you wrote:
I quoted osef mihtavim of emrey emet zatsal where he writes on zhuyot gained by tsionim from the british and the league of nations in e’y as “huchlat lo lehitnaged lezhuyot ha’elu, ki YAVO HATOV MIKOL MAKOM … ”
I just posted a comment with english translation of the full letter 60 from ???? ?????? ?????? on HebrewBooks.
The quote you mention says nothing about Zionism. The Gerrer Rebbe zatz”l spends much time both disgracing Kook as well as trying to forge a path forward of peace. He is adamant here, as well as in other letters published there, it is forbidden to have anything to do with the evil Zionist. For example, in letter 69 he says Jews must leave and are forbidden to be part of the Zionist JNC.
The full quote that you seem to be refering to is as follows:
And HaRav HaGaon R’ Avraham Kook Shlit”a is a multifaceted man (ish ha’eshkolos) in Torah and lofty middos (character traits). Also, many say that he despises monetary gain (sonei betza). However, his love for Zion crosses every boundary, and he declares the impure (tamei) to be pure (tahor) and shows it a [welcoming] face, like that which Chazal said in the first Perek of Eiruvin about one whose like was not in his generation, and for this reason, the Halacha was not established like him. And from this, came the strange matters (devarim hazarim) in his writings (chiburav). And I argued (hitvakachti) with him much, that although his intention is desirable (ratzui), his actions etc. (are not desirable), that he gives a hand to poshei’im (transgressors), as long as they stand in their rebellion and desecrate all that is holy (mechallelim kol kodesh). And that which he says: that in this he cleaves to His [G-d’s] attributes, as it is written “You give a hand to poshei’im” etc. – I say that for this we confess (misvadim), “for the hand that was sent against Your Sanctuary” [from Vidui prayer]. And the building of youths is destruction (binyan ne’arim stirah), even in the building of the Beis HaMikdash (Beis Hamikdash), as Rashi writes.
True, it was also decided in Vienna not to cause harm to the guarantee of rights given to us in Eretz Yisrael. And even, Heaven forbid (chas v’shalom), to others, for the good will come from anywhere. But to magnify the activities (hit’amlus) of poshei’im and to flatter them (l’hachnifam) in an alarming manner (b’ofen nivhal), to call them ‘Shalom Aleichem Malachei HaShareis’ etc. ‘Malachei Elyon’ (Angels of the Most High). This enrages the Chareidim in a way that is impossible (ee efshar) to describe. Also, his methodology (shitah) regarding the elevation of the sparks (ha’alaas hanitzotzos) is a dangerous path (derech mesukan); as long as they do not repent from sin (shavim mi’pesha), then the sparks have no substance (ein bahem mamash). And brings thereby danger (sakanah) to pure and clean souls (nefashos tehoros u’nekiyos), that they should connect (yischabru) through this to poshei’im by the power of the beauty of Yefes [allusion to Gen. 9:27]. Also a danger to the one involved (ha’osek) in this, as our Rabbis ZT”L instructed us. And behold, the wisest of all men [King Solomon] engaged in this, as the Midrash expounds “to endear them to their Father in Heaven,” these are those sparks, about which it is said “Can a man take fire in his bosom etc.” [Proverbs 6:27]. And therefore Chazal instructed us “Sages, be careful with your words etc.” and about the wisest of all men they said they sought to hide (lignoz) the Book of Koheles, although they later said “Shlomo spoke well,” yet why (v’lama) did they inform us that they sought to hide it? …to hide it? It is all to teach understanding (daas) even regarding a man distinguished among tens of thousands (dagul mei’revava).
so back to what you @yankel-berel wrote:
I quoted rav yy kaniefski zatsal in karyane de’igrata that belief that the medina is athalta dege’oula is not kfira. It is a mistake , but not kfira,
I don’t have a problem with this claim about the phrase “aschuleh d’geila”. Some say the Holocaust was the “aschuleh d’geila”
I quoted tshuvot avnei nezer zatsal in taf nun dalet ,helek yore de’a, where he says that 3 shavuot are not mehayev yehudim lema’aseh .
I believe you must mean ??”?. if you are refering to siman ??”?, he doesn’t say that the 3 shavuos are not binding, rather he goes through explanations of shitas rashi that the shevua of “aliyah b’choma” doesn’t prevent the individual from making aliyah. The whole conversation only makes sense with the precursor that the shavuos are of course binding.
The Avenei Nezer there doesn’t attempt to weaken the issur of rebellion against the goyim (higarus b’imos) or forcing the end of exile (dechikas hakeitz)
Beyond that, that siman was not written or published by the Avnei Nezer, rather it was printed by his students and it says clearly at the beginning that the following are bits and unrelated pieces of writings that we found and are not sure who wrote them.
Even satmar rav himself is not like satmar rav
I don’t understand your fixation on the Satmar Rav. He innovated very little in Vayoel Moshe while 95% of the sefer is him quoting and applying major Torah sources from Rishonim and Achronim.
In short, nothing in the holy writtings of the Gedolim you mentioned even hits to them having, chas v’shulem, a netia towards avoda zureh like Zionism.