Talk:Neturei Karta/Archive 1

Much of the Jewish community recognizes the Neturei Karta as being anti-semetic. RK

And here we go again... right there in the first line the ubiquitious equation antizionism = antisemitism. If anybody can not per definitionem be antisemite then it is a semite.

While I agree that some members of the Jewish community have labelled Neturei Karta antisemitic, in many instances it was part of the highly charged rhetoric that often infuses internal Jewish debate. Furthermore, even Neturei Karta recognizes that Jews have a right to statehood. The debate is when and how such a state should come into being and the precise nature of the state once it does (see Va-Yoel Moshe for instance, which clarified the Satmar hasidic position on Zionism). Furthermore, they do not deny that other Jews are not Jews: they claim that their behavior is heretical. Satmar and Neturei Karta would certainly respond differently to a Reform Jew and a Christian--one is a heretic and the other is a Gentile, so one must keep kosher, not work on Shabbat, etc., while the other has no such obligation. Danny

Meir Kahane, a Zionist extremist, wanted to reintroduce the ban on sexual relations between Jews and non-Jews, although for reasons of anti-Gentilism not anti-Semitism.

RK responds: the Neturei Karta [teach] hateful things about all Jews. They teach that all Jews are literally releasing demonic forces within the land of Israel, and are therefore on the side of evil incarnate, and that they thus deserved the be slaughtered by the Nazis.

Since they are Jews, does it follow they teach these things about themselves? -- Simon J Kissane

No, they don't teach hatred of themselves - but they DO teach hatred of all other Jews in the world. RK

They are nice, peaceful people. They believe that they will save the Jewish people and end the conflict between Jewish people and the rest of the world. I know them personally. They are well-meaning and misguided. They are definitely not antisemitic. They do not teach that Jews are demonic forces within the Land of Israel. Most of them live in the Land of Israel. They merely believe that there should not be a state before the Messiah, which is the view of most Orthodox Jews. The only thing extreme about them is their alliance with the PLO. They actually believe that the PLO is not anti-semitic, but only anti-zionist, and that the PLO will allow Jews to live peacefully in the Holy Land if the zionists give up control. However, most Jewish groups, including most anti-zionist orthodox groups, do not believe that the PLO will allow Jews to live peacefully in the Holy Land, and therefore do not join with them. This is the only difference between mainstream orthodoxy and the Neturei Karta. They do not teach that Jews deserved to be slaughtered by the Nazis. They teach that the Zionists collaborated with the Nazis because they believed that the world would give the Zionists a State out of pity for antisemitism. This is indeed true.

Even mainstream Orthodox Jews from the rabbinical Council of America have now denounced the Neturei Karta as antisemitic. RK Orthodox rabbi denounces Neturei Karta as anti-Semitic

As I see Neturei Karta, they are an extremely marginal segment of the Jewish public, both from the point of view of sheer numbers and that of their social status in the general Jewish community. --Uriyan

On a more ironic note dear chosen... now you know how we feel about Nestbeschmutzer ("those who soil the nest")

Even if true -- so what? This is a page for discussion of an article about NK, not a forum for spewing at them.

Hi Aloha. I was just wondering if you meant five or fifty thousand in the article. Also, what is your source for the number? Danny

Aloha had posted 50.000, Danny changed it to 5.000 . What is the number?

The next part was also taken out, which should be shown, especially in light of todays goings on and the previous talk, which seems to try to make them into a hate group, which they specifically reject.

Though they number just some 50000, their vociferous attacks against Zionism and Israel as a secular state have earned them considerable attention. They instead argue that the true Israel can only be reestablished with the coming of the Messiah. The Neturei Karta website shows Israeli police clobbering the Torah-True Neturei Karta. They stand for the rights of the Palestinians and have good relations with the PLO and other Palestinian and Muslim organizations. Nowhere on their website does it state, that they hate Jews or anyone else. They state that they are against the (militant) Zionists violence, against them supressing Palestinians and against the Zionists wars including the 1933 war-declaration then and the possibility of all-out war now.

Their website seems to say something to the effect of 100.000 followers? user:H.J.

user:H.J., as the person who wrote the first draft of this article I do know a little about the subject. In fact, I did not look at the website when writing the article--I based it on my own independent research on the phenomenon of Neturei Karta, my close personal interactions with members of the community, and my readings and interpretations of their own texts and the texts of sociologists and anthropologists who studied them.

To clarify some of the points you bring up: a website is hardly an informative account of a group. Anybody can put up a website and say whatever they want about anything, including themselves. It is an interesting source of information, no doubt, but the Internet per se is not always a reliable source. As regards Neturei Karta, I have a lot of problems with the website. For one, it is based in America, when the overwhelming majority of genuine Neturei Karta members live in Jerusalem. Then, of course, the vast majority of members of Neturei Karta would not own a computer, since this would bring them into contact with the outside world, and that is something they shun. The numbers are based on statistics from the Municipality of Jerusalem to which I have had formal access over the past few years. There are other groups which identify with Neturei Karta, but they are not Neturei Karta (Karta is an Aramaic term for "the city", meaning Jerusalem). Other anti-Zionist ultra-Orthodox groups such as Satmar are not Neturei Karta.

I removed the section beginning with "The Neturei Karta website shows ... " Yes it does. Do you know why they were "clobbered"? Because they were throwing rocks and bottles at cars driving on a highway in Jerusalem on the Sabbath. They wanted the highway to be closed for the Sabbath. An ambulance carrying a heart attack victim was hit with one of their rocks. How do I know this? I was there. Despite what the website implies, they were not "clobbered" because they are anti-Zionist. For the most part, the Israeli government leaves them alone. They barely even collect taxes from them. As for hating Jews, if you will look in the record of this discussion, I actually rejected the notion that they were anti-Semitic. I wrote this article to offer a fair presentation of their views, even though personally I may not share them.

As for the "Zionist declaration of war," I have spoken with many Neturei Karta about many issues, including their attitudes toward Zionists, the Holocaust, and Nazism. Not one Neturei Karta member will tell you that the Jews or the Zionists initiated or sparked World War II. They do not even say that on their website. They do claim that Zionist actions made things worse for the Jews, and they do claim that the Holocaust was Divine retribution for the secular lifestyles of the Zionists. I will not get into a debate here about the way God works (if at all). I would like to examine their claim, which you seem to support. Looking at their website, which you cite, they give examples of how the Zionists made things worse. Hitler wanted to deport all the Jews from Europe to Mauritius (sounds like ethnic cleansing to me). The Zionists opposed it and they should have said yes, because in Neturei Karta's philosophy, Jews should be subservient to Gentiles until the coming of the Messiah. Now lets plug the statement into your assertion here and in the mailing list that the Holocaust was largely caused because some Jews (the Zionists) refused to be ethnically cleansed. Sorry, but that is anti-Semitic, and I do not use that term lightly. If I were to say that the German residents of Prussia were justly killed after World War II because they did not want to be expelled from Prussia, you could rightfully call me racist. How is the case of Jews in Europe any different.

An interesting anecdote is that Ruth Blau, the widow of the late leader of Neturei Karta, Rabbi Amram Blau, is a French Catholic convert to Judaism. She met her husband when she part of the French underground, helping to smuggle Jews out of Europe during the Nazi reign of terror. She would never tell you that the Jews were responsible for the Holocaust, even if she would say that the Holocaust was God's retribution for the sins of some Jews, including the Zionists.

Finally, user:H.J., like everyone has already said: Examine your sources, examine your citations. Not every website is historically accurate. Not every historical claim has basis. I've avoided getting into this debate until now, but Helga, please realize that there are other people out there whose professional and academic fields do encompass your own interests. We also know our stuff, so if you don't want to get into vociferous arguments, please make sure your facts and interpretations are valid. Danny

Danny I appreciate all your information. Believe me, I did/do not want to get into this either. I do know that there are a lot more Jewish people opposed to the radical violence perpetuated by the current situation. I do know that a Lady Ambassador (name?) came from Israel was on an emergency trip and on Ted Koppel's Night Line. She warned about the militant brutal force and worse put upon by a rivaling faction against other Jews. There are ladies or grandmothers in grey (or black),opposing , with Israeli soldiers attending. There is a lot more going on, than what the official version wants you to believe. I do not wish harm on any one or any one group. Therefore I have this feeling, that getting previous happenings out in the open, can somehow make a difference. Now everyone wants to make this 1933 Declaration of War out to be a 'minor little none-issue', not worse mentioning. But when you read the wiki or any other article that says, "the Nazi's forbade Germans to buy from Jewish stores", then it makes a lot more sense to say 'why', and the 'why' is the Decleration of War. Another factor not readily mentioned, is the Deal between Germany and Jewish people (Zionists), who since before 1900 already moved to Palestine and who continued to do so under the Nazi dictatorship. They took a lot of money out of Germany and started building the Jewish State, (some program named Havala? or something like this). I would not argue about any of the loud arguments, because I do not know enough details on this. Therefore I ask questions. Which brings me to the question on the numbers again. I guess until we know, we should just leave the numbers off alltogether? user:H.J.

user:H.J., your ramblings here show that you have no idea what you are talking about, and I am being very polite in saying that. Personally, I find it insulting that you insinuate that I am a victim of some "official version" and not "the truth." Unlike you, I actually do know something about the topics mentioned here. For your information, we were talking about Neturei Karta, a reactionary group of a few thousand followers that opposes the state of Israel on principle, believing that Jews should be subservient to Gentiles until the Messiah comes. That is not some interpretation. That is what they say in their internal texts. I have read those texts. Women in Black is a grassroots organization of Israeli women opposed to the occupation of the West Bank. Yes, many Israelis are disturbed by the violence in Israeli society. I am also deeply concerned about the violence in Israeli society. This has little to do with Neturei Karta. It has to do with the Occupation. Period. Hitler and the Nazis did not forbid Germans to buy from Jews because of the so-called "Declaration of War." That is asinine. Are you ignoring Mein Kampf? Are you ignoring the Nazi campaign platform prior to Hitler coming to power? Are you ignoring Hitler's speeches and writings. We have records of all of them. We even have the records of Hitler's first public appearance at the German Worker's Party. (I have a copy in my office, if you'd like.) It was an anti-Semitic diatribe, plain and simple. It was also before any Nazi was elected to the Reichstag. Jews did not have any deal with the German government to move to Palestine. They fled Germany because of rampant anti-Semitism. As for your dates, political Zionism was founded in 1896. Herzl, the founder of the movement, negotiated unsuccessfully with the Kaiser to get a German protectorate in the region so that Jews could settle there. Until the 1930s, Jewish immigrants to Palestine came from Russia, not Germany. As for taking money out of Germany, they were fleeing for their lives. Some managed to take money out. Most did not. Most could not. It was illegal. Many spent all their money paying bribes to officials to get their children to England. It was called the Kindertransport. I am glad you admit you don't know much about this topic. It so happens that I do. As for the number of Neturei Karta members, at least you admit that you do not know it. Once again, I have studied this issue. I do have reasons for the numbers I give, and not just some stupid website. If you don't know the subject matter, don't writre about it. Better to be thought a fool than to open your mouth and prove it beyond a doubt. A very irate Danny

Once again, we are playing the numbers game. Okay, here is some information for all of you. Neturei karta refers to a very specific group of anti-Zionist Jews. There are many groups of anti-Zionist Jews and they are just one of them. What makes them special is a) they are particularly vociferous; and b) they live in Jerusalem and in Jerusalem only. They have lived there for as many as ten generations, and are descended of a particular group of Hungarian Jews that immigrated there long before the Zionist waves of immigration, which began in 1882. Other groups may have adopted the philosophies of Neturei Karta, but they are still not Neturei Karta. For example, the Satmar hasidic group is also vociferously anti-Zionist for the same religious reasons. They number about 100,000. They are still not Neturei Karta though. Oh, and for the various websites--no self-respecting member of Neturei Karta would own a computer, never mind surf the web. Danny 01:28 Feb 12, 2003 (UTC)

Yes, but they do like their views to be disseminated and represented without "distortion". A representative speaking on the BBC two weeks ago never hesitated to state his group's website address... They probably have internet companies doing the page design & content management. JFW | T@lk 12:43, 27 Jul 2004 (UTC)

re: Neturei Karta has, in the recent past, accepted funds from Palestinian organizations, including Fatah. now deleted, "such a claim is unacceptable without a solid citation) "

Arafat transferred funds to Neturei Karta

by IMRA

Rabbi Moshe Hirsch, known as the "Foreign Minister" of Neturei Karta, has never hidden the fact that he prefers a Palestinian state in place of Israel - the Neturei Karta sect refuses to recognize the state of Israel until the coming of the Messiah. However, now it appears, from documents disclosed by the defense establishment, that Rabbi Hirsch has also been in the pay of PA Chairman Arafat himself.

The incriminating documents were captured in the Mukata, Arafat's headquarters, two years ago during Operation Defensive Shield. While looking for PA efforts to fund terror organizations, security officials discovered that large amounts of money had been transferred to the Neturei Karta sect in Jerusalem. The captured documents show that Hirsch received from Arafat $55 thousand just two months before Operation Defensive Shield. Among the documents are receipts with Arafat's personal signature authorizing the transfer to Rabbi Hirsch under the heading "outgoing expenses". In the same period, Arafat allocated a much lower sum to terror operatives.

The captured documents include letters written in English by Hirsch to Arafat. The letters are addressed as to an eminent rabbi: "Dear Abu Amar (Arafat's Arabic name), may you live a long and happy life".

Hirsch has never hidden his relationship with Arafat. He is a regular member of the Palestinian National Council and served in the past as Minister of Jewish Affairs in a Palestinian government. Members of the sect recently demonstrated against Israel and for Palestine at the International Court of Justice at the Hague.

Rabbi Hirsch's son denounced the allegations as "evil slander" and denied all financial links with Arafat.

<http://www.virtualjerusalem.com/news/lateststories/?disp_feature=RTTnaW.var>

(I have no strong opinions one way or the other, I just found this, so please nobody get on my case, thanks) Gzuckier 21:28, 27 Aug 2004 (UTC)

However, idle musing: wouldn't we all rather have Arafat sending his money to Neturei Karta than 'terror operatives'? Gzuckier 21:28, 27 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I did ask for a solid citation, but when I went to the IMRA site I found "news articles" like "Not a hoax: Palestinian human rights group demands prisoners be enable to run terror operations" - a blatant lie. So we aren't going to accept information derived from that mob. Besides, expenses incurred as PNC delegate and Minister are perfectly reasonable choices for reimbursement and $55K is not a large sum of money. --Zero 04:06, 28 Aug 2004 (UTC)

A rotation group of anonymous users keeps on inserting a conspiracy theory that the public denouncement advertisements were placed by someone misrepresenting the signatories. However, none of these organisations later went on the record to state that they had been misrepresented. I will therefore keep on reverting this insertion until such evidence is advanced. JFW | T@lk 10:32, 14 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I think we have yet to find the perfect wording for this, one of the most crucial sentances of the article. Lets keep trying. ¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸ 5 July 2005 23:55 (UTC)

In November 1970 (and eventually rebroadcast November 21, 1971), a program on Israel radio "zarkor" broadcast a program, that had Yehuda Slutski, editor of Kitsur Toldoth ha-Haganah, Avraham Tehomi, and police officer David Tidhar discussing their foreknowledge and role in the assassination.

An even better idea is to get rid of this entire section. Why? This article is about Neturei Karta. De Haan had nothing to do with Neturei Karta it seems. At the time, he was a member or sympathizer of Agudath Yisrael. What does this have to do with Neturei Karteh [MEW - whose user name doesn't work for some reason]

CJCurrie twice removed this sentence, saying that "if we're going to condemn them it should be for *what they are* not for *who has cited them*" and invoking "guilt-by-association".

Note that we don't pass judgement, so "condemnation" is only in your head. Surely it is important to note _who_ cites them: scholars, theologians or... not. As for refs, do a quick web search and see for yourself. I didn't want to add those refs because I don't want to give them any publicity. ←Humus sapiens ^ну? 21:38, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

HS,

I simply meant that we should present the facts about NK and TTJ in a neutral manner without adding innuendo or guilt-by-association. If readers choose to oppose the group after reading the article, it should be for the right reasons.

For all TTJ's problems, their website does condemn anti-Semitism outright. I don't see how adding "the group has been quoted by anti-Semites" adds anything to the article, when TTJ evidently reject the message of such groups.

What do others think? CJCurrie 22:14, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

I think that TTJ being used as a tool by antisemites (despite TTJ themselves ostensibly being against antisemitism), is notable. IronDuke 22:20, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

I see your point, but the current edit doesn't describe the situation in quite those terms. Perhaps a rewording (as opposed to deletion) would be in order. CJCurrie 22:48, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

Although it is obviously common for people to insinuate other points by falsely innocuous edits, I think in this situation we are simply staing a relevant fact and that the innuendo us just a matter of the of the pov of the reader.- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 14:45, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

I should note that I've been wary about changes to this page ever since someone tried to describe the group as "Minim" a while ago (and in the opening section, no less).

I believe that certain editors (mostly anons) have been attempting to portray this group in an unfair light, and that a few sections of the current edit are very close to the line of "guilt by association". For instance, I don't see that citing comments made by Louis Farrakhan several months after he met with Neturei Karta representatives serves any useful purpose -- as much as I despise Farrakhan, I doubt these comments had anything to do with NK.

The irony is that I don't particularly like Neturei Karta either: I consider their connections to Farrakhan, Ahmedinejad, Hamas et al to be wrongheaded and highly objectionable, and I find their views on Jewish issues and human rights generally to be anti-modern and reactionary. That being said, I also think that their ideological views are the result of sincerely-held-if-misguided convictions about the nature of Jewish identity and Torah worship. Writing "the group has been cited by anti-Semitic websites" strikes me as unfair, in this light.

I'll reiterate the point that I made at the start of the discussion: if a reader is to condemn them, it should be for *what they've done*, not for *who has cited them*. CJCurrie 22:18, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

This is an important fact directly related the discourse relevant to the org in question. In other articles we say that X has been cited in academic journals, or scholarly publications, etc. In many other articles we note influence. We are not even saying that it is bad, or that it's their fault, etc. ←Humus sapiens ^ну? 23:33, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Responses: (i) Perhaps, to facilitate a compromise re:TTJ, we could also note that their website explicitly condemns anti-Semitism. (ii) I still disagree as to the inclusion of the Farrakhan quote. Any comments on this?

Btw, does anyone have conclusive proof that NK and TTJ are one and the same? CJCurrie 00:03, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

IMHO, Farrakhan belongs to their influences, just as other antisemites who traditionally [ab]use internal Jewish disputes to turn them against Jews - the tradition probably predating the gospels.

From we've seen so far, TTJ is a non-notable website and nothing more. ←Humus sapiens ^ну? 01:15, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

I don't see how Farrakhan qualifies as an "influence". It's fair to mention that NK met with him and made apologies for his "dirty religion" speech ... but I don't see how drawing his subsequent comments into the article is relevant.

The bit about LF abusing internal Jewish disputes may be notable, but I don't see it having a place in this particular article. CJCurrie 02:12, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

most CJCurie, most and not "several". Stop advancing your political agenda in every article opposing Israel

You missed my point: I was simply arguing that the evidence provided does not support the statement. (On the larger issue, I'm not certain that most mainstream Jewish groups have even heard of TTJ.) CJCurrie 02:54, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

No, it was you who missed "and other fringe groups opposing the existence of Israel". For shame. ←Humus sapiens ^ну? 02:57, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

I repeat: you missed my point.

The only evidence that you provided for your initial statement was a dubious-looking website called "True Torah Nazis". I do not take this site to be indicative of the opinions of "most mainstream Jewish organizations".

I don't doubt that most such organizations would find the beliefs of NK and TTJ objectionable, but you haven't provided much proof of actual criticisms. The article notes that other haredi groups have recently condemned NK, but there's little evidence to show that non-Haredi Orthodox groups particularly care about NK one way or the other.

This may surprise you, HS, but we actually aren't too far apart on this particular dispute. If you can show sufficient evidence for your initial claim, I'll withdraw my objections. CJCurrie 03:15, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

I have removed the True Torah Jews section altogether. It doesn't belong here. See its AFD. ←Humus sapiens ^ну? 08:44, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Fine by me. CJCurrie 22:09, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

I have removed the reference to him as Captain Hook. It both lacked a reliable source and was not compatible with NPOV. Capitalistroadster 20:29, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

That is how he is/was widely known in Europe, in the mainstream media also. So it can be put back. Just use Google. --Daniel575 19:27, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

I cleaned up the links section, which had way too many links, many of which were very biased - written by Zionists, with only the intent to bash NK untruthfully (such as what is written on www.zionism-israel.com about NK). And I archived two-thirds of the quite chaotic talk page, which contained discussions from 2004, 2005 etc. --Daniel575 19:39, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Al-Silverburg: The ADL link contains only a few sentences about NK, informatiom which can also be found elsewhere.

Next, I personally know who are behind 'Jews Against Zionism', and I also personally know some NK people including Rav Hirsch. 'Jews Againt Zionism.com' and Neturei Karta are not the same. They are miles apart and are not connected to each other in any way. Not noting that in the article will lead people to think that they are connected to each other. --Daniel575 23:28, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Who you personally know is irrelevant and would qualify as original research. Also the links are relevent so long as they mention the group, which they do. A reversion is in order.- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 04:55, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

"Results 1 - 10 of about 98,700 for Neturei Karta. (0.25 seconds)" Shall we just put all 98,700 results here as links? Or should we perhaps use common sense to determine that links like the ADL one, which is a whole page with only a few lines on NK (information which is also found in other articles), are totally unnecessary? --Daniel575 06:26, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Funny, espcially considering the fact that there are not an excessive amount of links present.- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 06:30, 14 June 2006

(UTC)

There was a huge amount of links available before I cleaned up some. Now, again, I again added the notice that Jewsagainstzionism.com is not a NK website. IT IS NOT. How many times do I need to tell you this? IT IS NOT A NETUREI KARTA WEBSITE. Either you leave it out completely or add the notice that it is not a Neturei Karta website. Do you need me to prove that it is not a Neturei Karta website? What do you want, a signed letter on official paperhead declaring that they are not Neturei Karta? The link is very useful and I do not want to see it removed, but to not add the notice that it is not an NK site would be misleading to those who are not very knowledgeable about the subject. 'Jewsagainstzionisn.com' is NOT Neturei Karta. The persons behind it are American Satmarrers and American Litvish. It is run from New York and it has no connection whatsoever to Neturei Karta. --Daniel575 23:21, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

1. The Jewsagainstzionism.com link is fitting because it is a similar ideology, belonging to a much bigger and almost as strongly anti-Zionist movement. It is absolutely relevant. 2. The Islamonline.net link is relevant because it gives a very good and accurate background picture of Neturei Karta, and it has even been approved and edited by someone of Neturei Karta, as you can read there. If you want to start deleting links, why not start with the danielpipes link, for example, which does not even contain 5% of the information to be found in the Islamonline.net article? --Daniel575 11:09, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Do you realize that you are writing this under your own text: "...it has no connection whatsoever to Neturei Karta"? I don't see why WP should advertise extremists with "no connection whatsoever" to the subject. Islamonline is not an encyclopedic resource on Judaic sects. See WP:RS. ←Humus sapiens ^ну? 21:54, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Daniel Pipes and the ADL are neutral links, of course? I can see the logic behind not including Jewsagainstzionism.com, which really has no link to Neturei Karta but to Satmar and certain elements in the Litvishe velt (and I must note that Neturei Karta is also litvish). I can agree on not including Jewsagainstzionism.com, but the Islamonline link is very useful and gives an excellent and positive view of NK. As opposed to the hateful articles by the ADL and Daniel Pipes. If you insist on deleting the Islamonline link, the Daniel Pipes and ADL links will go as well. --Daniel575 18:06, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Please see WP:RS, you may have problems with the ADL and Daniel Pipes, but they are considered acceptable sources. Islamonline is not.- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 23:23, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

The ADL and Daniel Pipes are definitely reliable sources concerning most Jewish- and Israel-related topics. However, when it comes to Neturei Karta, things lie a tiny little bit different. If you want, we will go over every point in the Islamonline article to judge its validity. Or I will take the article and put it on my own website (I run a Dutch version of 'Jews Against Zionism'). The Islamonline article is very fair, independently written without any bias and I see no reason why it should not be included. On what ground (except your own Zionist motivations [no insult meant]) do you automatically consider the ADL and Daniel Pipes to be 'reliable' sources concerning an extremely anti-Zionist movement, as opposed to Islamonline, which would be an 'unreliable' source? If you ask me, it would be the other way around! It is quite something that those ADL and Daniel Pipes articles are linked to here. I am not going to remove them, since others would place them back in a second anyway. But the Islamonline article, which I accidentally came across while googling some, is a great article and a much more useful addition than both the ADL and Daniel Pipes articles, and as such it will be placed back again. Please show me just why the Islamonline article is not reliable, and then we will talk about it. It's very easy and convenient to just disqualify any website you don't like as 'unreliable source' and delete it on that ground. I am, more or less, a member of Neturei Karta and I hereby qualify the Islamonline article as reliable. Oh and by the way, with your revert, you deleted my other edits to the article as well. --Daniel575

23:35, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Good, I agree with your current edit, greatly limiting the number of links. As I wrote above, there was a huge and disproportionate number of links here. However, the completely neutral and reliable Islamonline.net link will stay. If you agree on that, things look wonderful like this. --Daniel575 00:14, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Hi CJCurrie, I'm curious what you find objectionable in the ideology section you removed. Thanks, ShalomShlomo 01:22, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

This attitude became particularly unpopular with large numbers of the global Jewish community following the Holocaust, and was one of several major divisions between early Zionists and their adversaries, both those within the haredi world and outside it. The dispute continues to exist today, and serves as a significant dividing line among world Jewry.

"This attitude" (ie. fatalism, defeatism) is an attitude that NK are *accused* of holding. I'm not certain that they'd agree with this assessment, from their way of looking at the world. Describing the discussion around this attitude seems to reinforce the credibility of the accusation (which is what I meant by "leading") -- although this may not have been deliberate on your part.

There's probably a better way of saying that NK are regarded as holdovers of a previous age by most groups within the Jewish community ... CJCurrie 01:26, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification. I think I see what you're saying. I'll work on finding a more moderate tone and try to resubmit something tomorrow. ShalomShlomo 06:20, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

These three sites are obviously not neutral sources regarding this issue. All three are right-wing Zionist organizations, automatically disqualifying them from being neutral sources regarding an extremely anti-Zionist organization. While all three are certainly very good and neutral sources regarding other aspects of the Zionist-Palestinian conflict, they cannot be called neutral sources when it comes to Neturei Karta. Furthermore, the information in the Daniel Pipes link is mentioned earlier in the article and a link is provided there to Ynetnews.com. The ADL link contains only a few sentences about Neturei Karta and contains a blatant lie (the accusation that NK would have voiced support for suicide bombings). Zionismontheweb / Zionismisrael refers to an NK-affiliated group as 'True Torah Nazis'. Yes, very neutral sources, aren't they? --Daniel575 14:34, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Sources don't have to be neutral, they just have to be reasonably encyclopedic, and not excessively propagandistic. Pipes is a well-known and respected, if somewhat controversial, academic and commentator. He meets that qualification. Jayjg ^(talk) 19:27, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Pipes is a very right-wing Zionist Jew. He is not the person to write in a neutral manner about Neturei Karta. If you insist on placing that link, I insist on placing the Islamonline link. Furthermore, the Zionismontheweb link cannot be placed. It is by definition not a reliable source. Have you read the article? Do you realize that this is about a movement that considers Zionists to be agents of the Angel of Death, of the Satan itself? Do you think a website like 'Zionismontheweb' provides a neutral view of such a movement? Have you checked out the link yourself? --Daniel575 20:34, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Thinking a little more, I just came up with a better idea: we could divide the links section into 'pro-NK' and 'anti-NK' links. How does that sound? No more trouble about 'reliable source' qualifications. That would be an ideal solution. --Daniel575 20:36, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Pipes is a famous academic whose view is obviously relevant. IslamOnline, on the other hand, is a propaganda website, and nobody knows who writes articles for it. Pecher ^Talk 21:35, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Your opinion that Pipes is a "very right-wing Zionist Jew" is interesting, but hardly a fact, and irrelevant in any event. As I said above, links do not have to be neutral, they merely need to be reasonably encyclopedic, and not excessively propagandistic. Pipes is a well-known and respected, if somewhat controversial, academic and commentator. He meets that qualification. On the other hand www.islamonline.net does not appear to meet that qualification. Who writes it? Who supports it? The "About us" section tells us nothing about the site that is helpful in deciding this. Jayjg ^(talk) 22:11, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Daniel Pipes IS most definitely a very right-wing Zionist. He is very controversial and definitely not universally acknowledged as a serious academic. As I wrote before, the Islamonline article was checked, edited and approved by rabbis of Neturei Karta. Thus, it deserves a place in any case. I now changed the links section into a clear view of anti-NK, pro-NK and neutral (ie, newspaper) links. Please evaluate, and add more links to the 'anti-NK' and 'neutral' sections. --Daniel575 22:23, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

You keep making unourced assertions. Please provide evidence for your claims, and reference the relevant policies to explain why you think links should be included or excluded. Jayjg ^(talk) 23:07, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

I've removed the non-encyclopedic links, the blank links, and the links not about Neturei Karta. You've already violated WP:3RR a number of times, and I would hate it if you were blocked. Please do not restore the links again, or you will undoubtedly get blocked. Jayjg ^(talk) 23:12, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

I will add the link again. There is no reason why Daniel Pipes and 'Zionismisrael' should be considered reliable sources but Islamonline should not. Zionismisrael is a hate-sowing site which refers to one subgroup of Neturei Karta as 'True Torah Nazis' and emphasizes only alleged negative aspects of Neturei Karta. Islamonline on the other hand emphasizes the positive aspects and shows what the effect of NK's work in the Islamic world is. They spread the message of Jewish anti-Zionism as much as they can, and articles such as this one are the result of their actions. On top of that, as I said a number of times already, the article was read by, edited by and approved by someone of Neturei Karta in New York. The fact that the website itself is not neutral and not a 'reliable source' is solved by putting it under the 'pro-NK' links category. I repeat: I will not allow the Islamonline link to be removed while the Daniel Pipes and Zionismisrael links will stay in place. Either all are to be deleted, or none. If that means that I will be blocked, so be it. I am not giving in on this issue. My demand is entirely reasonable. --Daniel575 13:00, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

And who deleted the Jewsnotzionists.org link? That is also an NK website, though belonging to a different subgroup (NK consists of several divided subgroups). I see no reason why it should be deleted. --Daniel575 13:02, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

As has been explained multiple times, Pipes is a respected academic, Islamonline is a propaganda site of unknown provenance. Your claims that various people have read the material etc. are unverifiable and irrelevant, and while a site can be biased, it certainly cannot be a pure propaganda site. As for the ZionismIsrael site, I removed it myself. Also, there is no evidence that jewsnotzionists is an NK website, so it cannot stay. If you have reliable evidence that it is, bring it forward. I've also put some pro-Neturei Karta links in the correct section. Finally, since you cannot seem to grasp policy, from now on any edit you do which contains the Islamonline article will be reverted completely, regardless of any other merits to the edit. You must follow policy. Jayjg ^(talk) 17:54, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

If the article was posted on an NK website it would be fine. Meaning that I can post the article on my own website and post a link to it with my own hechsher (as I said before, I am the webmaster of the Dutch NK-affiliated website, under approval of Rabbi Moshe Hirsch). About Jewsnotzionists.org, I can tell you that they are an NK site because of the people behind it and the articles on the website. The articles on the website are of the NK type, not the Satmar type. Since there is no concurrent to NK regarding anti-Zionism of this type, it is an NK site. --Daniel575 21:43, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Do you have any real, verifiable evidence that jewsnotzionists is a NK site? I don't just mean "trust me, it is" evidence. Jayjg ^(talk) 22:00, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Where do you expect me to find such evidence? This isn't something you can find in a book or so. You can see it when you read the articles there. I think (no insult meant) that you are not even Jewish and not very well aware of what I am talking about when I speak about the subtile differences between Satmar and Neturei Karta. This website is obviously on the NK side. And as I mentioned before, there is no other group like NK which is as strongly anti-Zionist. If it is more extreme anti-Zionist than Satmar, that automatically makes it NK, get it? --Daniel575 22:44, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Right, got it (and let's use the whole page again). On http://www.jewsnotzionists.org/nyt/nyt051893.html it says "American Neturei Karta - Friends of Jerusalem". Sufficient now? Or should we also make an article American Neturei Karta? As I mentioned previously, there are several subgroups in Neturei Karta. Jewsnotzionists.org is a different group than the one running nkusa.org / netureikarta.org, though they are on speaking terms. Jewsagainstzionism.com is not affiliated with either, however. --Daniel575 22:47, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

That's an ad/letter to the New York Times from Neturei Karta, which is posted on the jewsnotzionists site. Please provide some real evidence. Jayjg ^(talk) 23:11, 26 June 2006 (UTC)