who FDR sent out to meet the March of the Rabbis while he himself ducked out the back door of the White House for a supposed prior commitment with the Yugoslavian Air Force. As Rav Soloveitchik, who was there, put it, "And we all know what a vice-president is worth." (Meaning no insult to Wallace, I suppose, who was perfectly nice but useless under the circumstances. To know what a vice-president is worth, see the famous line of Wallace's predecessor, John Nance Garner: "not worth a bucket of warm ****".)
Rav Soloveitchik would later see the Hand of God in how the USSR and USA agreed on one thing only, the creation of Israel.
Clifford, of course, ended his career deep in scandal over an Arab-linked bank. Nothing to do with Israel, though.
Norman Lamm once entertained us with stories of how he personally worked (in various capacities) against the arms embargo in 1948, almost getting arrested by the FBI at points. Part of that made it into the movie version of The Chosen- I don't think it's in the book.
"Norman Lamm once entertained us with stories of how he personally worked (in various capacities) against the arms embargo in 1948, almost getting arrested by the FBI at points. "
"I wonder how much of Wallace's views were sincere and how much were the party line."
Definitely sincere. His wealth came from being the first to successfully commercialize agricultural biotechnology. He greatly admired Zionist agriculture and visited Israel in 1947. He was no Communist just a useful idiot.
Unlike almost every other stooge for Stalin, Wallace eventually realized he was wrong, and said so:
I am unaware of any other leftist in the US who has ever made such a confession. Unfortunately, the ones in Europe who left the Left (pun intended) include Oswald Mosley, Pierre Laval, and Benito Mussolini. Sadly, the few modern US leftists who actually know some history cite Wallace's appeasement strategies and not his pro-Israel policies as models and ignore Wallace's later denunciation of communism.
Pete Seeger late in life kinda sorta apologized for being an apologist for Stalin. And of course a lot of those hauled in front of HUAC had dropped Communism because of Stalin, and some even admitted to it. The New York Times has never returned the Pulitzer they got for it.
Never Forget the book Perfidy by Ben Hecht. Never forget how the secular Zionist founders worked tirelessly to thwart plans to save hundreds of thousands of Hungarian Jewish lives from the Nazi crematorium during the holocaust to prevent them from reaching Israel. Never Forget!
I'm not going to damn Ben Hecht, because he did heroic work. But I will critique him.
His own colleague, Peter Bergson/Hillel Kook later told David Wyman that Hecht was a dramatist and tended to exaggerate. One the obvious lies (told for dramatic effect, no doubt) was that Malkiel Grunwald's brother was killed by the Gestapo along with Fabian Herskovitz. Both were prominent members of the Budapest Jewish community and were very much alive and active when Hecht wrote Perfidy.
One critic "praised" Hecht's autobiography (recommended, but skip the immodest parts) as being one of the finest pieces of fiction of its age. (Ask Nachum for the citation)
Hecht worked with secular Zionists. (And so did R. Michel Ber Weissmandl. The latter instructed those rescued by Kastner to testify on his behalf.)
Hecht wrote Perfidy to get back at his political opponents. Maybe they deserved it. But given the partisan and unreliable nature of the book, you should continue reading other books on the subject. Perfidy should not be the only book you read on the topic.
One thing that is vital to understand the period, is that even among the rescue activists there were debates on exactly what to do. The stakes were high and being on the perceived wrong side of the issue meant one could be accused of causing the deaths of thousands+++. I'll also note that no one wrote a rule book on how to save Jews from a massacre. (See e.g. the beginning of Hansi Brand's memoirs)
I'll conclude by saying that Kastner, whether right or wrong was not the first to face such a dilemma. יוחנן בן זכאי himself is neither vindicated nor condemned by חז"ל. And it would seem to imply that on his deathbed, he wasn't sure himself.
If we can't speak with certainty about a גדול הדור who would have achieved the level of דעת תורה, why should we be so certain about Kastner?
The stupidity with which you bring in a Talmud great and compare him to a demented Jewish renegade who threw away his father's faith and sold is soul to the Nazi devel is sickening. Classic obfuscation.
But that isn't even my point. It's about the founders and leaders of secular Zionism during the war that I particularly speak of. Stop the obfuscation. Again, it's about the secular Zionist leaders. After all, that is what this post is about. Israel and the holocaust.
Joel Brand was offered by Einstein hundreds of thousands of Hungarian lives for trucks. The Zionist leaders...the Jewish agency...they got him arrested so he couldn't complete the deal. The blood of hundreds of thousands of souls is on the heads of these people. And they are obviously paying for it right now it gehennim.
Is Israel a blessing from G-d for the Jewish nation? Sure. But the idea of zionism - when stripped away from religion - is a sickening disease, as history so clearly demonstrates.
"The stupidity with which you bring in a Talmud great and compare him ..."
Let me be perfectly clear. There has not been anyone comparable to יוחנן בן זכאי in more than 1000 years. Not Kastner, nor Hecht, nor (להבדיל) Rav Weissmandl. Does that mean that there גמרא has nothing to teach us? Why not toss every single אגדה that mentions an incomparable sage because he was incomparable? Unlike you, I believe in the eternal message of אגדות and I don't consider the lessons of them inapplicable because of the awesome level of its protagonists. But I will assume, perhaps imprudently, that your fuss over the בן זכאי comparison is only due to the wide gaping immeasurable difference in personality and not of circumstance.
"a demented Jewish renegade"
That's not how Rav Weismandl thought.
"threw away his father's faith "
This is rather sloppy. To throw something away implies he had it to start with. I'm not show to what extent Kastner had a full Torah upbringing.
" Classic obfuscation. "
I think you meant conflation. Obfuscation means to render something unintelligible. You fully understood my point. Your response, though incorrect, was to the point and thus indicates you understood me. So there was no obfuscation.
"But that isn't even my point. "
Then stick to it. And don't fuss over what you consider irrelevancies.
"Joel Brand was offered by Einstein hundreds of thousands of Hungarian lives for trucks. "
Not exactly. He was provided what on the surface appeared to be such an offer. It was understand by many then, and many now, as something more sinister than a genuine offer. If you read more than just Perfidy, you'd know that.
".they got him arrested so he couldn't complete the deal"
Again. It's not clear that this charge is true. But you wouldn't know that ambiguity because you only read Perfidy.
" so he couldn't complete the deal"
It's not clear that he could have completed the deal. Was the deal even possible? An illegal delivery of thousands of trucks to the enemy during wartime? And it doesn't matter whether it was actually possible. It only matters if it appeared impossible at the time. If you would read more than just Perfidy, you'd be less confident.
"And they are obviously paying for it right now it gehennim. "
I can't confirm this either. Many my binoculars are too cheap.
" But the idea of zionism - when stripped away from religion - is a sickening disease"
So you've gone from relying on Hecht, to condemning him. Did you read Hecht's Guide For The Bedevilled?
Its funny. You sound like some kind of Zionist plant intending to bamboozle posts against your cause. You attack me line by line. You get lost in words when my intent is clear.
Notice you have not even mentioned at all how Rabban Yochanan Ben Zakkai got into this. You compared him without the least explanation! Yes, that is obfuscation. You want to demonstrate that you have a counter point without even having one.
But even more striking is that you call him Yochanan Ben Zakkai. If you know anything about Mishna and Talmud or at least if you respected it, you would refer to him as Rabban Yochanan Ben Zakkai, as found in Shas. You would not strip away his honorific title or call him Ben Zakkai which is so non-religious-scholarly. The type that views Jewish history and Talmud as simply historic without the least holiness (at best).
You say you can't see into hell because your binoculars are too cheap. Well so is your faith. And your sincerity. Zionists worked with the Nazis to prevent Hungarian Jews from reaching Israel. It is historical fact. For example. The Jewish Agency of which Chaim Weizmannn was a big part, and Ben-Gurion was chairman, elected on board Yitzhak Gruenbaum ymsh.
Here is what he said in 1942 while the Jews were being thrown in ovens:
“I will not demand that the Jewish Agency allocate a sum of 300,000- or 100,000-pounds sterling to help European Jewry. And I think that whoever demands such things is performing an anti-Zionist act.”
Wow! The Jewish Agency felt that helping European Jewry while they were being gassed and tortured was not important enough! As this sub-human Gruenbaum said himself “I think it is necessary to state here – Zionism is above everything.” Yes. And Zionism did that. They ignored the European Jews during the holocaust. Any Zionism stripped of Judaism is a wicked disease.
Nothing you've written here is relevant to my suggestion that you read more than Perfidy.
You can bloviate over my shortening of מרן הרב הגדול הפאר הדור עטרת ראשינו הצדיק הקדוש הבבא שר התורה העילוי הנפלא פוסק מובהק רבן של כל ישראל יוחנן בן זכאי in order to enhance readability and reduce obfuscation. But you, for all your pretension, respect him less. You consider him irrelevant and you reject to learn anything from him.
Now you go to the opposite extreme and add titles to blow past my correct observation that you are lacking in respect for Talmud. I never indicated that you should title him more than the Talmud does. I said don't strip away his title.
Also you never even began to explain what Rabban Yochanan Ben Zakkai has to do with anything!!!!!!!!!!!
You simply mention that I should learn from him. What should I learn from him more than anyone else regarding our topic? You seem to be afraid to go further. Lets have at it. I bet we will see some serious lack of Torah scholarship on your part once you open up. I'm ready whenever you are.
Your intent is actually rather muddy. I don't like Kastner much. His granddaughter is a horror show too. Not sure why that's relevant to anything.
"You would not strip away his honorific title or call him Ben Zakkai which is so non-religious-scholarly. The type that views Jewish history and Talmud as simply historic without the least holiness (at best)."
Do you study your Mishna with commentaries? Rav is one of the foremost. Here is what he writes on that sentence: רבן יוחנן בן זכאי. ותלמיד דן לפני רבו היה באותה שעה, לכך קוראו בן זכאי
The individual here is actually Rabban Yochanan Ben Zakkai. He is called here Ben Zakkai because at that time he was a student in the presence of his teacher.
It's like calling Rashi by his name Shlomo. Perhaps if referring to when he was a young student, we might say Shlomo. When discussing Rashi in general however we have more honor for him than that.
Oh, I also don't like Kastner ymsh much. But not because of his granddaughter. Because he was a Nazi collaborator. For example, he encouraged Jews to board the trains to their deaths by the Nazis.
The fact that you trivialize such discussion by pointing out your dislike of him for another reason completely (like: "I don't like Eichmann much. His attitude was horrific. Not sure why that's relevant to anything") speaks volumes of you.
"Home is a place that you can always enter. While the Jewish state serves many purposes, one of its earliest and most basic goals is that there should be a country which will let Jews in and can be always be relied upon to do that."
If that's the case, the optimal strategy would be to create a small, heavily fortified spot where everyone can run to in an emergency. It makes no sense to invite world Jewry there in peacetime. It's the equivalent of living in a miklat and inviting people from neighborhoods which aren't under threat to join you. Also, the worst possible place to establish this safe haven would be a region where muslims and christians have been killing each other for centuries over. That's like building a miklat on the roof of a skyscraper. Additionally, you would want to create as many safe zones in as many different places as possible. Like, maybe Israel could exchange Yitzhar for Guantanamo Bay, and kochav ha'shachar for some territory in Thailand. It would probably save on labor costs to have hordes of potential Thailandi workers close by.
(I'm not sure I necessarily disagree with your overall point. I'm more trying to get you flesh out your argument.)
"It makes no sense to invite world Jewry there in peacetime. "
And it makes more in wartime? Why? Is it cheaper and easier to move around in wartime?
"Also, the worst possible place to establish this safe haven would be a region where muslims and christians have been killing each other for centuries over. "
You know, you're describing much of the world.
" Like, maybe Israel could exchange Yitzhar for Guantanamo Bay, and kochav ha'shachar for some territory in Thailand."
"And it makes more in wartime? Why? Is it cheaper and easier to move around in wartime?"
No. Because that's what safe havens are *for.* You don't live in a miklat because it's safer to so than to run there while there's a missile on the way.
313 – Roman co-emperors Constantine I and Licinius declare that Christianity is an acceptable religion.[73]
324 – Constantine—having defeated Emperor Maximian, Caesar of the Western Roman Empire at the Battle of the Milvian Bridge—becomes the sole ruler of the re-united Roman Empire with its capital at Byzantium (New Rome). Queen Helena, a devout Christian, wife of Eastern Roman Emperor Constantius and mother of Constantine the Great, departs for the Holy Land and begins the construction of churches.
326–333 – Concurrent construction of the world's first 4 state-sponsored purpose-built churches under the tutelage of Constantine and Helena: the Church of the Nativity is built in Bethlehem, marking the site where according to Christian tradition Jesus was born; "Eleona" (Greek: Olive) on the Mount of Olives in Jerusalem, also called "Chapel of the Apostles", marking the site where, according to Christian tradition, Jesus ascended to heaven; the Church of the Holy Cross,[citation needed] later called the Church of the Resurrection and Church of the Holy Sepulchre, is built in Jerusalem around the hill of Golgotha, marking the site where, according to Christian tradition, Jesus was crucified, buried, and resurrected; and the basilica of St. George at Mamre (Ramat el-Khalil), near Hebron.
c. 350 – The Christian monk Hilarion founds the first church in Haluza and converts a large portion of the population.[74]
351/2 – Jewish revolt centered around Sepphoris against the Caesar of the Byzantine (Eastern Roman) Emperor Constantius Gallus. The revolt is quickly subdued by Gallus' general Ursicinus.[75]
c. 357 – Palestine is divided into the provinces Palaestina Prima and Palaestina Salutaris.[76]
361–363 – Roman emperor Julian the Apostate orders Alypius of Antioch to rebuild the Jewish Temple.[77]
363 – An earthquake with its epicenter in the Galilee rocks Palestine.[78] The earthquake results in, among other things, a halt in the construction of the Jewish Temple, mainly because it ruins the early stages of the construction. Ultimately the plan to rebuild the Temple is scrapped after the death of emperor Julian in June 363.
374/5 – Melania the Elder founds a monastery on the Mount of Olives which also functions as a hostel for pilgrims.[74]
c. 400 – Palestine proper is split into the provinces Palaestina Prima and Palaestina Secunda. Palaestina Salutaris is renamed Palaestina Tertia.[79]
425 – The Sanhedrin is disbanded by the Byzantine Empire.
The Madaba Map depiction of 6th-century Jerusalem
438-439 – Empress Aelia Eudocia Augusta visits Jerusalem for the first time.[80]
451 – The Council of Chalcedon declares that Jerusalem shall be a patriachate.[81]
484 – Samaritans revolt as Emperor Zeno has a church built on their holy mountain, Gerizim.[82]
529 – The Samaritans rebel against the Romans.[83] Samaritanism loses its religio licita status as punishment.[84]
541/2 – The bubonic plague sweeps Palestine.[8]
555/6 – Uprising by Samaritans and Jews centered around Caesarea.[85]
571 – Muhammad, founder of Islam, is born in Mecca.[73]
613 – The Sasanian Empire (Persian Empire) captures several Palestinian cities on the coast.[86]
614 May – The Sasanian Empire under general Shahrbaraz captures and sacks Jerusalem;[86] the Church of the Holy Sepulchre is damaged by fire and the True Cross is captured.[86]
629 – Byzantine Emperor Heraclius retakes Jerusalem after the decisive defeat of the Sassanid Empire at the Battle of Nineveh in 627. Heraclius personally returns the True Cross to the city.[87]
634 February 4 – The Rashidun Caliphate defeats a 300-man-strong Byzantine force led by Dux Sergius at the Battle of Dathin, near Gaza.[88]
Early Muslim period
See also: Early Muslim conquests and Muslim conquest of the Levant
Rashidun period
637 (or 638) – Jerusalem falls to the armies of Rashidun caliph Umar Ibn el-Khatab.[89] Jews are permitted to return to the city after 568 years of Roman and Byzantine rule.[90]
June/July – The Rashiduns capture Gaza.[89]
summer – Ascalon surrenders to the Rashiduns.[89]
late – The Rashiduns and the Byzantines consent to a truce.[89]
640 – The Rashiduns capture Caesarea.[72]
641 – The Rashiduns capture Ashkelon, completing their conquest of the Holy Land.
659 – Earthquake.[91]
Umayyad period
The Dome of the Rock (photograph from 1856)
661 – The Umayyad family takes control of the caliphate and moves its capital to Damascus, following the assassination of the Caliph Ali ibn Abi Talib.[92]
687–691 – The Dome of the Rock is built on the Temple Mount in Jerusalem at the site where, according to Islam, Muhammad ascended to heaven.[73]
c. 715 – Sulayman ibn Abd al-Malik founds Ramla; it becomes the capital and administrative center of Palestine.[93]
744:
February – Caliph Hisham ibn Abd al-Malik dies and is succeeded by Al-Walid II.[94]
spring – Beginning of widespread mutinies against the Umayyads.[94]
April – Caliph Al-Walid II is assassinated and succeeded by Yazid III.[94]
October – Yazid III is assassinated and succeeded by Ibrahim ibn al-Walid.[94]
November – Caliph Ibrahim is defeated in battle by Marwan II who becomes the new caliph.[94]
745 – Theodore is appointed patriarch of Jerusalem.[94]
749 January 18 – The Galilee earthquake destroys Tiberias, Scythopolis, Hippos, and Pella. Many other cities throughout the Jordan valley suffer heavy damage. Tens of thousands of lives are lost.[95][96]
Scythopolis (Beit She'an) was one of the cities destroyed during 749 Galilee earthquake
Abbasid period
747–750 – Civil war resulting in the overthrow of the Umayyads; the Abbasid family seize control of the caliphate.[97]
758 – The Caliph Al-Mansur visits Jerusalem and possibly orders the renovation of the Dome of the Rock.[98]
762 – The Abbasids found Baghdad and designate it the caliphate's new capital.[99]
792/3 – War between the tribes of Palestine[100]
796 – Battles between the tribes of Palestine.[101]
799 – The Patriarch of Jerusalem sends a mission to the Frankish king Charlemagne and the latter returns the favor.[102]
c. 800 – The Jewish High Council, headed by Gaon, moves from Tiberias to Jerusalem.[103]
800 – The Patriarch of Jerusalem sends another mission to Charlemagne carrying the keys to the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, together with a banner.[104]
807 – A rebellion breaks out. Led by Abu'l-Nida', it has its epicenter in Eilat.[105]
813 – Earthquake.[106]
c. 820 – The Church of the Holy Sepulchre is repaired.[107]
820 – Basil is appointed patriarch of Jerusalem.[108]
855 – Solomon is appointed patriarch of Jerusalem.[107]
885 – The Abbasids reconquer Damascus.[109]
873 – The governor of Egypt, Ahmad Ibn Tulun, breaks with the Abbasids and establishes independent rule.[109]
878 – The Tulunids occupy most of the former Byzantine Diocese of the East, enabling them to defend Egypt against Abbasid attacks.[110]
879 – Elias III is appointed patriarch of Jerusalem.[111]
c. 881 – Elias III of Jerusalem appeals to the Franks.[112]
c. 903 – Persian geographer Ibn al-Faqih visits Jerusalem.[113]
905/6 – The Abbasids regain control of Palestine.[109]
908/9 – Al-Muqtadir forbids Christians from serving in administrative positions.[114]
c. 913 – Spanish scholar Ibn Abd Rabbih visits Jerusalem.[113]
935 – Al-Ikhshid takes control of Egypt and establishes independent rule.[109]
937 March 26 – Rioting Muslims burn down the Church of the Resurrection and loot the Chapel of Golgotha.[115]
939:
October 17 – Muhammad ibn Ra'iq conquers Ramla.[116]
late – Battle of al-'Arish between Ibn Ra'iq and al-Ikhshid.[116]
946 July – Sayf al-Dawla invades Palestine.[117]
966 – A Muslim-Jewish mob torches the Church of Resurrection, plunders it, and kills Jerusalem's Patriarch John VII.[118]
Fatimid period
969/70 – The Fatimids, a self-proclaimed Shia caliphate, defeat the Ikhshidids and appoint a Jewish governor.[109]
971 – The Qarmatians attack Damascus.[109]
September 5 – The Qarmatians conquer Ramla.[119]
December – The Fatimids ward off a Qarmatian invasion near Fustat.[119]
972 or 975 – Byzantine emperor John I Tzimiskes leads an expedition that reaches as far south as Caesarea and Tiberias in Palestine.[120]
975:
winter – The Turkish officer Alptakin conquers Sidon and slaughters the population.[121]
spring – Alptakin conquers Tiberias.[122]
April – Alptakin conquers Damascus.[122]
977 March 12 – Ramla is again conquered by the Qarmatians.[123]
978:
Joseph II is appointed patriarch of Jerusalem.[123]
August 15 – A massive Fatimid army defeats Alptakin and the Qarmatians in southern Palestine.[124]
Europe has been even worse, at least since about the beginning of the third century CE. Most of those wars were Christians killing Christians in the name of God. Some were Christians killing Pagans, and then they turned to killing us in the 20th century.
Oh yes you are. There are very few places on Earth that have experience long periods of peace and tranquility. That fact alone is enough against your fact vomit.
"You don't live in a miklat because it's safer to so than to run there while there's a missile on the way."
This again shows that you're downplaying the crisis. Children sleep in the protected room, and others remain close to it. Maybe not in the center, but down south and up north. Show some concern for them.
978–979 winter – The Jewish Fatimid general tries to negotiate with the leader of the Hamdanids, but their leader Abu Taghlib refuses because Fadl is a Jew.[125] He later agrees to negotiations with Fadl who offers him Ramla in exchange for ousting the Jarrahids.[126]
979 August – Abu Taghlib launches a failed offensive on Ramla and is taken captive and executed.[126]
981:
June – Damascus is besieged by a Fatimid army.[123]
July – The Bedouins, led by the Jarrahids, rebel against the Fatimids.[127]
983 July 5 – Damascus is conquered by a Fatimid army.[123]
984 – Orestes is appointed patriarch of Jerusalem.[123]
991 February 24 – Ya'qub ibn Killis dies.[128]
996–998 – Revolt in Tyre. The rebels call for and receive support from the Byzantines. The Fatimids put the city under siege and it falls in May 998. The rebel leader is tortured and crucified.[129]
1006–1007 – Russian abbot Daniel makes pilgrimage to Palestine.[130]
1008 – Caliph al-Hakim bi-Amr Allah forbids Jerusalem Christians from performing the Palm Sunday procession.[106]
1009 October 18 – Caliph al-Hakim bi-Amr Allah orders the destruction of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre.[131]
1011–1013 February – Uprising of the Yemenite Djarrahid Bedouin tribe who seize Ramla and establish a mini-caliphate.[132]
1012 – Beginning of al-Hakim bi-Amr Allah's oppressive decrees against Christians and Jews.[133]
1015 September 4 – Earthquake. The dome of the Dome of the Rock collapses.[134]
1021 February 13 – Caliph Al-Hakim is assassinated and succeeded by his son al-Zahir.[135]
1024 September – Bedouin rebellion erupts over tax-collecting privileges (iqta'a). The Bedouins attack and loot Ramla and Tiberias.[136]
1026–1027 – Richard of Verdun makes pilgrimage to Palestine.[137]
1027 – A treaty is signed between the Byzantine emperor and the Fatimid caliph. It permits the rebuilding of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, and allows Christians who had converted to Islam under duress to return to their former faith. It also granted the emperor the right to designate the patriarch of Jerusalem. In return, the mosque of Constantinople would be reopened.[138]
1029 – Anushtakin defeats a Bedouin coalition that challenges Fatimid rule in Palestine and Syria.[139]
1032 – Renovations of the Dome of the Rock ordered by Caliph al-Zahir are finished.[140]
1033:
Jerusalem's city walls are rebuilt.[141]
December 5 – 1033 Jordan Rift Valley earthquake.[142]
1047 – Persian poet and traveler Nasir Khusraw visits Palestine.[143]
1063 – The Fatimids strengthen or rebuild the walls of Jerusalem.[144]
1064–1065 – The Great German Pilgrimage takes place.[145]
1068 – An earthquake destroys Ramla, killing an estimated 15,000.[146]
1071 – The Seljuk Turks invade large portions of West Asia, including Asia Minor and the Eastern Mediterranean; they capture Ramla and lay siege to Jerusalem.[147]
1073 – The Seljuks invade Palestine.[148]
1075:
The Seljuks capture Damascus.[147]
A severe drought hits Palestine.[149]
1077 – The Seljuks capture Jaffa.[147]
1089 – The Fatimids conquer Tyre.[150]
1092–1095 – Abu Bakr ibn al-Arabi stays in Jerusalem.[151]
1093 – Muslims in coastal communities bar Christians from entering Palestine.[152]
1095 November 27 – Pope Urban II launches the First Crusade at the Council of Clermont. Its principal objectives are Catholic reconquest of the sacred city of Jerusalem and the Holy Land, and the freeing of Eastern Christians from Islamic rule.
1098:
July – The Fatimids lay siege to Jerusalem.[144]
August 26 – The Fatimids recapture Jerusalem.[153]
June 7 – The crusaders reach Jerusalem and besieges the city.[154]
June 17 – A Genoese fleet captures Jaffa.[155][156]
July 15 – Catholic soldiers under Godfrey of Bouillon, Robert II of Flanders, Raymond IV of Toulouse and Tancred take Jerusalem after a difficult siege, killing nearly every inhabitant.[157]
July 22 – Godfrey is elected as the ruler of Jerusalem, but he is not crowned king.[158][159]
August 12 – The Crusaders defeat the Fatimids at the Battle of Ascalon.[160]
Battle of Cresson (from a copy of the Passages d'outremer, c.1490)
Godfrey of Bouillon enters Jaffa.[152]
1100 December 25 – The Kingdom of Jerusalem is established.[161]
1113–1115 – Earthquakes hits the region.[162]
1116 – The Latins repair the walls of Jerusalem.[162]
1153 August 23 – The Franks capture Ascalon, thus completing the conquest of the Western coast of the Mediterranean Sea.[163][164]
1177 November 25 – Battle of Montgisard: Baldwin IV of Jerusalem and Raynald of Chatillon defeat Saladin.
1124 – Crusaders conquer Tyre.[165]
1177 – The Latins repair the walls of Jerusalem.[162]
1187:
May 1 – Battle of Cresson: Saladin defeats the crusaders.
June – Saladin captures Tiberias.[161]
July 4 – Saladin defeats Guy of Lusignan, King of Jerusalem at the Battle of Hattin.[161]
October 2 – Saladin captures Jerusalem from Crusaders.[166]
1189 August 28 – Guy of Lusignan besieges Acre.[167]
1189–1192 – Third Crusade led by the armies of Richard the Lionhearted.
1191:
June 8 – Richard arrives at Acre.[167]
July 12 – The Muslim garrison at Acre surrenders to the Crusaders.[168]
August 20 – Richard executes Muslim prisoners from Acre outside the city.[167]
September 7 – Richard I of England defeats Saladin at the Battle of Arsuf forcing him to retreat with heavy losses.[169]
Siege of Acre (painting by Dominique Papety from 1840)
1192:
September 2 – Richard and Saladin signs the Treaty of Jaffa, a peace-treaty to run for three years.[170]
October 9 – Richard leaves Palestine.[171]
1193 March 3/4 – Saladin dies in Damascus. Conflicts between his sons, brothers and nephews cause the disintegration of his empire.[172]
1202 – Major earthquake.[173]
1219 March – The Ayyubid sultan Al-Mu'azzam Isa orders the destruction of Jerusalem's city walls to prevent the crusaders from capturing a fortified city.[174]
1229:
February 18 – Frederick II and the Ayyubid sultan Al-Kamil signs the Treaty of Jaffa, a 10-year-truce (hudna) that restores Jerusalem, Nazareth, and Bethlehem to Christian control in exchange for protection.[175]
March 17 – Frederick enters Jerusalem.[176]
1239 – The Ayyubid ruler An-Nasir Dawud destroys some of the refortifications built by the Franks in Jerusalem.[173]
1243 – The Franks recover Jerusalem.[173]
1244:
July 11 – The Khwarezmians capture Jerusalem and slaughter its inhabitants.[177]
October 18 – Battle of La Forbie north-east of Gaza: The Crusaders and their allies, the Ayyubids of Damascus, Homs, and Kerak, suffer a crushing defeat by the Egyptian army and their Khwarezmian mercenaries.[178]
c. 1250 – Rabbi Yehiel ben Joseph founds a Yeshiva (Jewish religious school) in Acre.[179]
1258 – The Mongols execute the last Abbasid caliph.[97]
1260 – Battle of Ain Jalut (Jezreel Valley) between the Egyptian Mamluks and the Mongols.
1265 – The Mamluk Bahri dynasty of Egypt captures several cities and towns from Crusader states in the Middle East, including the cities of Haifa, Arsuf, and Caesarea Maritima.
1267 – According to tradition, Nachmanides visits Jerusalem and establishes the Ramban Synagogue. However, it is doubtful whether Nachmanides ever visited Jerusalem.[180]
1291 May 18 – Fall of Acre: Al-Ashraf Khalil of Egypt captures Acre, thus exterminating the Crusader Kingdom of Jerusalem (the final Catholic landholding remaining from the Crusades), and ending the Ninth Crusade.[161]
Shavua tov, Reb Natan. Of the possible interpretations of "Never Again" that you considered, you didn't include what much of the Jewish world considers the most fundamental: that there will never again be another genocide. In other words, it doesn't matter which group is the genocidaire and which group their victim, we cannot ever allow such a crime to happen again. I believe the Jewish world is cleaved by its reaction to the Holocaust. On one side, you have the Jews who say we are never again going to be the victims. This has a number of implications. On the other side, you have those who take a universalist message, and seek to support global human rights principles. These two reactions are in tension with each other.
Your argument would be applicable to any marginalized group, except the Jews. Are redheads, overweight individuals, or those with speech impediments facing discrimination? Let them establish their own community or institution where they can feel secure.
However, the situation for Jews is notably more intricate. "Ki Tavo" Torah portion states that if the entire Jewish people, not just a minority percentage of society, fail to uphold the commandments, God will ultimately expel them from the Land of Israel. Indeed, the persistent conflicts that the State of Israel has confronted over 75 years, with increasingly unfavorable outcomes, seem to affirm this principle.
We endure hardship both in the Diaspora and in the Land of Israel. The most powerful army in the Middle East (led by an ultra-leftist command) struggles to combat a gang of Gaza looters on motorcycles. This can only be seen as the Hand of God at work.
My comment is intended for religious Jews who adhere to the principles outlined in the Torah, rather than for those who may not share these beliefs.
Furthermore, the sporadic occurrence of natural disasters bears no connection to the longstanding history of the Jewish people. Anti-Semitism transcends rationality; it differs from typical xenophobia. Jews, irrespective of their religious or social standing, do not experience unconditional acceptance; they find no solace in either the diaspora or their homeland. Why?
Your comment may be intended for religious Jews but the venal principles ascribed to Hashem and outlined in the Torah is no less pernicious and easily understood by non-religious ( and many religious) Jews as unfalsifiable poppycock.
And leaves you unprepared to defend your rehearsed dogma with an explanation as to what Hashem has against Iceland.
Hashem controls everything but his natural disasters are indifferent to Iceland’s suffering. Only Jews are to be made aware of his despisement for whatever reasons you want to conjure up. Now I get it.
I'm not interested in demagogues and trolls such as yourself. If the distinction between sporadic cataclysms like earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, and tornadoes, and the sustained persecution endured by a particular group over the course of 2,000 years eludes you, it's a philosophical quandary that lies with you, not with me.
Appeal to Tradition also Appeal to Authority - both logical fallacies; errors in thinking. Used mostly by charlatans, some clergy and politicians. Sound persuasive - but are persuasion tricks.
Popper reference is I guess a red herring? Which is also a logical fallacy...
Seek to rationalize the peculiar brand of xenophobia known as anti-Semitism, where members of a particular nationality have faced persecution for 2,000 years despite embodying contradictory characteristics such as religiosity and assimilation, all the while this same nationality endures.
The Bible, written by the One who created man, is not really reliable.
All we need is the Orthodoxy of 'unfalsifiablity'. Because we must all bow at its altar. But it's not a jealous god, it allows you to bow at the altar of Occam too. Any bias is ok, as long as it is non-demanding.
In a world where so many people hate us, I feel the only way to win the non military side of the war is to try and understand/engage with the Taanos of the other side, and having robust dialogue with them. Playing devil's advocate, as it were.
Until then, nothing will stop the many many ignorant automatically siding with the poor brown oppressed Palestinians against the Goliath of white colonial apartheid Zionists . And there's more of them than us.
With that said, as an opening question I would ask,
Is there any justification to the Arabs of pre mandate palestine feeling aggrieved about hundreds of thousands of European Jews suddenly turning up in their land?
Sure, there is absolutely reason for them to feel aggrieved. (Even though it did promise to bring them a lot of benefits.) Unfortunately it changed from "aggrieved" to believing that the Jews were coming to drive them out (which was not the case). Consequently they decided to try to drive the Jews out, and the rest is Naqba.
"Is there any justification to the Arabs of pre mandate palestine feeling aggrieved about hundreds of thousands of European Jews suddenly turning up in their land?"
No.
The Jews immigrated with the permission of the Ottoman authorities. And paid cash for the land to the landowners of record. If anything, their beef would have been with the Sultan (and Abdul Hamid II was indeed a despot).
I once worked for a law firm that specialized in covering up Arab land sales to Jews so the Arab wouldn't get killed. They had me poring over Ottoman-era maps- literally, ancient pieces of yellow paper. Good thing I can read Arabic letters.
On the other hand, our building's plumber (a far-left gay Jew of Iraqi descent) specialized in turning those Arabs over to the PA for execution. (We only found this out after he retired. The business went to his Arab partner, who thought he was a kook.) He died awaiting trial.
Not exactly. Most of the land was owned by absentee landowners in Beirut or Damascus. They were happy to get the cash. The Russian Orthodox Church was buying up even more land (and is even today the largest private landowner in Israel). The Arab tenant farmers in the Land of Israel were thrown under the bus. Once again, Arabs elsewhere care nothing for the welfare of Arabs in "Palestine". This was all before WW1.
As of 1939, the Nazis had been saying what they wanted to do to Jews for a decade and a half. Hamas has been saying what they want to do to Jews for twice as long. Only the existence of the IDF has prevented the second genocide.
And I'm sure there were people in 1939 still "trying to see both sides." You know, "Just to play devil's advocate." Hey, we *know* there were *Jews* "trying to see both sides" only a few years before that.
Really? Even back then racists had clever ways of getting around things, like passing black (that is, African-American) baseball players as "Cuban." (One of the Negro League teams was actually called "The New York Cubans.")
Florence King, who grew up in segregated Washington, DC, once described how her grandmother was the person to go to with racial questions. Soldier brings home a Japanese bride after World War II? Grandmother: "Not a problem. She's not black, after all." King describes the logic of people, even racists, taking pride in (real or imagined) American Indian ancestors: "There was the subtle subtext of 'My ancestors have been here so long, when they got here there weren't enough white women to go around!'"
It should be made clear that the reason the state of Israel was not established many years earlier, after Britain received a mandate to do exactly that in 1917 was BECAUSE of the (violent) objections of the Arabs.
In fact, the second world War may be considered to have delayed the formation of the state of Israel.
So...after the loss of 6 million of our brethren many of whom could have been saved if the Brits hadn't caved to the Arabs, we could also ne a bit aggrieved maybe?
Much more complicated than that.
The reason that a Mandate was created that included language for a "Jewish National Home" (notably NOT a sovereign Jewish state) was that the Paris Peace Conference after WW1 was basically a discussion between three philo-Semites.
1. David Lloyd-George was an actual Christian Zionist. (So was Arthur Balfour, but he wasn't a major player in British politics at that time.) This was not an uncommon end-times theology among the Welsh Protestants such as Lloyd-George at that time, even though he didn't let religion prevent him from bringing his mistress to Paris with him rather than his wife.
2. Woodrow Wilson's father had been one of the leading Presbyterian ministers in the South and Wilson himself was a Presbyterian elder who believed in the return of Jews to Zion; I am not sure that it was based on end-times theology or simply the more common (today) view among many (nor all) evangelical Christians that Jews are God's Chosen People and deserve our homeland. Wilson proved that a philo-Semite can be a horrible racist about Black Americans -- although not so much of a racist to avoid marrying a widow with documented American Indian ancestry.
3. Georges Clemenceau came from an opposite perspective. He was a leftist atheist who passionately hated the Catholic Church (which was still at that time horribly anti-Semitic). In his long career, even more as a journalist than as a politician, he repeatedly defended the interests of oppressed minorities including Black Americans during Reconstruction, the Communards of the 1871 Paris Commune, and Armenians when the Ottoman Empire was murdering them *en masse*. But he seems to have had a special place in his heart for Jews. He published almost seven hundred articles in his newspaper defending Dreyfus -- at great risk to his life. The result of Clemenceau's work was an absolute total complete defeat for the anti-Dreyfus movement and the Catholic Church that had supported it almost totally; France separated Church and State in 1905 and remains a militantly secular country today (except for Alsace and Lorraine, which were not a part of France at that time). Clemenceau wanted Jews to have a homeland like every other people.
It might be possible to ascribe the fact that three non-Jewish Zionists led the Paris Peace Conference to Divine Intervention. All three had limited political support in their home countries. None had majority support in their countries' legislatures. Wilson was hated by the majority Republicans; Lloyd-George was distrusted by much of his own party in addition to the majority Conservatives, and Clemenceau was hated by, well, just about every other politician in France and they had only turned to him to lead the country when it seemed like there was no alternative (sort of Churchill in 1940 Britain).
". The Hamas massacre is a price that we pay for having a Jewish State, but the Holocaust was a price that we paid for not having one. This is just one of the many reasons that we should be very, very grateful that we have Israel."
I think it's very strange to propse that the Holocaust *couldn't* happen to a Jewish state. Especially one that is under constant threat from its neighbors who want to destroy it, chas v'Shalom. Armies invade sovereign nations all the time. The Nazis steamrolled over many sovereign nations. And when that happens, the population is at their mercy. The Holocaust was an extreme outlier in world history (October 7th style pogroms were much more common), and the lack of a Jewish state has nothing to do with it. צא ולמד what happened to the sovereign Jewish state during the time of the Churban. I am sorry to sound so morbid, but I think you are giving over the wrong message. There are perhaps many good reasons to have a sovereign Jewish nation, but Holocaust prevention is not one of them. Only Hashem can allow or prevent a Holocaust.
I didn't say that Israel guarantees safety. It could be nuked. What I said was that it provides safety from persecution in *other* countries.
(sorry, I meant to write refuge, not safety.)
Thanks. I hear what you are trying to say, although it still seems strange to me, referring the prevention of a hypothetical future Holocaust in some unspecified country "one of the most basic goals" of having a Jewish state, and talking about the real Holocaust as "price that we paid for not having one"- as if we had the option of preventing the Holocaust by establishing a Jewish state earlier. Almost like a resident of Hiroshima building a nuclear bunker in 2010 and saying how great it would have been to have it in 1945. Surely there are much more basic and practical reasons for Jewish people to want a Jewish state.
It was already clear by around 1930, if not 1920, that there was going to be some sort of Jewish state, absent strong attempts to sabotage it (which of course did take place). Did the Holocaust change things? The one act I think we can point to is the November 29, 1947 resolution. And that resolution- for several reasons- had no legal impact, and no real practical impact, as the British were planning on pulling out anyway (and had to). Still, did it pass because of the Holocaust? Maybe, but Israel still had to do a *lot* of lobbying to get it passed, and the same for later events, like US recognition of independence. So probably the Holocaust had *some* impact, but not as much as some people think.
The UN resolution had the practical impact of having the US and USSR both recognize the new Jewish state very quickly after it was declared. And many other countries followed shortly thereafter: Czechoslovakia, Nicaragua, Poland, Guatemala, and Uruguay within a few days; Hungary and South Africa (two days before a pro-Nazi government won the general election in ZA!) within a month; Finland, Paraguay, Costa Rica, Panama, Venezuela, El Salvador, and Honduras by mid-September. About 30 more countries would do so before Medinat Yisrael was a year old. That recognition would have come much slower had there not been the UN Resolution.
I didn't say there was *no* effect. Even so, Truman, for example, had to have his arm twisted with Chaim Weizmann tracking down his old Jewish haberdashery partner, who was by then an active Zionists, and getting him to barge into the Oval Office and sweet talk him into meeting Weizmann.
(Truman wasn't an anti-Semite, but was irritated by Zionist pressure. Truman's wife was a real old-fashioned Jew-hater who wouldn't let Jews into the house- and since it was her house, Harry apologetically let her have her way.)
Two others who pushed Truman in the right direction were Clark Clifford, an old fashioned Washington insider who would later serve as Secretary of Defense under Johnson, and Henry Wallace, a millionaire businessman previously Secretary of Agriculture, Secretary of Commerce, and Vice President, who was then a far left third party Presidential candidate (and stooge for Stalin) who repeatedly attacked Truman for not supporting a new Jewish state.
Nevertheless Truman still slapped an arms embargo on Israel and even prosecuted Americans who broke it. That embargo would remain in effect through the entire Eisenhower Administration and was ended by Kennedy. Stalin, OTOH, ordered his Czech stooge Gottwald to ship arms to Israel even as Gottwald had the man who had arranged for the arms transfers, Jan Masaryk, pushed out of a window.
Masaryk's father has a bunch of places named after him in Israel, including a street in Jerusalem, in the neighborhood where the streets tend to be named for non-Jewish Zionists (Lloyd George, Patterson, Smuts, and others- Martin Luther King is a few blocks away, but I'm not sure if that's intentional). I imagine that sort of crowded out the son.
In Washington, there's a statue of Masaryk pere located right next to one of Gandhi. My wife, who used to live nearby, finds it funny that Masaryk is in an overcoat and Gandhi is in a loincloth. :-)
I wonder how much of Wallace's views were sincere and how much were the party line. I tend to be a bit cynical about Communists considering how they flipped back and forth about Hitler in the late 30's and early 40's. I wonder if Wallace's views, ahem, "evolved."
Wallace, of course, was who FDR sent out to meet the March of the Rabbis while he himself ducked out the back door of the White House for a supposed prior commitment with the Yugoslavian Air Force. As Rav Soloveitchik, who was there, put it, "And we all know what a vice-president is worth." (Meaning no insult to Wallace, I suppose, who was perfectly nice but useless under the circumstances. To know what a vice-president is worth, see the famous line of Wallace's predecessor, John Nance Garner: "not worth a bucket of warm ****".)
Rav Soloveitchik would later see the Hand of God in how the USSR and USA agreed on one thing only, the creation of Israel.
Clifford, of course, ended his career deep in scandal over an Arab-linked bank. Nothing to do with Israel, though.
Norman Lamm once entertained us with stories of how he personally worked (in various capacities) against the arms embargo in 1948, almost getting arrested by the FBI at points. Part of that made it into the movie version of The Chosen- I don't think it's in the book.
"Norman Lamm once entertained us with stories of how he personally worked (in various capacities) against the arms embargo in 1948, almost getting arrested by the FBI at points. "
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ELYtq0aDVbw
"Masaryk's father has a bunch of places named after him in Israel, including a street in Jerusalem"
And the main street in the main Jewish neighborhood in Mexico City!
https://matadornetwork.com/es/historia-de-la-avenida-presidente-masaryk-en-la-ciudad-de-mexico
"I wonder how much of Wallace's views were sincere and how much were the party line."
Definitely sincere. His wealth came from being the first to successfully commercialize agricultural biotechnology. He greatly admired Zionist agriculture and visited Israel in 1947. He was no Communist just a useful idiot.
Unlike almost every other stooge for Stalin, Wallace eventually realized he was wrong, and said so:
https://delong.typepad.com/sdj/2013/02/henry-a-wallace-1952-on-the-ruthless-nature-of-communism-cold-war-era-god-that-failed-weblogging.html
I am unaware of any other leftist in the US who has ever made such a confession. Unfortunately, the ones in Europe who left the Left (pun intended) include Oswald Mosley, Pierre Laval, and Benito Mussolini. Sadly, the few modern US leftists who actually know some history cite Wallace's appeasement strategies and not his pro-Israel policies as models and ignore Wallace's later denunciation of communism.
Good to know.
Pete Seeger late in life kinda sorta apologized for being an apologist for Stalin. And of course a lot of those hauled in front of HUAC had dropped Communism because of Stalin, and some even admitted to it. The New York Times has never returned the Pulitzer they got for it.
Great piece
Never Forget the book Perfidy by Ben Hecht. Never forget how the secular Zionist founders worked tirelessly to thwart plans to save hundreds of thousands of Hungarian Jewish lives from the Nazi crematorium during the holocaust to prevent them from reaching Israel. Never Forget!
I'm not going to damn Ben Hecht, because he did heroic work. But I will critique him.
His own colleague, Peter Bergson/Hillel Kook later told David Wyman that Hecht was a dramatist and tended to exaggerate. One the obvious lies (told for dramatic effect, no doubt) was that Malkiel Grunwald's brother was killed by the Gestapo along with Fabian Herskovitz. Both were prominent members of the Budapest Jewish community and were very much alive and active when Hecht wrote Perfidy.
One critic "praised" Hecht's autobiography (recommended, but skip the immodest parts) as being one of the finest pieces of fiction of its age. (Ask Nachum for the citation)
Hecht worked with secular Zionists. (And so did R. Michel Ber Weissmandl. The latter instructed those rescued by Kastner to testify on his behalf.)
Hecht wrote Perfidy to get back at his political opponents. Maybe they deserved it. But given the partisan and unreliable nature of the book, you should continue reading other books on the subject. Perfidy should not be the only book you read on the topic.
One thing that is vital to understand the period, is that even among the rescue activists there were debates on exactly what to do. The stakes were high and being on the perceived wrong side of the issue meant one could be accused of causing the deaths of thousands+++. I'll also note that no one wrote a rule book on how to save Jews from a massacre. (See e.g. the beginning of Hansi Brand's memoirs)
I'll conclude by saying that Kastner, whether right or wrong was not the first to face such a dilemma. יוחנן בן זכאי himself is neither vindicated nor condemned by חז"ל. And it would seem to imply that on his deathbed, he wasn't sure himself.
If we can't speak with certainty about a גדול הדור who would have achieved the level of דעת תורה, why should we be so certain about Kastner?
The stupidity with which you bring in a Talmud great and compare him to a demented Jewish renegade who threw away his father's faith and sold is soul to the Nazi devel is sickening. Classic obfuscation.
But that isn't even my point. It's about the founders and leaders of secular Zionism during the war that I particularly speak of. Stop the obfuscation. Again, it's about the secular Zionist leaders. After all, that is what this post is about. Israel and the holocaust.
Joel Brand was offered by Einstein hundreds of thousands of Hungarian lives for trucks. The Zionist leaders...the Jewish agency...they got him arrested so he couldn't complete the deal. The blood of hundreds of thousands of souls is on the heads of these people. And they are obviously paying for it right now it gehennim.
Is Israel a blessing from G-d for the Jewish nation? Sure. But the idea of zionism - when stripped away from religion - is a sickening disease, as history so clearly demonstrates.
"The stupidity with which you bring in a Talmud great and compare him ..."
Let me be perfectly clear. There has not been anyone comparable to יוחנן בן זכאי in more than 1000 years. Not Kastner, nor Hecht, nor (להבדיל) Rav Weissmandl. Does that mean that there גמרא has nothing to teach us? Why not toss every single אגדה that mentions an incomparable sage because he was incomparable? Unlike you, I believe in the eternal message of אגדות and I don't consider the lessons of them inapplicable because of the awesome level of its protagonists. But I will assume, perhaps imprudently, that your fuss over the בן זכאי comparison is only due to the wide gaping immeasurable difference in personality and not of circumstance.
"a demented Jewish renegade"
That's not how Rav Weismandl thought.
"threw away his father's faith "
This is rather sloppy. To throw something away implies he had it to start with. I'm not show to what extent Kastner had a full Torah upbringing.
" Classic obfuscation. "
I think you meant conflation. Obfuscation means to render something unintelligible. You fully understood my point. Your response, though incorrect, was to the point and thus indicates you understood me. So there was no obfuscation.
"But that isn't even my point. "
Then stick to it. And don't fuss over what you consider irrelevancies.
"Joel Brand was offered by Einstein hundreds of thousands of Hungarian lives for trucks. "
Not exactly. He was provided what on the surface appeared to be such an offer. It was understand by many then, and many now, as something more sinister than a genuine offer. If you read more than just Perfidy, you'd know that.
".they got him arrested so he couldn't complete the deal"
Again. It's not clear that this charge is true. But you wouldn't know that ambiguity because you only read Perfidy.
" so he couldn't complete the deal"
It's not clear that he could have completed the deal. Was the deal even possible? An illegal delivery of thousands of trucks to the enemy during wartime? And it doesn't matter whether it was actually possible. It only matters if it appeared impossible at the time. If you would read more than just Perfidy, you'd be less confident.
"And they are obviously paying for it right now it gehennim. "
I can't confirm this either. Many my binoculars are too cheap.
" But the idea of zionism - when stripped away from religion - is a sickening disease"
So you've gone from relying on Hecht, to condemning him. Did you read Hecht's Guide For The Bedevilled?
Its funny. You sound like some kind of Zionist plant intending to bamboozle posts against your cause. You attack me line by line. You get lost in words when my intent is clear.
Notice you have not even mentioned at all how Rabban Yochanan Ben Zakkai got into this. You compared him without the least explanation! Yes, that is obfuscation. You want to demonstrate that you have a counter point without even having one.
But even more striking is that you call him Yochanan Ben Zakkai. If you know anything about Mishna and Talmud or at least if you respected it, you would refer to him as Rabban Yochanan Ben Zakkai, as found in Shas. You would not strip away his honorific title or call him Ben Zakkai which is so non-religious-scholarly. The type that views Jewish history and Talmud as simply historic without the least holiness (at best).
You say you can't see into hell because your binoculars are too cheap. Well so is your faith. And your sincerity. Zionists worked with the Nazis to prevent Hungarian Jews from reaching Israel. It is historical fact. For example. The Jewish Agency of which Chaim Weizmannn was a big part, and Ben-Gurion was chairman, elected on board Yitzhak Gruenbaum ymsh.
Here is what he said in 1942 while the Jews were being thrown in ovens:
“I will not demand that the Jewish Agency allocate a sum of 300,000- or 100,000-pounds sterling to help European Jewry. And I think that whoever demands such things is performing an anti-Zionist act.”
Wow! The Jewish Agency felt that helping European Jewry while they were being gassed and tortured was not important enough! As this sub-human Gruenbaum said himself “I think it is necessary to state here – Zionism is above everything.” Yes. And Zionism did that. They ignored the European Jews during the holocaust. Any Zionism stripped of Judaism is a wicked disease.
Nothing you've written here is relevant to my suggestion that you read more than Perfidy.
You can bloviate over my shortening of מרן הרב הגדול הפאר הדור עטרת ראשינו הצדיק הקדוש הבבא שר התורה העילוי הנפלא פוסק מובהק רבן של כל ישראל יוחנן בן זכאי in order to enhance readability and reduce obfuscation. But you, for all your pretension, respect him less. You consider him irrelevant and you reject to learn anything from him.
Now you go to the opposite extreme and add titles to blow past my correct observation that you are lacking in respect for Talmud. I never indicated that you should title him more than the Talmud does. I said don't strip away his title.
Also you never even began to explain what Rabban Yochanan Ben Zakkai has to do with anything!!!!!!!!!!!
You simply mention that I should learn from him. What should I learn from him more than anyone else regarding our topic? You seem to be afraid to go further. Lets have at it. I bet we will see some serious lack of Torah scholarship on your part once you open up. I'm ready whenever you are.
"You get lost in words when my intent is clear."
Your intent is actually rather muddy. I don't like Kastner much. His granddaughter is a horror show too. Not sure why that's relevant to anything.
"You would not strip away his honorific title or call him Ben Zakkai which is so non-religious-scholarly. The type that views Jewish history and Talmud as simply historic without the least holiness (at best)."
https://he.wikisource.org/wiki/%D7%9E%D7%A9%D7%A0%D7%94_%D7%A1%D7%A0%D7%94%D7%93%D7%A8%D7%99%D7%9F_%D7%94_%D7%91
מַעֲשֶׂה וּבָדַק בֶּן זַכַּאי בְּעֻקְצֵי תְּאֵנִים.
====
Are you Levi from https://www.rationalistjudaism.com/p/the-shmini-atzeret-war/comment/41564189 here? You yell and shout a whole lot like him.
Do you study your Mishna with commentaries? Rav is one of the foremost. Here is what he writes on that sentence: רבן יוחנן בן זכאי. ותלמיד דן לפני רבו היה באותה שעה, לכך קוראו בן זכאי
The individual here is actually Rabban Yochanan Ben Zakkai. He is called here Ben Zakkai because at that time he was a student in the presence of his teacher.
It's like calling Rashi by his name Shlomo. Perhaps if referring to when he was a young student, we might say Shlomo. When discussing Rashi in general however we have more honor for him than that.
Oh, I also don't like Kastner ymsh much. But not because of his granddaughter. Because he was a Nazi collaborator. For example, he encouraged Jews to board the trains to their deaths by the Nazis.
The fact that you trivialize such discussion by pointing out your dislike of him for another reason completely (like: "I don't like Eichmann much. His attitude was horrific. Not sure why that's relevant to anything") speaks volumes of you.
You have a good sense of humor, just saying
"Home is a place that you can always enter. While the Jewish state serves many purposes, one of its earliest and most basic goals is that there should be a country which will let Jews in and can be always be relied upon to do that."
If that's the case, the optimal strategy would be to create a small, heavily fortified spot where everyone can run to in an emergency. It makes no sense to invite world Jewry there in peacetime. It's the equivalent of living in a miklat and inviting people from neighborhoods which aren't under threat to join you. Also, the worst possible place to establish this safe haven would be a region where muslims and christians have been killing each other for centuries over. That's like building a miklat on the roof of a skyscraper. Additionally, you would want to create as many safe zones in as many different places as possible. Like, maybe Israel could exchange Yitzhar for Guantanamo Bay, and kochav ha'shachar for some territory in Thailand. It would probably save on labor costs to have hordes of potential Thailandi workers close by.
(I'm not sure I necessarily disagree with your overall point. I'm more trying to get you flesh out your argument.)
Sure, it would be a great idea to have some additional sovereign territory elsewhere in the world. I don't see how it could happen, though.
Teaneck?
"It makes no sense to invite world Jewry there in peacetime. "
And it makes more in wartime? Why? Is it cheaper and easier to move around in wartime?
"Also, the worst possible place to establish this safe haven would be a region where muslims and christians have been killing each other for centuries over. "
You know, you're describing much of the world.
" Like, maybe Israel could exchange Yitzhar for Guantanamo Bay, and kochav ha'shachar for some territory in Thailand."
You are welcome to be the pioneer.
"And it makes more in wartime? Why? Is it cheaper and easier to move around in wartime?"
No. Because that's what safe havens are *for.* You don't live in a miklat because it's safer to so than to run there while there's a missile on the way.
"You know, you're describing much of the world."
No I'm not.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_Palestine_region#Byzantine_period
313 – Roman co-emperors Constantine I and Licinius declare that Christianity is an acceptable religion.[73]
324 – Constantine—having defeated Emperor Maximian, Caesar of the Western Roman Empire at the Battle of the Milvian Bridge—becomes the sole ruler of the re-united Roman Empire with its capital at Byzantium (New Rome). Queen Helena, a devout Christian, wife of Eastern Roman Emperor Constantius and mother of Constantine the Great, departs for the Holy Land and begins the construction of churches.
326–333 – Concurrent construction of the world's first 4 state-sponsored purpose-built churches under the tutelage of Constantine and Helena: the Church of the Nativity is built in Bethlehem, marking the site where according to Christian tradition Jesus was born; "Eleona" (Greek: Olive) on the Mount of Olives in Jerusalem, also called "Chapel of the Apostles", marking the site where, according to Christian tradition, Jesus ascended to heaven; the Church of the Holy Cross,[citation needed] later called the Church of the Resurrection and Church of the Holy Sepulchre, is built in Jerusalem around the hill of Golgotha, marking the site where, according to Christian tradition, Jesus was crucified, buried, and resurrected; and the basilica of St. George at Mamre (Ramat el-Khalil), near Hebron.
c. 350 – The Christian monk Hilarion founds the first church in Haluza and converts a large portion of the population.[74]
351/2 – Jewish revolt centered around Sepphoris against the Caesar of the Byzantine (Eastern Roman) Emperor Constantius Gallus. The revolt is quickly subdued by Gallus' general Ursicinus.[75]
c. 357 – Palestine is divided into the provinces Palaestina Prima and Palaestina Salutaris.[76]
361–363 – Roman emperor Julian the Apostate orders Alypius of Antioch to rebuild the Jewish Temple.[77]
363 – An earthquake with its epicenter in the Galilee rocks Palestine.[78] The earthquake results in, among other things, a halt in the construction of the Jewish Temple, mainly because it ruins the early stages of the construction. Ultimately the plan to rebuild the Temple is scrapped after the death of emperor Julian in June 363.
374/5 – Melania the Elder founds a monastery on the Mount of Olives which also functions as a hostel for pilgrims.[74]
c. 400 – Palestine proper is split into the provinces Palaestina Prima and Palaestina Secunda. Palaestina Salutaris is renamed Palaestina Tertia.[79]
425 – The Sanhedrin is disbanded by the Byzantine Empire.
The Madaba Map depiction of 6th-century Jerusalem
438-439 – Empress Aelia Eudocia Augusta visits Jerusalem for the first time.[80]
451 – The Council of Chalcedon declares that Jerusalem shall be a patriachate.[81]
484 – Samaritans revolt as Emperor Zeno has a church built on their holy mountain, Gerizim.[82]
529 – The Samaritans rebel against the Romans.[83] Samaritanism loses its religio licita status as punishment.[84]
541/2 – The bubonic plague sweeps Palestine.[8]
555/6 – Uprising by Samaritans and Jews centered around Caesarea.[85]
571 – Muhammad, founder of Islam, is born in Mecca.[73]
613 – The Sasanian Empire (Persian Empire) captures several Palestinian cities on the coast.[86]
614 May – The Sasanian Empire under general Shahrbaraz captures and sacks Jerusalem;[86] the Church of the Holy Sepulchre is damaged by fire and the True Cross is captured.[86]
629 – Byzantine Emperor Heraclius retakes Jerusalem after the decisive defeat of the Sassanid Empire at the Battle of Nineveh in 627. Heraclius personally returns the True Cross to the city.[87]
634 February 4 – The Rashidun Caliphate defeats a 300-man-strong Byzantine force led by Dux Sergius at the Battle of Dathin, near Gaza.[88]
Early Muslim period
See also: Early Muslim conquests and Muslim conquest of the Levant
Rashidun period
637 (or 638) – Jerusalem falls to the armies of Rashidun caliph Umar Ibn el-Khatab.[89] Jews are permitted to return to the city after 568 years of Roman and Byzantine rule.[90]
June/July – The Rashiduns capture Gaza.[89]
summer – Ascalon surrenders to the Rashiduns.[89]
late – The Rashiduns and the Byzantines consent to a truce.[89]
640 – The Rashiduns capture Caesarea.[72]
641 – The Rashiduns capture Ashkelon, completing their conquest of the Holy Land.
659 – Earthquake.[91]
Umayyad period
The Dome of the Rock (photograph from 1856)
661 – The Umayyad family takes control of the caliphate and moves its capital to Damascus, following the assassination of the Caliph Ali ibn Abi Talib.[92]
687–691 – The Dome of the Rock is built on the Temple Mount in Jerusalem at the site where, according to Islam, Muhammad ascended to heaven.[73]
c. 715 – Sulayman ibn Abd al-Malik founds Ramla; it becomes the capital and administrative center of Palestine.[93]
744:
February – Caliph Hisham ibn Abd al-Malik dies and is succeeded by Al-Walid II.[94]
spring – Beginning of widespread mutinies against the Umayyads.[94]
April – Caliph Al-Walid II is assassinated and succeeded by Yazid III.[94]
October – Yazid III is assassinated and succeeded by Ibrahim ibn al-Walid.[94]
November – Caliph Ibrahim is defeated in battle by Marwan II who becomes the new caliph.[94]
745 – Theodore is appointed patriarch of Jerusalem.[94]
749 January 18 – The Galilee earthquake destroys Tiberias, Scythopolis, Hippos, and Pella. Many other cities throughout the Jordan valley suffer heavy damage. Tens of thousands of lives are lost.[95][96]
Scythopolis (Beit She'an) was one of the cities destroyed during 749 Galilee earthquake
Abbasid period
747–750 – Civil war resulting in the overthrow of the Umayyads; the Abbasid family seize control of the caliphate.[97]
758 – The Caliph Al-Mansur visits Jerusalem and possibly orders the renovation of the Dome of the Rock.[98]
762 – The Abbasids found Baghdad and designate it the caliphate's new capital.[99]
792/3 – War between the tribes of Palestine[100]
796 – Battles between the tribes of Palestine.[101]
799 – The Patriarch of Jerusalem sends a mission to the Frankish king Charlemagne and the latter returns the favor.[102]
c. 800 – The Jewish High Council, headed by Gaon, moves from Tiberias to Jerusalem.[103]
800 – The Patriarch of Jerusalem sends another mission to Charlemagne carrying the keys to the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, together with a banner.[104]
807 – A rebellion breaks out. Led by Abu'l-Nida', it has its epicenter in Eilat.[105]
813 – Earthquake.[106]
c. 820 – The Church of the Holy Sepulchre is repaired.[107]
820 – Basil is appointed patriarch of Jerusalem.[108]
855 – Solomon is appointed patriarch of Jerusalem.[107]
885 – The Abbasids reconquer Damascus.[109]
873 – The governor of Egypt, Ahmad Ibn Tulun, breaks with the Abbasids and establishes independent rule.[109]
878 – The Tulunids occupy most of the former Byzantine Diocese of the East, enabling them to defend Egypt against Abbasid attacks.[110]
879 – Elias III is appointed patriarch of Jerusalem.[111]
c. 881 – Elias III of Jerusalem appeals to the Franks.[112]
c. 903 – Persian geographer Ibn al-Faqih visits Jerusalem.[113]
905/6 – The Abbasids regain control of Palestine.[109]
908/9 – Al-Muqtadir forbids Christians from serving in administrative positions.[114]
c. 913 – Spanish scholar Ibn Abd Rabbih visits Jerusalem.[113]
935 – Al-Ikhshid takes control of Egypt and establishes independent rule.[109]
937 March 26 – Rioting Muslims burn down the Church of the Resurrection and loot the Chapel of Golgotha.[115]
939:
October 17 – Muhammad ibn Ra'iq conquers Ramla.[116]
late – Battle of al-'Arish between Ibn Ra'iq and al-Ikhshid.[116]
946 July – Sayf al-Dawla invades Palestine.[117]
966 – A Muslim-Jewish mob torches the Church of Resurrection, plunders it, and kills Jerusalem's Patriarch John VII.[118]
Fatimid period
969/70 – The Fatimids, a self-proclaimed Shia caliphate, defeat the Ikhshidids and appoint a Jewish governor.[109]
971 – The Qarmatians attack Damascus.[109]
September 5 – The Qarmatians conquer Ramla.[119]
December – The Fatimids ward off a Qarmatian invasion near Fustat.[119]
972 or 975 – Byzantine emperor John I Tzimiskes leads an expedition that reaches as far south as Caesarea and Tiberias in Palestine.[120]
975:
winter – The Turkish officer Alptakin conquers Sidon and slaughters the population.[121]
spring – Alptakin conquers Tiberias.[122]
April – Alptakin conquers Damascus.[122]
977 March 12 – Ramla is again conquered by the Qarmatians.[123]
978:
Joseph II is appointed patriarch of Jerusalem.[123]
August 15 – A massive Fatimid army defeats Alptakin and the Qarmatians in southern Palestine.[124]
"No I'm not."
Europe has been even worse, at least since about the beginning of the third century CE. Most of those wars were Christians killing Christians in the name of God. Some were Christians killing Pagans, and then they turned to killing us in the 20th century.
" first 4 state-sponsored purpose-built churches "
I think one in Armenia predated them.
"No I'm not"
Oh yes you are. There are very few places on Earth that have experience long periods of peace and tranquility. That fact alone is enough against your fact vomit.
"You don't live in a miklat because it's safer to so than to run there while there's a missile on the way."
This again shows that you're downplaying the crisis. Children sleep in the protected room, and others remain close to it. Maybe not in the center, but down south and up north. Show some concern for them.
"This again shows that you're downplaying the crisis."
*I'm* downplaying it? Quite the opposite. You're the one claiming Israel is some sort of safe haven.
"Maybe not in the center, but down south and up north. Show some concern for them."
I'm sure it's a horrendous experience. I would never suggest otherwise.
978–979 winter – The Jewish Fatimid general tries to negotiate with the leader of the Hamdanids, but their leader Abu Taghlib refuses because Fadl is a Jew.[125] He later agrees to negotiations with Fadl who offers him Ramla in exchange for ousting the Jarrahids.[126]
979 August – Abu Taghlib launches a failed offensive on Ramla and is taken captive and executed.[126]
981:
June – Damascus is besieged by a Fatimid army.[123]
July – The Bedouins, led by the Jarrahids, rebel against the Fatimids.[127]
983 July 5 – Damascus is conquered by a Fatimid army.[123]
984 – Orestes is appointed patriarch of Jerusalem.[123]
991 February 24 – Ya'qub ibn Killis dies.[128]
996–998 – Revolt in Tyre. The rebels call for and receive support from the Byzantines. The Fatimids put the city under siege and it falls in May 998. The rebel leader is tortured and crucified.[129]
1006–1007 – Russian abbot Daniel makes pilgrimage to Palestine.[130]
1008 – Caliph al-Hakim bi-Amr Allah forbids Jerusalem Christians from performing the Palm Sunday procession.[106]
1009 October 18 – Caliph al-Hakim bi-Amr Allah orders the destruction of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre.[131]
1011–1013 February – Uprising of the Yemenite Djarrahid Bedouin tribe who seize Ramla and establish a mini-caliphate.[132]
1012 – Beginning of al-Hakim bi-Amr Allah's oppressive decrees against Christians and Jews.[133]
1015 September 4 – Earthquake. The dome of the Dome of the Rock collapses.[134]
1021 February 13 – Caliph Al-Hakim is assassinated and succeeded by his son al-Zahir.[135]
1024 September – Bedouin rebellion erupts over tax-collecting privileges (iqta'a). The Bedouins attack and loot Ramla and Tiberias.[136]
1026–1027 – Richard of Verdun makes pilgrimage to Palestine.[137]
1027 – A treaty is signed between the Byzantine emperor and the Fatimid caliph. It permits the rebuilding of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, and allows Christians who had converted to Islam under duress to return to their former faith. It also granted the emperor the right to designate the patriarch of Jerusalem. In return, the mosque of Constantinople would be reopened.[138]
1029 – Anushtakin defeats a Bedouin coalition that challenges Fatimid rule in Palestine and Syria.[139]
1032 – Renovations of the Dome of the Rock ordered by Caliph al-Zahir are finished.[140]
1033:
Jerusalem's city walls are rebuilt.[141]
December 5 – 1033 Jordan Rift Valley earthquake.[142]
1047 – Persian poet and traveler Nasir Khusraw visits Palestine.[143]
1063 – The Fatimids strengthen or rebuild the walls of Jerusalem.[144]
1064–1065 – The Great German Pilgrimage takes place.[145]
1068 – An earthquake destroys Ramla, killing an estimated 15,000.[146]
1071 – The Seljuk Turks invade large portions of West Asia, including Asia Minor and the Eastern Mediterranean; they capture Ramla and lay siege to Jerusalem.[147]
1073 – The Seljuks invade Palestine.[148]
1075:
The Seljuks capture Damascus.[147]
A severe drought hits Palestine.[149]
1077 – The Seljuks capture Jaffa.[147]
1089 – The Fatimids conquer Tyre.[150]
1092–1095 – Abu Bakr ibn al-Arabi stays in Jerusalem.[151]
1093 – Muslims in coastal communities bar Christians from entering Palestine.[152]
1095 November 27 – Pope Urban II launches the First Crusade at the Council of Clermont. Its principal objectives are Catholic reconquest of the sacred city of Jerusalem and the Holy Land, and the freeing of Eastern Christians from Islamic rule.
1098:
July – The Fatimids lay siege to Jerusalem.[144]
August 26 – The Fatimids recapture Jerusalem.[153]
1099:
June 7 – The crusaders reach Jerusalem and besieges the city.[154]
June 17 – A Genoese fleet captures Jaffa.[155][156]
July 15 – Catholic soldiers under Godfrey of Bouillon, Robert II of Flanders, Raymond IV of Toulouse and Tancred take Jerusalem after a difficult siege, killing nearly every inhabitant.[157]
July 22 – Godfrey is elected as the ruler of Jerusalem, but he is not crowned king.[158][159]
August 12 – The Crusaders defeat the Fatimids at the Battle of Ascalon.[160]
Battle of Cresson (from a copy of the Passages d'outremer, c.1490)
Godfrey of Bouillon enters Jaffa.[152]
1100 December 25 – The Kingdom of Jerusalem is established.[161]
1113–1115 – Earthquakes hits the region.[162]
1116 – The Latins repair the walls of Jerusalem.[162]
1153 August 23 – The Franks capture Ascalon, thus completing the conquest of the Western coast of the Mediterranean Sea.[163][164]
1177 November 25 – Battle of Montgisard: Baldwin IV of Jerusalem and Raynald of Chatillon defeat Saladin.
1124 – Crusaders conquer Tyre.[165]
1177 – The Latins repair the walls of Jerusalem.[162]
1187:
May 1 – Battle of Cresson: Saladin defeats the crusaders.
June – Saladin captures Tiberias.[161]
July 4 – Saladin defeats Guy of Lusignan, King of Jerusalem at the Battle of Hattin.[161]
October 2 – Saladin captures Jerusalem from Crusaders.[166]
1189 August 28 – Guy of Lusignan besieges Acre.[167]
1189–1192 – Third Crusade led by the armies of Richard the Lionhearted.
1191:
June 8 – Richard arrives at Acre.[167]
July 12 – The Muslim garrison at Acre surrenders to the Crusaders.[168]
August 20 – Richard executes Muslim prisoners from Acre outside the city.[167]
September 7 – Richard I of England defeats Saladin at the Battle of Arsuf forcing him to retreat with heavy losses.[169]
Siege of Acre (painting by Dominique Papety from 1840)
1192:
September 2 – Richard and Saladin signs the Treaty of Jaffa, a peace-treaty to run for three years.[170]
October 9 – Richard leaves Palestine.[171]
1193 March 3/4 – Saladin dies in Damascus. Conflicts between his sons, brothers and nephews cause the disintegration of his empire.[172]
1202 – Major earthquake.[173]
1219 March – The Ayyubid sultan Al-Mu'azzam Isa orders the destruction of Jerusalem's city walls to prevent the crusaders from capturing a fortified city.[174]
1229:
February 18 – Frederick II and the Ayyubid sultan Al-Kamil signs the Treaty of Jaffa, a 10-year-truce (hudna) that restores Jerusalem, Nazareth, and Bethlehem to Christian control in exchange for protection.[175]
March 17 – Frederick enters Jerusalem.[176]
1239 – The Ayyubid ruler An-Nasir Dawud destroys some of the refortifications built by the Franks in Jerusalem.[173]
1243 – The Franks recover Jerusalem.[173]
1244:
July 11 – The Khwarezmians capture Jerusalem and slaughter its inhabitants.[177]
October 18 – Battle of La Forbie north-east of Gaza: The Crusaders and their allies, the Ayyubids of Damascus, Homs, and Kerak, suffer a crushing defeat by the Egyptian army and their Khwarezmian mercenaries.[178]
c. 1250 – Rabbi Yehiel ben Joseph founds a Yeshiva (Jewish religious school) in Acre.[179]
1258 – The Mongols execute the last Abbasid caliph.[97]
1260 – Battle of Ain Jalut (Jezreel Valley) between the Egyptian Mamluks and the Mongols.
1265 – The Mamluk Bahri dynasty of Egypt captures several cities and towns from Crusader states in the Middle East, including the cities of Haifa, Arsuf, and Caesarea Maritima.
1267 – According to tradition, Nachmanides visits Jerusalem and establishes the Ramban Synagogue. However, it is doubtful whether Nachmanides ever visited Jerusalem.[180]
1291 May 18 – Fall of Acre: Al-Ashraf Khalil of Egypt captures Acre, thus exterminating the Crusader Kingdom of Jerusalem (the final Catholic landholding remaining from the Crusades), and ending the Ninth Crusade.[161]
Very well stated.
Shavua tov, Reb Natan. Of the possible interpretations of "Never Again" that you considered, you didn't include what much of the Jewish world considers the most fundamental: that there will never again be another genocide. In other words, it doesn't matter which group is the genocidaire and which group their victim, we cannot ever allow such a crime to happen again. I believe the Jewish world is cleaved by its reaction to the Holocaust. On one side, you have the Jews who say we are never again going to be the victims. This has a number of implications. On the other side, you have those who take a universalist message, and seek to support global human rights principles. These two reactions are in tension with each other.
Your argument would be applicable to any marginalized group, except the Jews. Are redheads, overweight individuals, or those with speech impediments facing discrimination? Let them establish their own community or institution where they can feel secure.
However, the situation for Jews is notably more intricate. "Ki Tavo" Torah portion states that if the entire Jewish people, not just a minority percentage of society, fail to uphold the commandments, God will ultimately expel them from the Land of Israel. Indeed, the persistent conflicts that the State of Israel has confronted over 75 years, with increasingly unfavorable outcomes, seem to affirm this principle.
We endure hardship both in the Diaspora and in the Land of Israel. The most powerful army in the Middle East (led by an ultra-leftist command) struggles to combat a gang of Gaza looters on motorcycles. This can only be seen as the Hand of God at work.
@Shaul,
“This can only be seen as the Hand of God at work.”
Indeed, this can only be seen as the Hand of God at work, no doubt, without question, it’s incontrovertible. But what does he have against Iceland.
You’re a fool.
https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/images/152631/fresh-flows-spread-across-iceland
My comment is intended for religious Jews who adhere to the principles outlined in the Torah, rather than for those who may not share these beliefs.
Furthermore, the sporadic occurrence of natural disasters bears no connection to the longstanding history of the Jewish people. Anti-Semitism transcends rationality; it differs from typical xenophobia. Jews, irrespective of their religious or social standing, do not experience unconditional acceptance; they find no solace in either the diaspora or their homeland. Why?
@Shaul,
Your comment may be intended for religious Jews but the venal principles ascribed to Hashem and outlined in the Torah is no less pernicious and easily understood by non-religious ( and many religious) Jews as unfalsifiable poppycock.
And leaves you unprepared to defend your rehearsed dogma with an explanation as to what Hashem has against Iceland.
Hashem controls everything but his natural disasters are indifferent to Iceland’s suffering. Only Jews are to be made aware of his despisement for whatever reasons you want to conjure up. Now I get it.
I'm not interested in demagogues and trolls such as yourself. If the distinction between sporadic cataclysms like earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, and tornadoes, and the sustained persecution endured by a particular group over the course of 2,000 years eludes you, it's a philosophical quandary that lies with you, not with me.
Non falsifiable. An error in thinking. How charlatans work. Respectfully.
Read the historical books of the Bible thoroughly before sharing your pseudo-Popperian viewpoint.
Appeal to Tradition also Appeal to Authority - both logical fallacies; errors in thinking. Used mostly by charlatans, some clergy and politicians. Sound persuasive - but are persuasion tricks.
Popper reference is I guess a red herring? Which is also a logical fallacy...
Seek to rationalize the peculiar brand of xenophobia known as anti-Semitism, where members of a particular nationality have faced persecution for 2,000 years despite embodying contradictory characteristics such as religiosity and assimilation, all the while this same nationality endures.
The Bible, written by the One who created man, is not really reliable.
All we need is the Orthodoxy of 'unfalsifiablity'. Because we must all bow at its altar. But it's not a jealous god, it allows you to bow at the altar of Occam too. Any bias is ok, as long as it is non-demanding.
Are you Zichron Devarim? https://irrationalistmodoxism.substack.com/p/merry-krismiss-to-all-the-kofrim/comment/45309378
i think a fallacy of insufficiency. Also, an appeal to ignorance fallacy. Also an appeal to emotion fallacy.
Used by charlatans, politicians, effective child predators, preachers, cult leaders - and yes, sadly, religious leaders.
Probably because these are actually proven persuasion tricks that work on many people.
So, no one will stop.
Not even the down to earth Jews.
Fallacy of reciting a list of random fallacies.
In a world where so many people hate us, I feel the only way to win the non military side of the war is to try and understand/engage with the Taanos of the other side, and having robust dialogue with them. Playing devil's advocate, as it were.
Until then, nothing will stop the many many ignorant automatically siding with the poor brown oppressed Palestinians against the Goliath of white colonial apartheid Zionists . And there's more of them than us.
With that said, as an opening question I would ask,
Is there any justification to the Arabs of pre mandate palestine feeling aggrieved about hundreds of thousands of European Jews suddenly turning up in their land?
Sure, there is absolutely reason for them to feel aggrieved. (Even though it did promise to bring them a lot of benefits.) Unfortunately it changed from "aggrieved" to believing that the Jews were coming to drive them out (which was not the case). Consequently they decided to try to drive the Jews out, and the rest is Naqba.
"Is there any justification to the Arabs of pre mandate palestine feeling aggrieved about hundreds of thousands of European Jews suddenly turning up in their land?"
No.
The Jews immigrated with the permission of the Ottoman authorities. And paid cash for the land to the landowners of record. If anything, their beef would have been with the Sultan (and Abdul Hamid II was indeed a despot).
" And paid cash for the land to the landowners of record. "
And those who sold land at night, rioted during the day. (Or vice-versa?) I recall reading that even the Mufti's people sold land to Jews.
I once worked for a law firm that specialized in covering up Arab land sales to Jews so the Arab wouldn't get killed. They had me poring over Ottoman-era maps- literally, ancient pieces of yellow paper. Good thing I can read Arabic letters.
On the other hand, our building's plumber (a far-left gay Jew of Iraqi descent) specialized in turning those Arabs over to the PA for execution. (We only found this out after he retired. The business went to his Arab partner, who thought he was a kook.) He died awaiting trial.
Not exactly. Most of the land was owned by absentee landowners in Beirut or Damascus. They were happy to get the cash. The Russian Orthodox Church was buying up even more land (and is even today the largest private landowner in Israel). The Arab tenant farmers in the Land of Israel were thrown under the bus. Once again, Arabs elsewhere care nothing for the welfare of Arabs in "Palestine". This was all before WW1.
I think you're correct in regards to most of the sellers. I should have been more clear that I was only refer to some of the sellers.
"Once again, Arabs elsewhere care nothing for the welfare of Arabs in "Palestine"
That's because absent a uniting foe, clannish self interest trumps western notions of nationalism.
Would you have said such things about the Germans in 1939?
As of 1939, the Nazis had been saying what they wanted to do to Jews for a decade and a half. Hamas has been saying what they want to do to Jews for twice as long. Only the existence of the IDF has prevented the second genocide.
And I'm sure there were people in 1939 still "trying to see both sides." You know, "Just to play devil's advocate." Hey, we *know* there were *Jews* "trying to see both sides" only a few years before that.
"white colonial apartheid Zionists"
I know some Israeli Jews who would not have been allowed to attend my segregated elementary school in the South. Their skin is too dark.
Really? Even back then racists had clever ways of getting around things, like passing black (that is, African-American) baseball players as "Cuban." (One of the Negro League teams was actually called "The New York Cubans.")
Florence King, who grew up in segregated Washington, DC, once described how her grandmother was the person to go to with racial questions. Soldier brings home a Japanese bride after World War II? Grandmother: "Not a problem. She's not black, after all." King describes the logic of people, even racists, taking pride in (real or imagined) American Indian ancestors: "There was the subtle subtext of 'My ancestors have been here so long, when they got here there weren't enough white women to go around!'"
But weren't the original "invaders" mostly caucausian Europeans? Remember I am playing devil's advocate. I know that Israel is NOW full of non whites.
Substitute "this" for "their".