Tel-Chai Nation

If there's any fifth column the anti-Israel left can rely upon for victim-blaming mentality, it's the ultra-Orthodox politicians in the Knesset and even "opinionators". For example, here's one dummy from the UTJ party:

Haredi politicians on Wednesday offered a reserved response to U.S. President Donald Trump’s recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital.

Deputy Education Minister Meir Porush (United Torah Judaism) argued that Trump’s declaration could lead to a diplomatic process being forced on Israel.

"Trump's declaration of recognition of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel will cost us dearly and in the diplomatic plan that he will present, it will harm us," said Porush.

“It is preferable to build in Judea and Samaria and in neighborhoods of Jerusalem where they are crying for housing, rather than a declaration that has no substance,” he added.

Porush’s colleague, Deputy Knesset Speaker MK Yisrael Eichler, had similar sentiments.

"I welcome the U.S. recognition of Jerusalem. But I would prefer a thousand apartments for young couples in Jerusalem to one building of the American embassy. I pray that the declaration will not cost us the blood of terror attacks,” said Eichler.

Ahem. There are more plans to build, but that aside, their reaction is still quite insulting to the intellect. Who says the declaration's got no substance? Only pea-brains like them, that's for sure. I also miss the part where they say the Islamofascists should get the hell out of Israel if they don't like what's been done now.

And then, guess who else sides with the bad mentality, his dislike for Reform/Conservative sects notwithstanding? The dhimmi "rabbi" Avi Shafran:

Many in the broader Jewish world, the one, that is, beyond my cloistered Orthodox environs, have voiced criticism of President Trump’s declaration of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital and of his plan to move our embassy there.

The critics include the Union for Reform Judaism, the Association of Reform Zionists of America, the Central Conference of American Rabbis, the Women’s Rabbinic Network, J Street and The New Israel Fund.

Some of my fellow Orthos may feel that those critics are anti-Israel or, at best, deeply misguided. I don’t agree. Not only am I heartened to see Jewish passion, civilly communicated, about an important Jewish issue, but I understand the latter groups’ concerns. In some ways, I even share them.

The goal of us all, however deep our theological or political differences may be, is that peace reign in Israel, and none of us can know whether Mr. Trump’s announcement will bring that desideratum closer or, God forbid, push it even farther away.

While the president’s action was a simple recognition of reality—not to mention a reflection of long-standing American law, i.e. The Jerusalem Embassy Act of 1995—I am sensitive, as are the president’s critics, to the impact of his move on the deep-seated, sincere feelings of Arabs in Israel and the Palestinian Authority areas, many of whom have characterized the new American policy as an ugly, callous affront to their sensibilities.

Wow, fascinating! If he's got such a poor position on Jerusalem's validity, and even a lenient, otherwise accepting view of Islam, then no wonder he's got such a lenient view of Haredi extremists. Of course, the funny thing is how he wrote this crappy op-ed to argue that Reform should consider "cultural sensitivity" towards the brand of "Orthodox" he adheres to, even as he sides with them full force on any position that could harm Israel. And what's this, he views the PLO as legit?

But zoom in with me, please, to a small part of modern Jerusalem, a parcel that sits in its Old City: The Temple Mount. It is a place, incidentally, where Israel shows respect for Muslim Arabs’ feelings, where two large mosques have functioned unhindered even after Israel conquered the area in 1967, despite the fact that the site in antiquity served as the worship-locus of all Jews’ ancestors.

Does he know that Muslims on the Temple Mount have many times over the years acted with violence, and even destroyed some antiquities? His whole viewpoint is naive in the extreme, and he should be ashamed of himself for basically shunning his heritage that the Temple Mount happens to be, all because he doesn't want to "offend" people who consider violence a perfectly acceptable reaction in every way, shape and form. As a result, how can I possibly accept his argument about what he considers Jewish "norms"? Coming from a supremacist like him, it's awfully rich.

Anyway, it's still quite bizarre how somebody can say he has a problem with a branch of Judaism yet fully agrees with a cowardly position said branch extols. Why do anti-Zionist Haredis and Reform have a problem with each other, yet make strange bedfellows on anti-Israelism? Shafran's just proven why some critics of ultra-Orthodoxy within Orthodox circles themselves find his visions so offensive - because he really does undermine the sect/movement as a whole with his 5th column approach.

Labels: anti-americanism, anti-semitism, dhimmitude, haredi corruption, islam, Israel, Jerusalem, jihad, Moonbattery, msm foulness, political corruption, terrorism